The Celts were G2a2b2a1b L497 ( Hallstatt Y-DNA from Mitterkirchen, Upper Austria 700

bicicleur said:
there are 2 groups of Celts : Halstatt and Atlantic Celts
IMO both descend from Csepl Bell Beaker
Click to expand...
Post from administrator/autor of this site:
Bell Beakers were a multicultural phenomenon & trade network, not an ethnic culture
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...menon-amp-trade-network-not-an-ethnic-culture

Bell Beaker archeological culture and Hallstatt archeological culture are 2 from most complicated and ambiguous cultures

Archeologists say, that do not exist relationship betwen Celts from Hallstatt culture and British / Irish people

This is link about Celts in middle Europa (Slovakia), in small Slovak village. It is scientific archeological publication. You can download PDF file
Prehistoric Settlement, Celts in middle Europa, Slovakia,
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...Celts-in-Slovakia-Bošáca-and-Lusatian-Culture
 
OK All the archeologists share the same opinion: good new.
 
Haplogrup G are Arabs.
Celts are Arabs?
... Imigration of Arabs: now and in history: history repeats.
... and British and Irish Celtic nacionalism? ... human sacrifices?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_G_(Y-DNA)_by_country

Dr. Cyril Hroník is Slovakian scientist historian and linguistic expert with very rich and world academic career to "Celts" say: Ethymology of word "Celt" is "outlaw / bandit / gangster" (ethymology in dravidian tamil language. Tamil is the oldest language of world and Slovakian/Slavic launage has the most tamilic words. Tamilic words use other european languages too)
images

Dr. Cyril Hroník
 
Last edited:
Sloven-Vened said:
Haplogrup G are Arabs.
Celts are Arabs
... Imigration of Arabs: now and in history: history repeats.
... and British and Irish Celtic nacionalism? ... human sacrifices?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_G_(Y-DNA)_by_country

Dr. Cyril Hroník is Slovakian historian and linguistic expert with very rich and world academic career to "Celts" say: Ethymology of word "Celt" is "outlaw / bandit / gangster"
images

Dr. Cyril Hroník
Click to expand...

Is this Slovakian humor? Arabs are G2?In what alternate universe?
 
Sile said:
G-L497 according to the link below is 79.80% of a Tyrolese marker ( from western Austria )

http://www.blutspendezurich.ch/Medi...h resolution mapping of Y haplogroup G(2).pdf

It is pre-celtic in origin
Click to expand...
Sile, G-L497, virtually restricted to Europe (https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/g-ydna/about/), formed 10800 years ago, and the TMRCA is 7400 ybp. As bicicleur pointed out, Neolithic. It's so old and widespread in Europe that it must be related to the genesis of several people/cultures. The fact that most of G from Tyrol belong to this major clade (and particularly to G-L42) doesn't mean that it's necessarily "Tyrolean", imo.
Since we are talking on the Celts, it would make more sense consider subclades of G-L497 which are young and still widespread, like G-L42 (TMRCA 3700 ybp) and G-CTS4803 (3500 ybp), just for example. The hotspot of G-L42 is in Austria and Switzerland. It could be Rhaetian, but then who would have caused its dispersion? I don't know. Romans? Instead, it could be a minor clade of the Celts. One of the "suggestions" comes from skeleton HÜ-I/8 - 700 BC (La Tène). He was G, and likely G-L497, perhaps G-L42.
 
I'm afraid we 'll be obliged to repeat the same things everytime a new forumer come in; no end; Y-G has its thread, and the simplest and sensible opinion is that it is of Neolithic origin; its position in refugium regions in Europe doesn't support a typical Celtic origin. What doesn' t exclude some late downstream SNPs moved along with diverse ethnies, across diverse lands from doverse points of horizon, so some of them among late Celtic groups. But the point is the link of Y-G1a with early Celts.
'Arab' is a relatively recent name maybe related only to Bedawins at first; are we naming WHGs Hunters-Gatherers "Spanyards" or "Swedes" or "Belgians"? But I think Angela has made the point concerning this misnaming and very distorded link Sloven-Vened did.
 
MOESAN said:
I'm afraid we 'll be obliged to repeat the same things everytime a new forumer come in; no end; Y-G has its thread
Click to expand...
hehe I don't understand. G-L497 is in the title of this thread. I don't even agree with it. Everybody know that first Celts were mainly R1b.

