DNA of Iberians from Europe

[Vukodav]

DF27 is not Celtic. Eupedia map about ItaloCeltic y dna was made by an amateur and not by an academical author.

 

[Johannes]

Cambridge University is not in the habit of letting just about "anybody" publish books and articles using their name. They only publish studies by academics. The historian in question is referring to a general consensus about the total population of Iberia during Roman times.

Academics are not gods. And what is the general concensus? All the historians who write about Iberian history? Does he site any primary sources or any journals? Its sounds like he is guessing.

 

[Drac II]

Yes you are right: I need to improve my Spanish. But thanks for the translation. It makes it easier for me to understand. So I am also willing to accept 150,000 but they must have increased their numbers given that in 300 years they dont just stop having children. Historians tell us that the Roman Emperors wanted to put the Germans as far away from Italy as possible and they gave the Goths the best lands in SW France and Iberia. Eventually the Goths left SW France and moved into Iberia. The Goths also defeated the Swabians in Galicia. So it goes against common sense that their number stagnated or even declined so that the Goths disappeared form the earth. Look at what happened in England. The Anglo-Saxon numbered somewhat similar to the Goths and Swabians. In 100 years the Anglo-Saxons took over all the best lands in England and Scotland and increased their numbers by perhaps threefold. Of course England and the Scottish Lowlands constitute a much smaller size in area (about 1/4) compared to Iberia. Never the less the Swabians and Goths must have increased their numbers and probably reached 20%, which is not significant, but certainly not zero or 1%.

Look carefully, that post was not in reply to one of yours but that of another user who thought that his source was saying that the Visigoths in Iberia must have numbered less than 150,000. But that is not exactly the case.

 

[Drac II]

Academics are not gods. And what is the general concensus? All the historians who write about Iberian history? Does he site any primary sources or any journals? Its sounds like he is guessing.

No, but they are knowledgeable about the subject they specialize in and therefore are better authorities than people who do not make a career out of these subjects. Since he is referring to a common calculation among historians for the population of the Iberian Peninsula in those times, he just mentions it. He did not feel the need to prove it. He just accepts it as good enough and goes on with his analysis.

 

[Johannes]

No, but they are knowledgeable about the subject they specialize in and therefore are better authorities than people who do not make a career out of these subjects. Since he is referring to a common calculation among historians for the population of the Iberian Peninsula in those times, he just mentions it. He did not feel the need to prove it. He just accepts it as good enough and goes on with his analysis.

So therefore he is guessing. Its that simple. Who cares if he is an "academic." He is guessing just like we are. What about the sources I gave you? Whats the difference? You just accept his numbers because it fits better to your opinions. And I like the other source because it fits better to my opinion.

 

[Drac II]

So therefore he is guessing. Its that simple. Who cares if he is an "academic." He is guessing just like we are. What about the sources I gave you? Whats the difference? You just accept his numbers because it fits better to your opinions. And I like the other source because it fits better to my opinion.

Your source mentions no authority behind it, they do not cite their sources. Mine is a professional historian who gets his writings published by Cambridge University. Which part of this simple fact is it that you are having problems with? As for guessing: some guesses are more educated than others. Since very precise data on population numbers from those times has not survived, the next best thing is to come up with estimates based on what data has survived.

 

[Johannes]

Your source mentions no authority behind it, they do not cite their sources.

I understand what you are saying. I know professional historians are more reliable that others. The language was in Spanish. There was a lot a explanation and and did not read it. I thought it might have sources from professors. I am wondering why they even posted it on the internet. What did it say?

OK it does not matter anyway what the population was at the time. However, the Goths and Swabians must have increased their numbers because there were no major invasions or traumatic events until the Muslims arrived (and that is roughly 250 years).

If according to some people in this forum DF27 in is not a Celtic marker. I know its an Iberian-Basque-Atlantic marker. But why is it not Celtic? If Basques are R1b DF27 and its very common among modern Iberians, what is the percent of Celtic DNA in Iberia and what are the subclades?

 

[Johannes]

DF27 is not Celtic. Eupedia map about ItaloCeltic y dna was made by an amateur and not by an academical author.

R1b DF 27 is a derivative of R1b P312. R1b P312 also created the Italo-Celtic and Germanic marker. So are Basques and Iberians related?

 

[Tomenable]

Maciamo recently uploaded a new version.

I'm wondering what exactly is counted as Germanic Y-DNA, and why.

Counting all of R1b-U106 and I1 as originally Germanic is doubtful, even if it correlates best with Germanic languages.

It would also be nice to see a map of Balto-Slavic Y-DNA, by the way.

 

[Tomenable]

Maybe people should pay attention to actual genetic IBD Analysis. Ydna is not an accurate predictor of overall admixture.

There was no significant admixture with Goths.

http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555

Dna doesn't lie.

