PDA

View Full Version : Genetic make up of the British Isles



Bare man
26-11-10, 02:33
Does anyone have any good information and/or studies taken showing the genetic make up of the people of the British Isles?

Things i'm interested in finding out -
How Germanic England actually is, or is it still mostly Celtic?
Germanic areas of Scotland
How similar Scottish and Irish genetics are
Any possible information about the picts (feel like i'm pushing the boundaries here)
Amounts of Y-Chromosome haplogroup I in the British Isles

Also, whatever else anyone has. Thanks for any help :)

Oh, and one last question - is it fair to say that Celts exist? I've used the term "celts"/"celtic people" before and people have gotten angry against it saying there are no such thing as celts and never have been as it is 'a created victorian term". I don't understand that, because then surely if celts don't exist then Germanic people don't and neither do Slavic?

Yorkie
26-11-10, 11:55
Does anyone have any good information and/or studies taken showing the genetic make up of the people of the British Isles?

Things i'm interested in finding out -
How Germanic England actually is, or is it still mostly Celtic?
Germanic areas of Scotland
How similar Scottish and Irish genetics are
Any possible information about the picts (feel like i'm pushing the boundaries here)
Amounts of Y-Chromosome haplogroup I in the British Isles

Also, whatever else anyone has. Thanks for any help :)

Oh, and one last question - is it fair to say that Celts exist? I've used the term "celts"/"celtic people" before and people have gotten angry against it saying there are no such thing as celts and never have been as it is 'a created victorian term". I don't understand that, because then surely if celts don't exist then Germanic people don't and neither do Slavic?

This thread asks essentially the same questions as does an existing thread in Ydna forum.

mihaitzateo
23-02-12, 18:36
The existence of the celts if first atested by the galeic languages (which are celtic languages),as irish,scotish,welsh are.You are living in Germany, you say you are irish,you ever visited Ireland?
If you did not,go search on youtube and see there people speaking in irish language,which is a celtic language.
Second,there is some nordid profile clearly asociated with celtic ancestry, called keltic nordid,as a lot of people in UK looks (about 25%-30% from the people in UK).
If you have some R1b branch on paternal line,that is good only for history,what matters most is how you look like,for example even if you find common R1b subclades in Italy/Spain and UK,people are not looking same.
Those from Italy are usually brown/dark brown/black eyed and darker skin,with softer facial lines etc while those in UK are usually with green/blue eyes/light eyes and diferent look of their faces,a little straighter lines,etc.
In old Europe only thracians and celts were red haired,so in UK you have a lot of people red haired,because of the celts first and second because of those vikings who came and raided there and some even settled there,who were red haired also.(I do consider those vikings red haired,descendants of thracians from Troy).That red haired pretty present in UK (think most common is in Scotland) is a serious proof of celtic ancestry.
Beside,except Y DNA there is also maternal DNA,H is a large group for mt-dna (which is most common in Europe ),for sure it haves a lot of sub-branches,but research should be done to see them.
Go search a little on google images "keltic nordid" to make an ideea,about how people of this profile looks.
Just searched on google,highest percent of red heads from Europe is in Scotland,about 13% of the population and 2nd in Ireland,10% of the people.
Since you asked about genetics,if you see R1a in Scotland/Ireland is very very likely viking norse ancestry.

MOESAN
27-02-12, 22:15
The existence of the celts if first atested by the galeic languages (which are celtic languages),as irish,scotish,welsh are.You are living in Germany, you say you are irish,you ever visited Ireland?
If you did not,go search on youtube and see there people speaking in irish language,which is a celtic language.
Second,there is some nordid profile clearly asociated with celtic ancestry, called keltic nordid,as a lot of people in UK looks (about 25%-30% from the people in UK).
If you have some R1b branch on paternal line,that is good only for history,what matters most is how you look like,for example even if you find common R1b subclades in Italy/Spain and UK,people are not looking same.
Those from Italy are usually brown/dark brown/black eyed and darker skin,with softer facial lines etc while those in UK are usually with green/blue eyes/light eyes and diferent look of their faces,a little straighter lines,etc.
In old Europe only thracians and celts were red haired,so in UK you have a lot of people red haired,because of the celts first and second because of those vikings who came and raided there and some even settled there,who were red haired also.(I do consider those vikings red haired,descendants of thracians from Troy).That red haired pretty present in UK (think most common is in Scotland) is a serious proof of celtic ancestry.
Beside,except Y DNA there is also maternal DNA,H is a large group for mt-dna (which is most common in Europe ),for sure it haves a lot of sub-branches,but research should be done to see them.
Go search a little on google images "keltic nordid" to make an ideea,about how people of this profile looks.
Just searched on google,highest percent of red heads from Europe is in Scotland,about 13% of the population and 2nd in Ireland,10% of the people.
Since you asked about genetics,if you see R1a in Scotland/Ireland is very very likely viking norse ancestry.