MOESAN said:
I'm afraid we 'll be obliged to repeat the same things everytime a new forumer come in; no end; Y-G has its thread, and the simplest and sensible opinion is that it is of Neolithic origin; its position in refugium regions in Europe doesn't support a typical Celtic origin. What doesn' t exclude some late downstream SNPs moved along with diverse ethnies, across diverse lands from doverse points of horizon, so some of them among late Celtic groups. But the point is the link of Y-G1a with early Celts.
'Arab' is a relatively recent name maybe related only to Bedawins at first; are we naming WHGs Hunters-Gatherers "Spanyards" or "Swedes" or "Belgians"? But I think Angela has made the point concerning this misnaming and very distorded link Sloven-Vened did.
Click to expand...
Maybe the subclade mentioned in the title of this thread has very little or nothing to do with Celts/Italics. I don't know. Those were just hypotheses based on few "signals".
Some people speculate that it's related to Etruscans. Maybe some subclade(s) are. I have no idea. Others (like G-CTS4803) are too widespread for that.

Not all G were confined in refugium regions. G-L497 is the main G subclade in Europe, and it's an example. In fact, it's the opposite: it's uncommon in these regions. Besides, there were more than one set of G, as Angela pointed out (see below).
See also these articles of Maciamo:
http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml#bronze_iron_age
(...)
"The Roman form of G2a is almost certainly G2a3b1a and its two main subclades U1 and L497, whose distribution in Europe mirrors that of R1b-U152. These subclades make up 1.5% of Sardinian lineages, a proportion of 1/7 compared to R1b-U152."
(...)
- and http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtml

Angela said:
The presence of this sub-clade among them obviously doesn't mean others were not, as was pointed out above, but it is interesting. In Boattini et al they showed five separate sets of G2a in Italy, with one arriving very late, and predominantly found in the north.
Click to expand...
 
Sloven-Vened said:
Post from administrator/autor of this site:
Bell Beakers were a multicultural phenomenon & trade network, not an ethnic culture
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...menon-amp-trade-network-not-an-ethnic-culture

Bell Beaker archeological culture and Hallstatt archeological culture are 2 from most complicated and ambiguous cultures

Archeologists say, that do not exist relationship betwen Celts from Hallstatt culture and British / Irish people

This is link about Celts in middle Europa (Slovakia), in small Slovak village. It is scientific archeological publication. You can download PDF file
Prehistoric Settlement, Celts in middle Europa, Slovakia,
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...Celts-in-Slovakia-Bošáca-and-Lusatian-Culture
Click to expand...

what is the definition of Celt?

tell me, why are Bell Beaker so predominantly R1b, more specific even R1b-L11 ?
 
Regio X said:
hehe I don't understand. G-L497 is in the title of this thread. I don't even agree with it. Everybody know that first Celts were mainly R1b.

Maybe the subclade mentioned in the title of this thread has very little or nothing to do with Celts/Italics. I don't know. Those were just hypotheses based on few "signals".
Some people speculate that it's related to Etruscans. Maybe some subclade(s) are. I have no idea. Others (like G-CTS4803) are too widespread for that.

Not all G were confined in refugium regions. G-L497 is the main G subclade in Europe, and it's an example. In fact, it's the opposite: it's uncommon in these regions. Besides, there were more than one set of G, as Angela pointed out (see below).
See also these articles of Maciamo:
http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml#bronze_iron_age
(...)
"The Roman form of G2a is almost certainly G2a3b1a and its two main subclades U1 and L497, whose distribution in Europe mirrors that of R1b-U152. These subclades make up 1.5% of Sardinian lineages, a proportion of 1/7 compared to R1b-U152."
(...)
- and http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtml
Click to expand...

Sorry I answered under an upset condition (not very true indeed), and I wrote too quickly. I 'll try to make me clear:
- I wrote Y-G1a when I thought Y-G2a
- Y-G2a is in refugium areas in the core of the supposed cradle of Celts; it's sure that in Italy it's not so restricted in its distribution
- when we look at the hyperdominance of Y-G2a in Europe during Neolithic, and its rather restricted distribution today in the most of the areas we are obliged to consider it has not been the winner of Metal Ages Y-haplo's competition, in a time where the elites were male;
- surely there are diverse subligneages among Y-G2a and some of there, relatively recent compared to Neolithic, are more or less typical of some regions and of the today ethnicity of these regions, and surely they had different histories; but I find weird to link a statistically very minor male ligneage to the birth of an ethny (Celts here) when we see that the major male ligneages of this ethny or group of ethnies are all of the same not too ancient origin (Y-R1b-L51), origin common to other I-E speaking ethnies (Italic, Germanic, perhaps Lusitanian and Ligurian); I think you agree for this last point; If a find a specific subsubligneage of Y-E1b present solely among Irish eople, can I say: "Gaels or Western Celts were Y-E1b...x"? I know it's not your point, but Iwrite that to show I find useless to give life again to this thread linking G and Celts; a lot of things has been said in more than a thread about Y-G.
If people want to discuss Hallstatt, Atlantic and Celts identity (or lack of it) I should prefer they do that in a specific thread. But people are free, it was just my personal opinion.


