L21 on the Iberian Peninsula

[rms2]

FTDNA's R-L21 Plus Project is in the process of sponsoring the testing of six individuals of Spanish and Portuguese descent for L21. Thus far, one turned out to be L21-, but four of the six have already gone L21+. There is one still awaiting test results, but he is almost certain to be L21+, too, since he is a 35/37 match for one of our L21+ project members.

One of our new L21+ members, Romero, has five Spanish matches, with five different surnames, all within a genetic distance of three or less at 37 markers. Surely they are all L21+, too. One of them, Garcia, has joined the project and is now also awaiting L21 test results.

I know of at least 21 L21+ men of Iberian descent, but only 17 of them have joined the R-L21 Plus Project. I wish all of them would.

If you add Romero's five close matches and the one man, very likely to be L21+, still awaiting results, that makes 27.

So, perhaps L21 is not as rare on the Iberian Peninsula as we once thought?

[rms2]

A few days ago I stumbled on what I believe is a mainly Spanish R-L21 haplotype cluster with the following characteristic marker values:

385a=12

439=11

459a=10

447=24

449=31-32

464a=14

456=15

607=16

438=11

Take a look at the following link in Ysearch, using "Research Tools" (just enter the Captcha codes at the bottom and click on "Show comparative y-dna results").

http://tinyurl.com/2g7bjej

[rms2]

A few days ago I stumbled on what I believe is a mainly Spanish R-L21 haplotype cluster with the following characteristic marker values:

385a=12

439=11

459a=10

447=24

449=31-32

464a=14

456=15

607=16

438=11

Take a look at the following link in Ysearch, using "Research Tools" (just enter the Captcha codes at the bottom and click on "Show comparative y-dna results").

http://tinyurl.com/2g7bjej

Interestingly, the only two guys in this cluster with 67-marker haplotypes both have 481=19, which is relatively uncommon. The R1b1b2 modal value there is 22.

[buckley612]

Interesting, if L21 reached Spain with M167 and M153 then by now it should have been discovered at a more constant frequency throughout the country. My guess is that L21 was part of an incursion which took place long after the Celtiberian people established themselves. This could also mean that M167 and M153 both separated from the main S116 clade and travelled westward before the La Tene and Hallstatt cultures began to dominate. Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but this is all fascinating and new to me.

[rms2]

Interesting, if L21 reached Spain with M167 and M153 then by now it should have been discovered at a more constant frequency throughout the country. My guess is that L21 was part of an incursion which took place long after the Celtiberian people established themselves. This could also mean that M167 and M153 both separated from the main S116 clade and travelled westward before the La Tene and Hallstatt cultures began to dominate. Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but this is all fascinating and new to me.

You could be right, but it might be well to remember that testing for M167 (SRY2627) and M153 has been going on for several more years than has testing for L21, which was only discovered (for all practical purposes) in late 2008.

And the Iberian Peninsula is an under-tested region, as is all of continental Europe.

[buckley612]

Agreed, I think it will take many more years of research before anyone comes up with a reasonable explanation for the peopling of Europe. Until then I will continue to occupy my mind with unstable theories.

[rms2]

Agreed, I think it will take many more years of research before anyone comes up with a reasonable explanation for the peopling of Europe. Until then I will continue to occupy my mind with unstable theories.

I'm afraid those are all we have for now!

[rms2]

FTDNA's R-L21 Plus Project is in the process of sponsoring the testing of six individuals of Spanish and Portuguese descent for L21. Thus far, one turned out to be L21-, but four of the six have already gone L21+. There is one still awaiting test results, but he is almost certain to be L21+, too, since he is a 35/37 match for one of our L21+ project members . . .

Make that five out of six who turned out to be L21+. The last of the original six we recruited for L21 testing, De Herrera, went L21+ yesterday evening sometime.

[rms2]

I think I may have stumbled upon yet another Iberian R-L21 haplotype cluster.

Check this link out:

http://tinyurl.com/2cjs3e6

Enter the Captcha codes at the bottom and click on "Show comparative Y-DNA results".

Costa and Vargas are both confirmed L21+.

I know I have a couple of 25-marker haplotypes in there, so we can't be sure about them.

If this is a cluster, the off-modal values are:

19=15

459b=9

YCAIIb=19

456=15

Too bad they don't all have 67 markers.

[Maciamo]

I personally expect L21 to be rather strong in Spain, like in France, Britain and Ireland. L21 is probably the most Celtic or Atlantic of the main R1b subclades, while U152 is more Italo-Alpine and U106 is West Germanic (English, Dutch, North German).

[rms2]

I personally expect L21 to be rather strong in Spain, like in France, Britain and Ireland. L21 is probably the most Celtic or Atlantic of the main R1b subclades, while U152 is more Italo-Alpine and U106 is West Germanic (English, Dutch, North German).

