This excellent book by Bryan Sykes was a really great read about my own ancestors. I have always been interested in the history of Britain and Ireland and was always curious about the allure of the tiny little isles in the North Sea. Sykes documents the ancestry of the Isles by volunteer DNA samples through blood donors and booths at country fairs. Some of the people in these areas haven't moved in generations and many of the strains are surprisingly consistant. It was revealing to learn that some inhabitants of the Isles would prefer to be of Viking ancestry than Gaelic! And that Gaelic itself may be a cultural invention! I found this the natural follow up to "Deep Ancestry" and "Journey of Man" as well as "The Seven Daughters of Eve". It brought it all so close to home. And helped solidify the realization that each of us is descended from a long line of real people who lived real lives. It is my personal opinion that all of this scientific research is a result of the "spirit of Elijah" that is turning the hearts of the children to the fathers. I can see the Lord's hand in this interest by scientists and their effort to make it accessable to the general public.
UPDATE 2017: I had my DNA tested by Ancestry.com and the results were that 90% of my DNA tested as from Britain, mostly England and Scotland. I found this a little surprising since my sister (we share both parents)had hers tested and came back over 70% Scandinavian! I wasn't going to have mine done until a friend pointed out that even full siblings can have differences in their ancestral DNA due to the way the chromosomes from each parent line up, especially if the generations have been in the States for awhile. I can trace 3 of 4 lines back to the 1600s in North America, so we should be quite a mixed bag. Well, except for me! No wonder I am so drawn to that little island in the North Sea!

Bottom line most of the human DNA floating in the British Isles is a Celtic dating to original inhabitants from the last Ice Age. There are infusions of Viking and Saxon and a bit of Norman DNA but by and large, it is Celtic DNA more on the Celtic Fringe of Ireland, Wales, and Scotland but it is present throughout the whole of Great Britain and Ireland.

Sykes apologizes frequently for the technical aspect of the work, but I did not read anything herein that was technical at all. The closest he comes to being technical is explaining on a very rudimentary level where mitochondria and Y-DNA come from, and how mutations help to differentiate families. The majority of the book contains brief histories of Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England. There are only small sections that locate major families of DNA (which in his usual fashion, he names with call names rather than their scientific designation) within the various counties. I would like to have seen maps of the areas that he is naming, since I live in the USA not on the British Isles. I would also like to have seen a list of his call names with the scientific designations clearly identified. Otherwise, I don't have any complaints.

Excellent book on discovery of genetic testing and how it works. A must read.

Originally published on my book blog, TheBibliophage.com.

Bryan Sykes focuses on science and genetics in his book, Saxons, Vikings, and Celts: The Genetic Roots of Britain and Ireland. Published in 2006, it explains and examines his extensive research.

His team took thousands of cheek swabs from folks all over the British Isles. The goal was finding where genetics of conquering populations like Saxons and Vikings is strongest in the area. Conversely, the team also searched for genetics related to the islands’ indigenous populations, the Picts and Celts. In that work, Sykes attempts to determine if they really are indigenous.

Although Sykes shares funny stories of his various data gathering strategies, the book borders on the academic, with a drier tone and heavier focus on statistics and analysis. Still, it’s an interesting question for genealogists with roots in the British Isles—Britain, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales.

This is entirely a book about explaining genetics from a fairly small corner of the world. I also appreciated the detailed explanations of various types of DNA and DNA tests. We now focus on autosomal DNA, but Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA are also key elements. Sykes does his best to make it approachable, but I often put the book down and struggled to re-engage later.

If you’re a serious genealogical researcher, you’ll appreciate his ideas and information. However, casual hobbyists might find it a bit too dry.

This work comes close to being a masterpiece. I haven't read Professor Sykes' other works, but I'm guessing this is probably his magnus opus to-date. I couldn't put this book down and devoured it in a few brief sittings. As far as I know, the study the book is based on is ground-breaking. For this Professor Sykes deserves both our praise and our gratitude.