just details:
'gaelic' is the name for irish and scottish Gaedhlig and old Manx languages - welsh, breton and extinct cornish was named 'brittonic' -
the so called "keltic nordid" or "Iron Age keltic nordic" is a pseudo collective phenotype forged on metric means- a mixture of predominant dolichocephalic types and seldomer brachycephalic types, so not very homogenous - it why typical 'keltic nordic' types are so hard to show on photo's, contrary to typical 'nordic' type -
what we can say about this 'keltic ...' is that this crossing was common among almost all the celtic elites, gaelic or brittonic, producing always very closed metric means, (and that these means was common also among elites of Scythes and first Slavs, according to COON, if we trust him) - sure the true 'nordic' element was the heavier in the mixture, it is difficult to go further because crossings can cause features that do not lie in the very middle of the parents ones (genetic dominance and recessivity)

scotsman
10-03-12, 09:12
I am new to this site and made the following post in another section of the site but it maybe better re-posted here:

I was looking at the "Atlas of the Celts" University College Dublin. It has a terific history of the Celts and I noticed that in the presentation maps they covered for Celtic R1b distribution are identical to the Circle SNP distribution charts you see in many DNA sites. It almost looks like the R1b and probably all R DNA SNP variations should be named Celtic. Like Celtic Russians, Celtic Norse, Celtic Irish etc. The University College Dublin defines Celtic people as those ancient people who speak Galeic. It certainly ooks like Celtic should be the definition for with all R Haplo clasifications? Any comments?

What I was getting at in the above post is that as noted above the U of D refers to Celtic people as those who speak gaelic and display a map of Europe (in 400 bc ?) outlining where these Celtic people resided over the years. When the plot of the genetic DNA charts are placed on this celtic map the outline certainly is identical to the R Haplotype charts. To me this certainly indicates that the R DNA can all be described as Celtic. Even the those R1a who are of Celtic viking norse ancestry.


scotsman

L.D.Brousse
10-03-12, 15:12
Red Hair has nothing to do with being Celtic it is caused by a recessive gene. I fought in Iraq in 2008 and the Kurdish population has many red heads. It is hard to guess what a ancient population looked like. The first Celtic peoples encountered and wrote about came from the Greeks These Celtic tribes lived in SW France in many ways I find the term Celtic to be generic as the Greeks and Romans considered most people in Europe savages. Much how we did here in the USA with the Indians. France to is Celt heavy even my currant surname of Bruce which my 8th Great Grandfather took when he came to America in 1700 means from the thickets his French name was Brousse means from the bush or forest to me almost the same names

Taranis
10-03-12, 15:18
Red Hair has nothing to do with being Celtic it is caused by a recessive gene. I fought in Iraq in 2008 and the Kurdish population has many red heads. It is hard to guess what a ancient population looked like. The first Celtic peoples encountered and wrote about came from the Greeks These Celtic tribes lived in SW France in many ways I find the term Celtic to be generic as the Greeks and Romans considered most people in Europe savages. Much how we did here in the USA with the Indians

The term "Celt" wasn't generic at all. The term "Celt" (rendered into Greek as "Keltoi", and into Latin as "Celtae") was the self-designation of the people that the Romans generally refered to as Gauls. The ancient Irish and British, while speaking also Celtic languages, didn't refer to themselves as "Celts", and neither did the Romans refer to them as such.