I agree.

Have you seen this?

[Maciamo]

Have you seen this?

I don't see how the Bronze Age could have originated in the Atlantic fringe and spread to Central Europe, when all hard archaeological evidence has always confirmed that bronze working originated around the Caucasus and Middle East then spread to the Pontic steppe, then to Eastern Europe, then central Europe, then Western Europe. It's basically the same with the Iron Age, except that it spread more quickly westward.

It's usually a good idea to base one's hypothesis on real material evidence from archaeology. This article is trying to rewrite prehistory based on flimsy linguistic research based on reconstructed languages with no written form.

[rms2]

I don't see how the Bronze Age could have originated in the Atlantic fringe and spread to Central Europe, when all hard archaeological evidence has always confirmed that bronze working originated around the Caucasus and Middle East then spread to the Pontic steppe, then to Eastern Europe, then central Europe, then Western Europe. It's basically the same with the Iron Age, except that it spread more quickly westward.

It's usually a good idea to base one's hypothesis on real material evidence from archaeology. This article is trying to rewrite prehistory based on flimsy linguistic research based on reconstructed languages with no written form.

They aren't saying the Bronze Age or bronze metallurgy began in the Atlantic facade. They are theorizing that Celtic languages may have begun there. And I think they believe they have archaeological evidence; I mean that is what Dr. Barry Cunliffe does, after all, and he is one of the central players in the idea.

There is evidence that people from the Pontic region came, over time, by sea to the western Mediterranean. You can track them by the anthropomorphic stelae they left everywhere they settled and buried their dead. These "Stelae Folk" (David Anthony mentions them in his The Horse, the Wheel and Language) may have been the ones who first brought an early form of Indo-European to Iberia. If that is the case, then it was just a matter of time until, perhaps, one of its branches evolved into Proto-Celtic and began to work its way east from there, probably with the Beaker Folk.

[Cambrius (The Red)]

New research from the University of Wales, Celtic from the South-west project, will be published in August, 2010. The findings are expected to lend further strong support to an Iberian Celtic origin.

[Cambrius (The Red)]

I don't see how the Bronze Age could have originated in the Atlantic fringe and spread to Central Europe, when all hard archaeological evidence has always confirmed that bronze working originated around the Caucasus and Middle East then spread to the Pontic steppe, then to Eastern Europe, then central Europe, then Western Europe. It's basically the same with the Iron Age, except that it spread more quickly westward.

It's usually a good idea to base one's hypothesis on real material evidence from archaeology. This article is trying to rewrite prehistory based on flimsy linguistic research based on reconstructed languages with no written form.

Roughly two years ago a good number of stone tablets with Tartessian script were discovered by archaeologists in southern Portugal and SW Spain. These writings have been deciphered as Celtic (ref: Tartessian: Celtic in the South-west at the Dawn of History, Koch 2009).

[buckley612]

Perhaps the "mediterranean" theory would explain the distribution of Q-Celtic. I've always thought of the Goidelic and Celtiberian languages as closer to "proto"-Indo European than the P-Celtic branch. What confuses me is how they could have travelled all the way from their homeland without leaving any significant trace outside of the Atlantic fringe.

[buckley612]

Nevermind, I just read about the Stelae folk, though I don't think it is quite enough of a trace to really prove anything. Perhaps this will make sense of the nonsense story about "Goidel Glas" and his offspring. I still think that the P-Celtic languages developed independently and moved westward with the Alpine Celts at around the same time the "Atlantic" Celts(or beaker folk) were establishing themselves.

[Wilhelm]

Perhaps the "mediterranean" theory would explain the distribution of Q-Celtic. I've always thought of the Goidelic and Celtiberian languages as closer to "proto"-Indo European than the P-Celtic branch. What confuses me is how they could have travelled all the way from their homeland without leaving any significant trace outside of the Atlantic fringe.

No, no. The Celtiberian was a fully and complete Celtic language.

[buckley612]

No, no. The Celtiberian was a fully and complete Celtic language.

I know, I didn't say otherwise.

[rms2]

Nevermind, I just read about the Stelae folk, though I don't think it is quite enough of a trace to really prove anything. Perhaps this will make sense of the nonsense story about "Goidel Glas" and his offspring. I still think that the P-Celtic languages developed independently and moved westward with the Alpine Celts at around the same time the "Atlantic" Celts(or beaker folk) were establishing themselves.

Can you explain what you meant when you said you believe that P-Celtic developed independently of Q-Celtic?

Do you mean that Proto-Celtic was neither Q nor P and that Q sprang from it in the Atlantic zone and P sprang from it in the Alpine zone? What was Proto-Celtic if not an earlier form of Q-Celtic?