Do we even have any samples of Gothic ancient DNA from burials of Gothic people ???

I suggest to dig for some bones in Crimea - that's where Gothic-speakers survived for the longest time.

Speculating which DNA might be Gothic by looking at modern distribution and frequencies, is wrong. R1b was for a long time believed to be from the Paleolithic LGM refuge in Iberia, just due to its modern distribution.

How erroneous that was, I don't need to remind anyone here.

 

[Johannes]

Do we even have any samples of Gothic ancient DNA from burials of Gothic people ???

I suggest to dig for some bones in Crimea - that's where Gothic-speakers survived for the longest time.

Speculating which DNA might be Gothic by looking at modern distribution and frequencies, is wrong. R1b was for a long time believed to be from the Paleolithic LGM refuge in Iberia, just due to its modern distribution.

How erroneous that was, I don't need to remind anyone here.

The Crimea would be an excellent idea. But Iberia must have many burials of Germanics. I am sure all the Gothic settlements that have been discovered recently in Castile would have some remains. Why they dont do it or publish it beats me.

 

[Drac II]

I understand what you are saying. I know professional historians are more reliable that others. The language was in Spanish. There was a lot a explanation and and did not read it. I thought it might have sources from professors. I am wondering why they even posted it on the internet. What did it say?

OK it does not matter anyway what the population was at the time. However, the Goths and Swabians must have increased their numbers because there were no major invasions or traumatic events until the Muslims arrived (and that is roughly 250 years).

If according to some people in this forum DF27 in is not a Celtic marker. I know its an Iberian-Basque-Atlantic marker. But why is it not Celtic? If Basques are R1b DF27 and its very common among modern Iberians, what is the percent of Celtic DNA in Iberia and what are the subclades?

I am not necessarily saying that the authors of that article did not use reliable sources on the subject of the total population, the problem is that they do not mention any. For all we know a lot of what they wrote on the subject can be the conjectures of the people who wrote it, not information they got from academic sources. They should have indicated the sources they used in the footnotes, so that they can be checked out.

It does matter if you are trying to get an idea of what percentage of the Iberian population was made up of Visigoths or any other Germanics.

As for those genetic markers being labelled "Celtic", "Germanic" and such: Keep in mind that these designations are somewhat arbitrary. They seem to be mostly based on where these markers are most abundant today. Eupedia considers the "Iberian-Gascon" branch of R1b as "Celtic", for reasons briefly explained here:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/celtic_trivia.shtml

 

[Johannes]

I am not necessarily saying that the authors of that article did not use reliable sources on the subject of the total population, the problem is that they do not mention any. For all we know a lot of what they wrote on the subject can be the conjectures of the people who wrote it, not information they got from academic sources. They should have indicated the sources they used in the footnotes, so that they can be checked out.

It does matter if you are trying to get an idea of what percentage of the Iberian population was made up of Visigoths or any other Germanics.

As for those genetic markers being labelled "Celtic", "Germanic" and such: Keep in mind that these designations are somewhat arbitrary. They seem to be mostly based on where these markers are most abundant today. Eupedia considers the "Iberian-Gascon" branch of R1b as "Celtic", for reasons briefly explained here:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/celtic_trivia.shtml

"Genetic studies determined that most of the ancient Celtic men belonged to the Y-DNA haplogroup R1b-S116. Two Early Bronze Age migrations brought the L21 subclade to north-west France and the British Isles, and the DF27 subclade to south-west France and Iberia. The third major Celtic subclade is S28 (aka U152), which is associated with the expansion of the Hallstatt and La Tène Celts, as well as with Italic tribes."

Since Iberia contains 60-85% R1b 312 (S116) with DF 27 as the subclade most common in Iberia, this proves that the majority of Iberians today are descendants of Celts and that Iberians and Basques are related to Celts. The Iberians and Basques probably did not speak an Indo-European language because they came at the time before Indo- European had developed? Or perhaps the Celts invaded the Iberian peninsula and slaughtered many of the native and took many women as concubines and lost their Celtic language in eastern and south Iberia. There is no other solution to this paradox. By the way Drac what is your ethnic background? I see you live in USA but have no more information.

 

[Sile]

"Genetic studies determined that most of the ancient Celtic men belonged to the Y-DNA haplogroup R1b-S116. Two Early Bronze Age migrations brought the L21 subclade to north-west France and the British Isles, and the DF27 subclade to south-west France and Iberia. The third major Celtic subclade is S28 (aka U152), which is associated with the expansion of the Hallstatt and La Tène Celts, as well as with Italic tribes."