Pros: The author, despite being a niche scientist is also an extremely good writer in terms of readability and holding your interest. Not once did I find the book a chore to read, not even when he explains the technical genetics theory in some detail. Even this he manages to make understandable and entertaining enough for the layperson. The professor's use of genetic groupings, e.g. Helena, Jasmine, Tara, Oisin, Wodan etc. is ingenious and very helpful in understanding the complex nature of the results he presents. Equally impressively, Sykes skilfully weaves the genetics narrative into a well-rounded and absorbing survey of various British myths, history, and folklore. This book is not merely about genetics, but is equally about history, archaeology, literary history, and mythology. For these have been the primary sources on the origin of the British peoples up until almost the present day. To truly appreciate the significance of the genetic survey, we need to see it in the light of what these disciplines tell us (or once told us). Interestingly enough, the genetics support some, but only some, of the beliefs we have long held about our forefathers. Professor Sykes is in a very real sense laying some ghosts to rest. His results and conclusions shatter - presumably forever - several very influential and long-held notions of British identity. One he dismantles is the myth of a separate "Celtic" racial identity for the Scots, Irish and Welsh. For that alone he should get a medal. Equally pleasing is his very objective and sober treatment of the "Arthur" myth, a myth that for centuries was used to further various peoples' or groups political ends. Hopefully he's not the last to do this. Sykes's survey debunks the heretofore prevailing view that the Picts were a separate racial grouping which was absorbed by the Scots. A very important discovery. Nor did the Saxons wipe out the Britons in England (even in the east) or the Norsemen do the same to the indigenous inhabitants of Orkney and Shetland. Among many other plusses are a good survey of British racial theory throughout history and special discussion of the "Atlantic" connection of the various megaliths found throughout Spain, France and the British Isles. The linkage to British genetics found in Icelanders' DNA is also very interesting.

Cons: there's little to say here. There is one glaring omission - the lack of a bibliography! That is almost unforgivable in a work of this type, even if it is aimed at a lay audience. I want to know where I can read more about the topics Sykes has whetted my appetite on, whether they be genetics, or history and mythmaking, or whatever! Also noticeable is how relatively little space is given to the DNA of England, despite it being apparently the most diverse. However, that is partly due to a number of topics relevant to England having been discussed earlier in the book when dealing with the "Celtic" material. It would be unfair to call this work Celtic-biased, but the dominant focus is on the Celtic input into British genes. I would have liked to have read more examples both for and against the Anglo-Saxon racial superiority theory - Robert Knox is mainly wheeled out for this task. Also some feedback from the author on the actual physical appearance of the subjects he tested would have been interesting, e.g. did those carrying the "Oisin" gene generally have dark or red hair and brown eyes? What was the approximate preponderance in those subjects he found to be carrying the "Wodan" or "Sigurd" genes of fair hair, skin, and eyes?

All in all, I think this book is a very important work and should be a permanent feature on any reading list dealing with British history, origins, and mythology. 5 stars.

History + genealogy = nerd-gasm! Or puzzle lover's delight. Orrrrr family lore. :)

And we get all of this by way of a talented storyteller in Bryan Sykes.

This is notchur grandma's dry just the facts ma'am kinda scientific examination: there be mystery, drama, discovery, humor and more up in this ancestral joint. There are many 'wow' moments, and theories that cause the thinky thoughts.

I know a decent amount of history about various areas in England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. I've added even more during the last five years or so in working my family tree: some of my ancestors mentioned as a part of providing context for Sykes' genetic research are 27th great grandfather William the Conqueror, 29th great uncle Edward the Confessor, 1st cousin Cnut King of the Danes, 33rd great grandfather King Alfred the Great of Wessex, 31st great grandfather Hrolfe aka Rollo of Norway, 22nd great grandmother Marjorie Bruce, 23rd great grandfather Robert the Bruce, 43rd great grandfather Aidan King of Dal Riata, and more.

Through genetics, we get a better idea about different migrations, origins and patterns both. Or, even better, we're permitted to ponder some interesting possibilities. In example of the former: one of the Y-chromosomes widely found in Ireland also crops up among the Basques and Galicians of northern Spain. On a macro level, this could be another peg in the board of truth that ancient peoples traveled quite far along their shared Atlantic coastlines in exploration, trade, and most likely habitation. On a micro level, I have ancestors from northern Spain back in the middle centuries, the same time as some of the aforementioned forebears: like 2nd cousin Urraca of León, Queen of León, Castile, and Galicia, and 3rd cousin Alfonso X King of Castile, Léon, Galicia, among others.

As for the latter, here is one of the intriguing questions Sykes asks, almost a 'which came first, the chicken or the egg': "It was the coming of agriculture to Scotland, beginning about 6,000 years ago, that boosted the population so that, only a few centuries later, there was enough manpower to construct these vast monuments [large stone structures]. But did this evidently greatly increased population mean the immigration of large numbers of people, or did the original Mesolithic inhabitants adapt and proliferate?"

He goes on to say that there isn't a lot of archeological evidence to lead us in either direction with any certainty, but maybe DNA will shed some steadier light. A $64,000 question, indeed.

Sykes takes us through the methodology used in collecting these thousands of bits n bobs of genetic samples in a lighthearted, open, and conversational way. We get local color and cultural flavor, with observations on human nature that are probably universal, now and 8,000-10,000 years ago when we bipeds first arrived in these here parts of the world.