L.D.Brousse
10-03-12, 16:27
Even know it's nice to see early reports about the Celtic people from like the Greeks. Their depictions are really out there. Thundering voices talk in riddles constantly spiking their hair tall I think the average height of a Celtic male was not to far off from todays averages 5'10" and up but after mixing I'm sure they dropped off. Scotland and other small pockets lucked out and retained their Celtic Identity's where as Gaul was pretty much Romanized as London and other places

L.D.Brousse
10-03-12, 16:49
As far as if Celts exist today I saw the question before and the answer was yes they are still where they have always been. most do not retain any language customs but are still the original peoples

Eochaidh
10-03-12, 17:42
The ancient Irish and British, while speaking also Celtic languages, didn't refer to themselves as "Celts", and neither did the Romans refer to them as such.

My Gaelic scholar (who reads the old manuscripts for me), once sent me the following about the ancient names applied to the Irish.

"One problem I've noticed with the idea of a "Goidelic" invasion - each of the 3 names for the "Goidels" or Gaeil popularized by the Book of Invasions are exonyms. Plus, they don't remotely satisfy/fulfill the Celtic tribal concept of "the god my people swear by". Those 3 names are:
1. Goidheal & variations - from Old Brythonnic gwyddel (and variations) = 'wild ones', applied to Irish invaders/marauders of Roman Britain
2. Scotti - seemingly from Latin, perhaps ultimately derived from the Greek word skotos- darkness (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoti)
3. Uí Míleadh = descendants of the Miletus (Latin for 'soldier') Ed. Milesians or sons of Mil.

So, we can discard any of those as the original name of any Celtic tribe who might have invaded. Dál Chuinn isn't on Ptolemy's map, but the Dál Chuinn are a branch of another people called the Féini. Earlier spellings - Féni, Féne, etc.
The etymological affinity of the name "Féni" to the name of the Veneti, the tragic Gaulish tribe of Armorica, has long attracted attention."

He later told me that Féni came to mean all of the "free" peoples of Ireland.

Taranis
10-03-12, 17:53
My Gaelic scholar (who reads the old manuscripts for me), once sent me the following about the ancient names applied to the Irish.

"One problem I've noticed with the idea of a "Goidelic" invasion - each of the 3 names for the "Goidels" or Gaeil popularized by the Book of Invasions are exonyms. Plus, they don't remotely satisfy/fulfill the Celtic tribal concept of "the god my people swear by". Those 3 names are:
1. Goidheal & variations - from Old Brythonnic gwyddel (and variations) = 'wild ones', applied to Irish invaders/marauders of Roman Britain
2. Scotti - seemingly from Latin, perhaps ultimately derived from the Greek word skotos- darkness (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoti)
3. Uí Míleadh = descendants of the Miletus (Latin for 'soldier') Ed. Milesians or sons of Mil.

So, we can discard any of those as the original name of any Celtic tribe who might have invaded. Dál Chuinn isn't on Ptolemy's map, but the Dál Chuinn are a branch of another people called the Féini. Earlier spellings - Féni, Féne, etc.
The etymological affinity of the name "Féni" to the name of the Veneti, the tragic Gaulish tribe of Armorica, has long attracted attention."

He later told me that Féni came to mean all of the "free" peoples of Ireland.

This is an excellent find. I certainly think that there's a connection between the term "Féni" and "Veneti", even if only etymological (I wouldn't rule out a deeper connection offhand, however). What is also worthy of note in this context is that Ptolemy mentions a Pictish tribe, the Venicones. The first part of this name certainly is of the same root.

Sile
10-03-12, 20:19
This is an excellent find. I certainly think that there's a connection between the term "Féni" and "Veneti", even if only etymological (I wouldn't rule out a deeper connection offhand, however). What is also worthy of note in this context is that Ptolemy mentions a Pictish tribe, the Venicones. The first part of this name certainly is of the same root.

amazing, I presented this 6 months ago and stated I was wrong.

Well according to roman script the vanelli are related to the Armorica veneti and area around Fyfe scotland was
the territory of the Venicones later was known as Verturiones (Fortriu)

If feni = free, then by word association ( always are dangerous thing ), but my grandfather stated that the very old venetian opera house La FENIce meant the freed.
IMO, the feni = finnic who where related to the pictic from 3000BC boat people. That is , north sweden and north finland where finnic and north norway was pictic along with most of the british isles
Sorry- recently having issues with log and fonts on this site

Taranis
10-03-12, 20:43
amazing, I presented this 6 months ago and stated I was wrong.