You write:
Not all G were confined in refugium regions. G-L497 is the main G subclade in Europe, and it's an example. In fact, it's the opposite: it's uncommon in these regions. Besides, there were more than one set of G, as Angela pointed out (see below).
I answer: G-L497 is the main subclade among Y-G: it's very relative then; Y-G in Austria doesn't go very up the 11% if I don't mistake, locally, because the national mean would be 7-8%. the distribution of strongholds of Y-G is very spotty compared to other Y-haplos.
Where is Tyrol, or Switzerland? in plains? along big broad rivers, along coasts?
Y-G is common enough in Italy: Italy is a compartimented land; and Caucasus?
when a subclade makes say 75% or 7,5%, the absolute % is less than 7,5%, not 75%.
good evening by yhe way.
 
MOESAN said:
Sorry I answered under an upset condition (not very true indeed), and I wrote too quickly. I 'll try to make me clear:
- I wrote Y-G1a when I thought Y-G2a
- Y-G2a is in refugium areas in the core of the supposed cradle of Celts; it's sure that in Italy it's not so restricted in its distribution
- when we look at the hyperdominance of Y-G2a in Europe during Neolithic, and its rather restricted distribution today in the most of the areas we are obliged to consider it has not been the winner of Metal Ages Y-haplo's competition, in a time where the elites were male;
- surely there are diverse subligneages among Y-G2a and some of there, relatively recent compared to Neolithic, are more or less typical of some regions and of the today ethnicity of these regions, and surely they had different histories; but I find weird to link a statistically very minor male ligneage to the birth of an ethny (Celts here) when we see that the major male ligneages of this ethny or group of ethnies are all of the same not too ancient origin (Y-R1b-L51), origin common to other I-E speaking ethnies (Italic, Germanic, perhaps Lusitanian and Ligurian); I think you agree for this last point; If a find a specific subsubligneage of Y-E1b present solely among Irish eople, can I say: "Gaels or Western Celts were Y-E1b...x"? I know it's not your point, but Iwrite that to show I find useless to give life again to this thread linking G and Celts; a lot of things has been said in more than a thread about Y-G.
If people want to discuss Hallstatt, Atlantic and Celts identity (or lack of it) I should prefer they do that in a specific thread. But people are free, it was just my personal opinion.


You write:
Not all G were confined in refugium regions. G-L497 is the main G subclade in Europe, and it's an example. In fact, it's the opposite: it's uncommon in these regions. Besides, there were more than one set of G, as Angela pointed out (see below).
I answer: G-L497 is the main subclade among Y-G: it's very relative then; Y-G in Austria doesn't go very up the 11% if I don't mistake, locally, because the national mean would be 7-8%. the distribution of strongholds of Y-G is very spotty compared to other Y-haplos.
Where is Tyrol, or Switzerland? in plains? along big broad rivers, along coasts?
Y-G is common enough in Italy: Italy is a compartimented land; and Caucasus?
when a subclade makes say 75% or 7,5%, the absolute % is less than 7,5%, not 75%.
good evening by yhe way.
Click to expand...
No problem, Moesan.

- I reiterate that I don't agree with the statement in the title of the topic, which is its main idea after all. It makes no sense. You're probably right when implying that the reason of this thread is weak and that it shouldn't be stimulated. That said, I'll answer just your last post (also because I'm not a good writer in english, definitely; these texts take my time). :)
- I would say that Europe was dominated by "people" who carried certain haplogroups (correlation), not by haplogroups themselves, i.e., I'm not sure that these people were able to do it just because of specific mutations in the Y chromosome. Btw, given the birth rate among "native Europeans" (because of social evolution or whatever) and the immigration, could we roughly say that non-European haplogroups/subclades (which will become or will generate European haplogroups hereafter) just start to win the (natural) competiton in this new environment? What about America? Well, it could be a valid approach. Perhaps a subject for another thread... Anyway, I know what you mean, and you don't need to worry about that. No one here is saying that G2a (the mutations associated or, let's say, the "abstraction") won the (natural) competition. I wasn't discussing that. R1bs still are "the sherminators" (for those who watched American Pie). :)

B-f_JwUCQAAzFIw.jpg


Just for kidding and relax. ;)