Personally, I think it is pretty clear that Q-Celtic is the older form and that P-Celtic was a later development from the Q-Celtic original.

[buckley612]

I misused the term "P-Celtic" to refer to the language spoken by the Gauls and Alpine Celts. I think that the P-Celtic spoken in Britain was largely derived from Q-Celtic, but I believe that the Gallic language (neither P or Q) also influenced the P-Celtic there due to a Belgic/Northern Gallic incursion. My main problem with the theory of an East to West expansion is that I don't think it will be able to explain the huge linguistic differences between the Alpine and Atlantic Celts. It was said that the Gauls could understand Latin, that and other things seem to point to a language close to Italo-Celtic being spoken in Gaul and the Alpine area. As far as I know no Italo-Celtic type language could have been entirely derived from a Q-Celtic language. Another problem (this is unclear to me) is the genetic difference between the two, why are M167 and M153 so rare in the British Isles and Central Europe if the Beaker folk are responsible for the spread of the Celtic languages? My only explanation for this is that they are more recent mutations than R-21, which would mean that R-L21 is much older than researchers have concluded.

[rms2]

I misused the term "P-Celtic" to refer to the language spoken by the Gauls and Alpine Celts. I think that the P-Celtic spoken in Britain was largely derived from Q-Celtic, but I believe that the Gallic language (neither P or Q) also influenced the P-Celtic there due to a Belgic/Northern Gallic incursion. My main problem with the theory of an East to West expansion is that I don't think it will be able to explain the huge linguistic differences between the Alpine and Atlantic Celts. It was said that the Gauls could understand Latin, that and other things seem to point to a language close to Italo-Celtic being spoken in Gaul and the Alpine area. As far as I know no Italo-Celtic type language could have been entirely derived from a Q-Celtic language. Another problem (this is unclear to me) is the genetic difference between the two, why are M167 and M153 so rare in the British Isles and Central Europe if the Beaker folk are responsible for the spread of the Celtic languages? My only explanation for this is that they are more recent mutations than R-21, which would mean that R-L21 is much older than researchers have concluded.

First off, there is no evidence that the Beaker Folk had any M167 or M153. The former is found most frequently in the old non-Celtic, Iberian zones, and the latter is mostly a Basque marker. Secondly, Gaulish Celtic was P-Celtic, although there is some evidence (certain words from the Coligny Calendar, for example) that Q-Celtic was spoken among them at one time.

I don't think there were "huge linguistic differences between the Alpine and Atlantic Celts". And I have never heard that the Gauls could understand Latin (without some study). Do you have a source for that?

[rms2]

A few days ago I stumbled on what I believe is a mainly Spanish R-L21 haplotype cluster with the following characteristic marker values:

385a=12

439=11

459a=10

447=24

449=31-32

464a=14

456=15

607=16

438=11

Take a look at the following link in Ysearch, using "Research Tools" (just enter the Captcha codes at the bottom and click on "Show comparative y-dna results").

http://tinyurl.com/2g7bjej

Garcia, Ysearch ZQ6P9, went L21+ sometime yesterday evening. He is squarely in this cluster.

You can see the haplotype in the Spain category on the Y-DNA Results page of the R-L21 Plus Project, too.

[buckley612]

I don't think there were "huge linguistic differences between the Alpine and Atlantic Celts". And I have never heard that the Gauls could understand Latin (without some study). Do you have a source for that?

It was some from research I had done several years ago, back when the Italo-Celtic theory actually had some ground among linguists. I checked the college research engines I used to spend my time on, but the article was nowhere to be found. I still think that there is not enough linguistic evidence to prove what branch of Celtic the Gauls and other "extinct" Celts spoke, what is your source for a P-Celtic explanation?

[rms2]

It was some from research I had done several years ago, back when the Italo-Celtic theory actually had some ground among linguists. I checked the college research engines I used to spend my time on, but the article was nowhere to be found. I still think that there is not enough linguistic evidence to prove what branch of Celtic the Gauls and other "extinct" Celts spoke, what is your source for a P-Celtic explanation?

Not just one source, many. Nearly every text I have ever read on the subject mentions that most of the continental Celts, with the exception of those in Iberia, spoke P-Celtic languages.

One example, that I just pulled from my shelf, is T.G.E. Powell's The Celts. Here is a brief excerpt, from p. 56:

. . . Q-Celtic, which retained certain more archaic features than did the P-Celtic branch, to which Gaulish and British belonged . . .

As I said, that is just one example among many. I have also seen innumerable maps illustrating many such books, which use shading to distinguish between the Q-Celtic of Iberia and Ireland and the P-Celtic of the rest of the Celtic world.

I'll give you some more examples when I get the chance.