Well according to roman script the vanelli are related to the Armorica veneti and area around Fyfe scotland was
the territory of the Venicones later was known as Verturiones (Fortriu)

If feni = free, then by word association ( always are dangerous thing ), but my grandfather stated that the very old venetian opera house La FENIce meant the freed.
IMO, the feni = finnic who where related to the pictic from 3000BC boat people. That is , north sweden and north finland where finnic and north norway was pictic along with most of the british isles
Sorry- recently having issues with log and fonts on this site

Sorry, that really is nonsense. The term "Féni" certainly has nothing to do with Finnic. The development *w > *f is a sound shift that is exclusive to Irish/Goidelic, and it only occured around the 6th century AD, and before that, it would have been something akin to Wen- in Irish. Also, if you look at the available names, the Picts clearly were a Celtic people, speaking a language akin to Gaulish and (ancient) Brythonic.

L.D.Brousse
10-03-12, 22:06
One question I have seen are the Pictone tribe of SW France the same people as the Picts

hope
10-03-12, 23:11
The Veniconii of Scotland may be the same tribe who did indeed later become known as Picts in Scotland. Also there were Veniconni in Ireland around Donegal.

zanipolo
10-03-12, 23:33
Sorry, that really is nonsense. The term "Féni" certainly has nothing to do with Finnic. The development *w > *f is a sound shift that is exclusive to Irish/Goidelic, and it only occured around the 6th century AD, and before that, it would have been something akin to Wen- in Irish. Also, if you look at the available names, the Picts clearly were a Celtic people, speaking a language akin to Gaulish and (ancient) Brythonic.

so you clearly refer to information on this site

http://www.britam.org/AsherIre.html


what proof do you have that pictic is celtic?. pictic is far older than celtic, probably by 2000 years


http://books.google.com.au/books?id=f899xH_quaMC&pg=PA2123&lpg=PA2123&dq=feni+%3D+veneti&source=bl&ots=p-UvdaAAZK&sig=9ITWrzFr6eGpXG0ShhQcxACYgm8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=osdbT823MKWdiAeK45inBA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=pictish&f=false

from page 1444 is a good read on pictish language

Eochaidh
11-03-12, 03:43
I certainly think that there's a connection between the term "Féni" and "Veneti", even if only etymological (I wouldn't rule out a deeper connection offhand, however). What is also worthy of note in this context is that Ptolemy mentions a Pictish tribe, the Venicones. The first part of this name certainly is of the same root.

The conext of my quote about names for the Irish was the spread of yDNA M222 in Ireland.

The Féini gave rise to the Dál Chuinn or the People of Conn and this Conn was Conn of the Hundred Battles who gave rise to the Connachta. The most famous of the Connachta was Niall Noígíallach, or in English, Niall of the Nine Hostages who was erroneously credited with originating M222. The Connachta, or their ruling families at least, were/are M222 which is most prevalent in Ireland in the west (Connacht) and north (Ulster).

Less well studied is that the enemies of the Connachta in the Ulster Cycle stories, the Uliad, or at least their ruling family the Dál Fiatach, were also M222. 14 of 19 in the original McEvoy study for their surname and one other.

My scholar also said this:
"Therefore, as Byrne points out, it's clear that the earliest uses of Féini, as here seen even in an 8th century A.D. Uí Néill context, are intended to mean the Dál Chuinn (Connachta) and their branch called Uí Néill.

So, to sum up. the Féini were one of the most important peoples of Ireland at the dawn of Irish history. They are the direct ancestors of the Dál Chuinn and Uí Néill. Some have called attention to the possibility that the name of the Féini developed from the name of the Gaulish Veneti of the Armorican Peninsula. Accordingly, if Féini might possibly come from Veneti, I'm guessing that it could also possibly come from Veniconi / Venicnii, an obviously Q-Celtic word. But here we'd need an expert on the development of Archaic Irish to advise us.

Someone noted that the root-word Conn (Dál Chuinn, Connachta) might possibly be seen in the word Veniconi. Perhaps they're right. Similarly, it's generally agreed that the Irish words gom ('fool') and amadán ('fool') both developed from different parts of the Indo-European root-word *gemadan, which is also the ancestor of the English word 'mad'. Therefore, I think it's possible that both "Féini" and "Conn" developed from Veniconi."