- My initial intervention was related to the comments of bicicleur and Sile. The pre-Celtic hypothesis doesn't confront necessarily what was being discussed, and the idea of a possible link between G subclades and the Celts/Italics, as that skeleton in Mitterkirchen supposedly suggests, isn't even mine (I saw it firstly in a page of none other than R. Banks, a G himself). It just makes sense to me so far as what it is, an hypothesis. But I confess that I was and I am a bit more interested here in the origin of the L497 subclades or in the L497 as a whole, whatever they are, than to the origin of Celts, and this fact would explain my focus. So, it would be better discussing the matter in another thread. I agree and apologize.
- Well, the birth of an ethnicity could be associated to several major haplogroups, especially in certain times and places. We see this all the time. Particularly, I would be interested to know about all the subclades involved in the process, major and minor, but of course it is not always possible, hence so many speculations, good or not. To make matters worse, it seems that "Celtic" is a very flexible term, and the discussions in threads like this confirm this notion. :)
- In your example, the presence itself of E1b...x wouldn't be enough to conclusions. Probably it would raise questions, and, associated to other evidences in an investigative work, it could occasionaly provide some answers about the subclade and/or the ethnicity in discussion. Major R1b subclades, for instance, also could raise deeper questions when they are in "wrong places", so to speak. Or even minor R1b subclades* (you would call it "R1b...x"), just like E1b...x. Why not? Anyway, this forum is a good place for these exercises.
*Btw, I wonder if there is a good map or percentages of R1b-L11 (xP312, xU106) or R1b-P312 (xL21, xU152, xDF27) in Europe!
- Again: while some G subclades are mainly in refugium areas, others are not (see Maciamo's articles). Regarding to distribution of L497, there are maps like Rootsi's and Berger's,but I'm affraid they are not so accurate. There is also a map in the L497 project in FTDNA, but some countries are sub represented, you must know. However, it's possible to notice in this sources a possible maritime dispersal and an important presence in some coastal areas, Rhone River and some islands.
- There would be places in Austrian Tyrol with more than 40% of G. As Sile said, most of these G are L497. On the other hand, the highest absolute % of L497 would be in Italy: almost 5% (likely more in North Italy). Still a little number, than what? In this line, we'll conclude that it isn't related to the birth of any non-ancient people, or at least that we can't speculate about it. It would be kind of a ghost. :)
Austrian as a whole has the same G % of Austrian Tyrol, Switzerland, South Germany: about 7/8%, which is not a negligible number.
G-L42 (TMRCA 3700 ybp), apparently more common in Switzerland and Austria than in other places, is present from South Europe (Kythira, for example) to North Europe. Late movements? Perhaps. At least in some cases. But the "Norwegian" subclade down L42, G-F1300.2, for instance, is 3200 years old, and is so far restricted to Norway (coast). It doesn't seem to be related to recent movements, just like other subclades (old enough and restricted) down G-L42 and G-CTS4803. G-Z726 is also widespread in Europe, and it can be found even in Bureå, N. Sweden (Bure Kinship, G-Z726->G-CTS4803->G-S2808) - but probably it's a recent movement from South.
- Other subclades prevail in Caucasus. It has the highest G concentrations in the world (among Adyghe, about 50% are G; among Shapsugs, 80%; Abkhazians, about 50; and so on). G-U1 (the "Circassian") perhaps is the most important subclade in the region along with G-FGC595/Z6553 (old G-P16) (the "Ossetian/Alan").

Conclusion: Could G be related to the birth of Italics/Celts tribes as a minor but measurable clade? Given the circumstances, maybe. The answer "no" doesn't seem the best for me.
 
Last edited:
Sloven-Vened said:
Post from administrator of this site:
Bell Beakers were a multicultural phenomenon & trade network, not an ethnic culture
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...menon-amp-trade-network-not-an-ethnic-culture

The definition of Celt is vague for archeologists too.
Click to expand...

Correct, it was only a potting style learnt by the people there from others. People want to believe that H1 ( mtdna ) and R1b ( ydna ) brought it into the area.......but bothe markers where in BB lands 1000 years before the creation of this style of POTS
 
@ RegioX
NO problem, all right.
But the very G2a-L497/L42 question could be discussed in a dedicated thread, if people want. No matter.