Since Iberia contains 60-85% R1b 312 (S116) with DF 27 as the subclade most common in Iberia, this proves that the majority of Iberians today are descendants of Celts and that Iberians and Basques are related to Celts. The Iberians and Basques probably did not speak an Indo-European language because they came at the time before Indo- European had developed? Or perhaps the Celts invaded the Iberian peninsula and slaughtered many of the native and took many women as concubines and lost their Celtic language in eastern and south Iberia. There is no other solution to this paradox. By the way Drac what is your ethnic background? I see you live in USA but have no more information.

he has a catalan avatar which i doubt is his personnel family one.

 

[Johannes]

I'm wondering what exactly is counted as Germanic Y-DNA, and why.

Counting all of R1b-U106 and I1 as originally Germanic is doubtful, even if it correlates best with Germanic languages.

It would also be nice to see a map of Balto-Slavic Y-DNA, by the way.

I agree. But what about I2a1?? Is this Germanic or Slav? What is the frequency in Germany and Scandinavia, especially Sweden? I would also like to see in Balto-Slavic regions, like Poland and Lithuania?

 

[Johannes]

I'm wondering what exactly is counted as Germanic Y-DNA, and why.

Counting all of R1b-U106 and I1 as originally Germanic is doubtful, even if it correlates best with Germanic languages.

It would also be nice to see a map of Balto-Slavic Y-DNA, by the way.

I agree. But what about I2a1?? Is this Germanic or Slav? What is the frequency in Germany and Scandinavia, especially Sweden? I would also like to see in Balto-Slavic regions, like Poland and Lithuania?

OK by looking at Eupedia it says I2a1 is 5-10% in "Germanic" countries so I will assume Sweden is included as well. But its silent about Poland and Lithuania. But then if we look at the map below:

the percentages for Poland, Baltic countries, and even Iberia are the same (5-10%), although in Sweden its quite low. But then it says:

"The second great expansion of I2a-Din took place with the Slavic migration in the Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages. I2a-Din had started to mix with Proto-Indo-Euroepan R1a around Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus and Poland during the Corded Ware period (2900-2400 BCE), then disseminated more uniformly across Proto-Slavic tribes during the Bronze and Iron Ages. After Germanic tribes living in eastern Germany and Poland, like the Goths, the Vandals and the Burgundians, invaded the Roman Empire, the Slavs from further east filled the vacuum."

So it seems that I2a1 was carried by the Goths and other Eastern Germans as well and got it from the Slavs??? or left it in Poland after they migrated south. Any thoughts Tomenable?

 

[Sile]

I agree. But what about I2a1?? Is this Germanic or Slav? What is the frequency in Germany and Scandinavia, especially Sweden? I would also like to see in Balto-Slavic regions, like Poland and Lithuania?

OK by looking at Eupedia it says I2a1 is 5-10% in "Germanic" countries so I will assume Sweden is included as well. But its silent about Poland and Lithuania. But then if we look at the map below:

the percentages for Poland, Baltic countries, and even Iberia are the same (5-10%), although in Sweden its quite low. But then it says:

"The second great expansion of I2a-Din took place with the Slavic migration in the Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages. I2a-Din had started to mix with Proto-Indo-Euroepan R1a around Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus and Poland during the Corded Ware period (2900-2400 BCE), then disseminated more uniformly across Proto-Slavic tribes during the Bronze and Iron Ages. After Germanic tribes living in eastern Germany and Poland, like the Goths, the Vandals and the Burgundians, invaded the Roman Empire, the Slavs from further east filled the vacuum."

So it seems that I2a1 was carried by the Goths and other Eastern Germans as well and got it from the Slavs??? or left it in Poland after they migrated south. Any thoughts Tomenable?

they just found 3 ancient I2a1 in North-Italy............is this map still valid?

RISE486 Italy Remedello I2a1a1a-L672/S327
RISE487 Italy Remedello I2a1a
RISE489 Italy Remedello I2a1a1a-L672/S327

 

[LeBrok]

they just found 3 ancient I2a1 in North-Italy............is this map still valid?

RISE486 Italy Remedello I2a1a1a-L672/S327
RISE487 Italy Remedello I2a1a
RISE489 Italy Remedello I2a1a1a-L672/S327

Seems like you got lost in temporal dimension again, Sile. This map describes distribution of I2a1 of today, it has nothing to do with location of ancient Y. Why should it be change then?

 

[Sile]

Seems like you got lost in temporal dimension again, Sile. This map describes distribution of I2a1 of today, it has nothing to do with location of ancient Y. Why should it be change then?

Have you seen Maciano's sources for Italy......one states pre-roman populace .......is this not ancient?

Do you actually see for any marker the list of sources that Maciano uses for that marker

 

[Johannes]

they just found 3 ancient I2a1 in North-Italy............is this map still valid?

RISE486 Italy Remedello I2a1a1a-L672/S327
RISE487 Italy Remedello I2a1a
RISE489 Italy Remedello I2a1a1a-L672/S327

It shows you Sile how unreliable these so called "statistics" or "studies" are in this forum.