Taranis
11-03-12, 14:35
so you clearly refer to information on this site

http://www.britam.org/AsherIre.html

No. Why do you post links to such charlatan websites, anyways?


what proof do you have that pictic is celtic?. pictic is far older than celtic, probably by 2000 years

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=f899xH_quaMC&pg=PA2123&lpg=PA2123&dq=feni+%3D+veneti&source=bl&ots=p-UvdaAAZK&sig=9ITWrzFr6eGpXG0ShhQcxACYgm8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=osdbT823MKWdiAeK45inBA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=pictish&f=false

from page 1444 is a good read on pictish language

I honestly find it incomprehensable that you make such a claim about the Pictish language, especially given that the same source that you cite claims otherwise. If you take a look at the quote below (found on page 1593 of the link you provided):

"For Pictish, the language of the Pictish kingdom(s) north of the Firth of Forth, only proper-name and epigraphic evidence remains. At least from the former, it is clear that it was a P-Celtic language, closely related to Cumbric and hence to early Welsh and the other Brythonic languages."

By the way, I also recommend reading this (http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/2081/1/languagepictland.pdf) concerning the language of the Picts.


The conext of my quote about names for the Irish was the spread of yDNA M222 in Ireland.

The Féini gave rise to the Dál Chuinn or the People of Conn and this Conn was Conn of the Hundred Battles who gave rise to the Connachta. The most famous of the Connachta was Niall Noígíallach, or in English, Niall of the Nine Hostages who was erroneously credited with originating M222. The Connachta, or their ruling families at least, were/are M222 which is most prevalent in Ireland in the west (Connacht) and north (Ulster).

Less well studied is that the enemies of the Connachta in the Ulster Cycle stories, the Uliad, or at least their ruling family the Dál Fiatach, were also M222. 14 of 19 in the original McEvoy study for their surname and one other.

My scholar also said this:
"Therefore, as Byrne points out, it's clear that the earliest uses of Féini, as here seen even in an 8th century A.D. Uí Néill context, are intended to mean the Dál Chuinn (Connachta) and their branch called Uí Néill.

So, to sum up. the Féini were one of the most important peoples of Ireland at the dawn of Irish history. They are the direct ancestors of the Dál Chuinn and Uí Néill. Some have called attention to the possibility that the name of the Féini developed from the name of the Gaulish Veneti of the Armorican Peninsula. Accordingly, if Féini might possibly come from Veneti, I'm guessing that it could also possibly come from Veniconi / Venicnii, an obviously Q-Celtic word. But here we'd need an expert on the development of Archaic Irish to advise us.

Someone noted that the root-word Conn (Dál Chuinn, Connachta) might possibly be seen in the word Veniconi. Perhaps they're right. Similarly, it's generally agreed that the Irish words gom ('fool') and amadán ('fool') both developed from different parts of the Indo-European root-word *gemadan, which is also the ancestor of the English word 'mad'. Therefore, I think it's possible that both "Féini" and "Conn" developed from Veniconi."

I think the etymology of the second element in "Venicones" is a different one, namely related to the Celtic word for "dog" (Old Irish "cú", Welsh "ci" - which is a cognate with Latin "canis" and English "hound"). The link I provided above (on page 21) gives the name "Venicones" as "kindred hounds". Also, there's nothing in that name that would be diagnostic of Q/P-Celtic. Ancient Irish retained the *kw sound of Proto-Celtic (which was rendered into /k/ and /x/ in Old Irish). Concerning the Connachta, I don't think there's any relationship with the Veniconi. Ptolemy mentions a tribe in the west of Ireland that is variably rendered as "Cancani" or "Gangani", and in my opinion the name is probably related with the name "Connacht".

Getting back to genetics, you're making a very interesting point that R1b-M222 isn't just restricted to the Connachta and Niall of the Nine Hostages.

Eochaidh
11-03-12, 17:25
I think the etymology of the second element in "Venicones" is a different one, namely related to the Celtic word for "dog" (Old Irish "cú", Welsh "ci" - which is a cognate with Latin "canis" and English "hound"). The link I provided above (on page 21) gives the name "Venicones" as "kindred hounds".

I don't know enough about etymology to really comment on your Forsythe quote of Koch, but I know something of ancient Irish tribal naming patterns, so I can say this.