Concerning Celts, they are surely not come out from a magician hat. The linguistic existance is proven and they covered a huge territory. I personally doubt they were born only since the Iron Age and Hallstatt (I confirm old scholars estimated Hallstatt culture was finally shared by different ethnies, even if Celts were the principal one); I even wonder if a part of Hallstatt so called Celtic elite was not a non-celtic one at first, linguistically absorbed by celtophones a little in the way it occurred with Franks elite, at an higher level it's true. I even think proto-Celts were older than Urnfields which was also a multi-ethnic phenomenon, I think, at least in final phase; at La Tène time, the settlements seem returning to older conditions, more egalitarian. Henri Hubert think the Tumuli Culture of Southern Germany could have been already celtic or at least proto-celtic; He questioned the possibility that BBs derived culture of N-Germany-UK could have been already (proto)celtic, without being too affirmative; all the way, their cousins were already covering lots of lands in Western Europe at Bronze Age, as language differenciation seem proving it (Lusitanians, Ligurians, Italics). These people could have all of them known the BB cultural influence at some degree.
I wait news concerning Iberia BBs anDNA and Y-haplos, I'm longing to them! Maybe some surprises for the most of us whatever our biases or agenda or lack of them... I've nothing to add about BBs I said what I thought too often, more bets than science, as others (!) so...
 
Wrong?

Sile said:
Correct, it was only a potting style learnt by the people there from others. People want to believe that H1 ( mtdna ) and R1b ( ydna ) brought it into the area.......but bothe markers where in BB lands 1000 years before the creation of this style of POTS
Click to expand...

Man, I dont get it.
Bell beaker - No, BB were a very tight Genetic group sprung out of Iberia (and kept on being a tight group for all its BB period). This is what the best proxy for dna we have (see j. Desideri) Non metric dental traits. It also tells us that in bohemia BB toke CWC females and... dont know the rest, sorry.

Celts- In a less then a month old paper ANCIENT CELTS: MYTH, INVENTION OR REALITY? DENTAL AFFINITIES AMONG CONTINENTAL AND NON-CONTINENTAL CELTIC GROUPS from Mallory Anctil it looks like, yes, Celts were just a generalization of diferent (genetically) people learning to speak the same language and sharing traits.

Anyone wants to trash Non metric Dental traits as a proxy for Population DNA ?... bring it on!
 
Olympus Mons said:
Man, I dont get it.
Bell beaker - No, BB were a very tight Genetic group sprung out of Iberia (and kept on being a tight group for all its BB period). This is what the best proxy for dna we have (see j. Desideri) Non metric dental traits. It also tells us that in bohemia BB toke CWC females and... dont know the rest, sorry.

Celts- In a less then a month old paper ANCIENT CELTS: MYTH, INVENTION OR REALITY? DENTAL AFFINITIES AMONG CONTINENTAL AND NON-CONTINENTAL CELTIC GROUPS from Mallory Anctil it looks like, yes, Celts were just a generalization of diferent (genetically) people learning to speak the same language and sharing traits.

Anyone wants to trash Non metric Dental traits as a proxy for Population DNA ?... bring it on!
Click to expand...

And what, you are one that states that it was brought to central germany from Iberia by H1 ( mtdna ).............this old theory.
They found many H1 in central Germany in the eraly neolithic times, that's thousands of years before BB

Celts are ethnic proto-gallic people who began their existence in central and southern Germany
 
No, Siles, No

Sile said:
And what, you are one that states that it was brought to central germany from Iberia by H1 ( mtdna ).............this old theory.
They found many H1 in central Germany in the eraly neolithic times, that's thousands of years before BB

Celts are ethnic proto-gallic people who began their existence in central and southern Germany
Click to expand...

If I wanted to talk about Mtdna H1 I would have said so. No. What I am telling is that the second best thing about sampling ALL the bones/teeth that ever existed and sequence them (tens of thousands) for full genome (Not doable right now) is doing Nm dental traits studies. And the best ones were made, lo and behold to bell beakers and if I had to choose a few it would be the ones done by Geneva University by Desideri and Marie Besse. What does it say?

Bell beakers were made in Iberia by infusion of Iberia Late neolithic and Chalcolithic people. Then they move to rest of Europe had no local population contribution for a wide, wide range where they moved to. Not in South France, Switzerland, North Italy, or even the the Csepel group in HUngary. and never got any influx back from what is called the Eastern group. What is the eastern group? the only other place were BB toke local population contribution which was in bohemia (Czech) were they took CWC women (apparently loads of them). And from that point on there is no more Nm dental t studues as far as I know.

This is what we all know (or should). From this point on, everyone can drink the cool aid one likes and believe the fantasy he likes. Is just part of the game.
 
Sile said:
Celts are ethnic proto-gallic people who began their existence in central and southern Germany
Click to expand...

Sile, every day more so, Celts are just a derogatory term the ancient romans and greeks used to demeneour germanic barberic peoples outside their realms.
Read what I just linked regarding celts. Its really fresh off the printers...!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 72284 times.

Back
Top