He goes through the main mDNA haplogroups, the history of what used to pass for cultural historical research and the often patriarchal and racist conclusions of such, and the fact that these sub-microscopic proteins we all carry around have been handed down thanks to a handful of original ancestors shared by millions and millions of people. None of us is that different from the next person.

Regarding the 7 major mDNA origins of over 95% of Europeans: "I realized at once that these clan mothers, as I called them, were not some kind of theoretical ancestors, but real living, breathing women. No, not just women, they were mothers as well."

And through their daughters, and each generation of daughters after them, here we are.

As much as I love history, there were times when I wished for more exposition on the sciencey side of life. Sykes would get going on a description of one of he and his colleagues' sample collecting tours, or a set of results, and then head back to the lives of our long-dead clanspeople.

His bias that clearly favors England also comes through now and then, if only in hints. Given the rich, lengthy, and interesting history of all of the regions on which he spent his energy in studying, it would have been quite the feat to lessen the awesomeness of Wales, Scotland, and Ireland.**

I did not want this to end! I put off reading the last 20 pages or so for several days. I want more! This is such an enjoyable read, and I wrote notes, reactions, and questions throughout. Please give me more of this:

On the numbers part of the genetic equation: "Like so many tabulations, the numbers disguise individual stories of heroism and betrayal, triumph and defeat, and force them into bleak summaries. This is no way to treat our ancestors and you will be glad that I shall not insult them, or you, in this way again."

Cheeky! And 100% truth: the numbers often don't tell the whole story.

** I have my own "biases" considering my love for and having spent time in Ireland and Scotland, and England, and my extensive ancestry from these three places, along with Wales. ;)

I didn’t mind that there didn’t seem to be any major surprises or big reveals. Overall I appreciated the passion of a self-identified “genetic archaeologist,” who has gathered a great deal of genetic data from people of the “Isles,” (as he insists on calling the combination of Great Britain and Ireland).

Sykes does a great job of explaining mitochondrial DNA and how it can be used to trace the maternal line of descent, and Y-chromosomal DNA likewise to trace the paternal line. Taking the long historical view provided by DNA, he identifies several “clans” traceable to singular maternal or paternal founding ancestors who ranged from 14,000 to 4,000 years ago. This is a related concept to the idea of “mitochondrial Eve” who lived some 50kya and from whom all humans on Earth are descended. I would have liked a little more of a global perspective to trace the peregrinations of those groups, a little more discussion of the timing and circumstances that led to the populating of the Isles prior to the Vikings. But, given the title, I guess it’s fair to leave all that on the side.

Even if he did lose me at times in the weeds of minute mutation percentage variations between various place names that I’ve never heard about and will likely never trouble myself to learn more about, the author’s fascination with his particular topic is infectious and his writing style is very engaging.

By coincidence, the second book in a month in which the Scottish island of Skye features prominently (the other book being “Beasts Before Us: The Untold Story of Mammal Origins and Evolution” by Elsa Panciroli.

I really enjoyed the history and scientific data parts of this. I think this could gave been much shorter if the author didn't include stories about their journey to collect the DNA. I don't care to hear about how a lab assistant quit to pursue a career in law.
This book takes a look at what makes someone who they are and contributing factors such as war and invasion.

Early in the second chapter Professor Sykes writes:

"I have more than once found that oral myths are closer to the genetic conclusions than the often ambiguous scientific evidence of archaeology. Hawakiki, the legendary homeland of the Polynesians, was said to be located among the islands of Indonesia, and genetics proved it. The Hazara tribe of north-west Pakistan had a strong oral myth of descent from the first Mongol emperor, Ghengis Khan, and his genes are still there to this day. These are just two examples."

A scientist after my own heart!

The book is full of myth and the early history of the Isles - all of it fascinating reading, even for one already far more familiar with myth than history. It's the way he tells it. The serious genetic information comes later and makes the book practically unputdownable to the very end. But be warned - if you haven't already done so it'll make you long to order a test kit to find out about your ancestors and their amazing journeys.

Published in 2006, this book certainly shows its age twelve years later. To an admirable degree, Sykes doesn't make his revelations in any blunt way meant to set his own ideas apart as more valuable. Among a few surprises, Sykes makes the case (with the available tools and understanding of his time) that there aren't really any genetic markers setting apart Picts from the Celtic tribes. Sykes' work is a thesis built on a large collection of specimens Y-DNA and mDNA over a wide range of Britain and Ireland. He considers the insights found in the archaeology, history, and even the legends and myths, but ultimately his own argument is based on own original research.

_Saxons, Vikings, and Celts_ by Bryan Sykes is the author notes on page one the first book of its type, one on the genetic history of Britain and Ireland (which he refers to as the Isles throughout the book), using DNA as the main source of information. Having looked at much larger issues in the human past he wanted to "dissect the intimate genetic make-up of a smaller region," to look at the truth behind some of the popularly held ideas and myths about the Isles.

Throughout the centuries monarchs have used myths and legends about the origins of various peoples to justify their leadership and to bolster their policies. Several kings used Arthurian legends to justify their reign, believing the Britons, personified by Arthur, to be the truly indigenous people of the whole of Britain and the later Saxons "treacherous imposters," despite evidence for Arthur's very existence being on shaky archaeological ground (questions about him were raised at least as far back as the early 1500s by Renaissance scholar Polydore Vergil). Edward I said he was merely fulfilling Merlin's prophecies in his campaigns in Wales and Henry VII used Arthurian myth effectively in his defeat of Richard III.

In a complete about face, Henry VIII, after his bitter break with Rome, instead pushed forward the idea that the original Britons had been wiped out and the English were in fact the linear descent of Saxons, who of course now were no longer vilified but lionized as "strong, self-confident, and adventurous," who had triumphed over the weak Britons and who possessed the stout spirit of Protestant independence of the Teutonic Germans.

What began as part of a declaration of religious independence from Rome transformed into a "virulent doctrine of Saxon/Teutonic racial superiority over the other inhabitants of the Isles," one that was to have far-reaching consequences. The Teutonic Myth and "Teutomaniacs" encouraged racist and divisive policies against the Welsh, Scots, and Irish, a mind-set that only began to fade with Germany's enthusiastic embrace of the myth themselves.

The pendulum seems to have swung the other way again - albeit with considerably less racist overtones -with a virtual Celtic Renaissance and the rise of the "Celtic brand," as people throughout Scotland, Wales, and Ireland but also among those of British descent in America enthusiastically buy "Celtic" jewelry, play "Celtic" music, and celebrate "Celtic" holidays, all this despite the fact that the notion of the Celts as separate people and the idea of any similarities between the Welsh, Scots, and Irish didn't really arise until the 1700s. Nevertheless, this hasn't stopped concepts of being Celtic from serving as both political rallying cry and tapping into feelings of displacement and affinity with aboriginal peoples.

Sykes wanted to cut through all of these myths. To what degree are the people of the Isles really Saxon or Celtic (or in the north Viking)? Are these purely cultural movements, myths put forward by kings to serve political ambitions, or is there some grain of truth to these eagerly embraced (and exploited) beliefs?

Sykes wasn't the first to begin delving into the origins of the British people in a scientific manner. Even at the height of Saxon mania in the Victoria era, one individual, a barrister by the name of Luke Owen Pike, was questioning notions of racial superiority and purity and the very idea of the complete extermination of native peoples by invaders, putting forth the way-ahead-of-his-time notion that what would result would be the creation of a hybridized racial mixture, one in which the indigenous component would generally predominate. Although amateur naturalist John Beddoe struggled to come up with an impartial system of classifying physical appearance into different groups and early work with human blood groups (the famous types A, B, O, and AB) went a long way towards removing prejudice and human error from investigating the origins of various populations in the Isles, it took the discovery and analysis of DNA to make real strides. The blood groups studies were a "blunt instrument," lacking the finesse of the detailed findings of later DNA work and unfortunately tempted researchers to either fabricate arguments to explain their findings or were often so broad in outcome as to justify preconceived notions.

Sykes and his team used two tools. One was mitochondrial DNA (or mDNA), which has two outstanding properties for its use to analyze the human past. First, it mutates twenty times faster than regular DNA (by comparison the rate of nuclear DNA mutation is so low that we are virtually all the same), and second all mDNA comes only from the mother, who got it from her mother (men do not pass down mDNA). Amazingly, at any time in the past, be it 100 or 10,000 years ago, there was only one woman alive at the time from which you have inherited your mDNA from.

This of course only tells the female side, what about the male? For that Sykes looked at the Y-chromosome, found of course only in men. It is a mirror image of the inheritance pattern for mDNA and fortunately does vary enough genetically over time to be useful in a study.

So what did the study reveal? Is evidence of Saxon, Viking, and Celtic culture in the Isles the consequence of large-scale immigration or instead the result of indigenous people copying and adapting new styles, perhaps imposed by a small conquering minority? To vastly oversimplify this wonderful book, overall the genetic structure of the Isles is "stubbornly" Celtic, if by Celtic one means the people who were here before the Romans and who spoke a Celtic language. While the people of the Shetland and Orkney Islands do have a substantial Viking genetic presence (40% and 30% respectively), surprisingly 10% in the east and 5% in the north of England owe their genetic heritage to Saxons, Danes, or Normans, "only denting the Celtic substructure." There is also no genetic evidence of any large-scale Celtic immigration from central Europe to the Isles either.