Koch showed that Venicones is literally 'kindred hounds'. This would be a very unusual name for an Irish tribe, who always had an ancestor god or a man deified as a god in their name. With the different spellings of Veniconi and my lack of understanding of the case etc, used in the word, I'm not sure if this makes grammatical sense. But, if you read it as 'kindred of Hound', where Hound is the ancestor demi-god, (Cu or Conn in this case), then it makes tribal sense.

And in fact, this is just what Dál Chuinn means. Dál is a very old way to form a tribal name and is usually translated as 'Share of Conn' or 'Share of Hound' and this is not too far from 'Kindred of Hound/Conn'.

Coincidentally, Cu was often used as part of a royal name. The name Cu Uladh, meaning Hound of Ulster, was very common among the Dál Fiatach kings (and others), right up to the Norman invasion.

Niall Noígíallach and the Veniconi.

Here is a bit more about Niall and his move north from Connacht to Ulster.

Modern scholarship has re-evaluated the events of the fall of Ulster and it's capital Emain Macha at the end of the ancient period. It is now believed that this occurred in the mid fifth century and that Niall Noígíallach oversaw it.

Byrne believes that Niall helped the Airgíalla (Oriel) overthrow the Ulster king and set up an independant kingdom, subject to him. Airgíalla is usually translated as 'Hostage Givers', (except on Wikipedia). There were nine small kingdoms or tuatha in Airgíalla and Niall is called 'of the Nine Hostages', so his name makes sense without having to include Gaul etc.

Niall himself never lived in Airgíalla, he set up a new kingdom near the Inishowen Penninsula which is in the far northwest of Ireland in the modern county Donegal.

As can be seen in the two maps below, Ptolemy places the Veniconi right in the middle of Donegal, so it might be possible to say that Niall was just going home.

These maps are taken with thanks from the excellent site "Irish History in Maps".

http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l589/Knockbridge1/DNA/ptolemy1490a.gifhttp://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l589/Knockbridge1/DNA/ire150.gif

hope
11-03-12, 20:22
There were quite a few tribes but do you know anything about the Senchineoil..they lived around Galway and Roscommon I think? Can`t seem to find anything about them except for a few lines in wickipedia.

zanipolo
11-03-12, 21:27
No. Why do you post links to such charlatan websites, anyways?

firstly, the link i provided was only for the maps as they are accurate.


I honestly find it incomprehensable that you make such a claim about the Pictish language, especially given that the same source that you cite claims otherwise. If you take a look at the quote below (found on page 1593 of the link you provided):

"For Pictish, the language of the Pictish kingdom(s) north of the Firth of Forth, only proper-name and epigraphic evidence remains. At least from the former, it is clear that it was a P-Celtic language, closely related to Cumbric and hence to early Welsh and the other Brythonic languages."

By the way, I also recommend reading this (http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/2081/1/languagepictland.pdf) concerning the language of the Picts.


So its recorded that the celts arrived in Britain around 500BC, then what was the pictish language before this?

Some historians say the picts where from western France related to the basques, some say they are related to the spanish Galicians and others say they where scandinavian people as they where great seafarers.

The Romans only mentioned them once physically
"Venit et extremis legio praetenta Britannis, Quae Scotto dat frena truci ferronque notatas Perlegit examines Picto moriente figuras"

- The Romans called this pre-Celtic people Pictii, or "Painted ones"
- The Picts spoke a non-Celtic language, although many Celtophiles feel the Picts spoke a Brythonic-Gaulish form of Celtic language. As I stated, since celtic only arrived in britain from 500BC, the pre langauge of the islands was not celtic based.

Again I will ask the question, is celtic related to a language or a people. .........my answer is that it is a language.

julia90
11-03-12, 22:07
phenotype i associate with celtic people and also with pontid like people of eastern europe
http://www.lastampa.it/multimedia/cultura_spettacoli/24408_album/05burt.jpg
http://inciucio.myblog.it/media/00/01/234333862.jpg
http://www.newnotizie.it/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Roberto-Bolle.jpg
http://www.casa24.ilsole24ore.com/images2010/mercato-immobiliare/2011/03/cota-roberto-lapresse--488x255.jpg
http://www.optimaitalia.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Vasco-Rossi.jpg
http://multimedia.quotidiano.net/data/images/gallery/2010/18735/ballando8.JPG
http://www.mondotvblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Festival-di-Sanremo-2012-Gianni-Morandi-non-conduce-sarà-direttore-artistico.jpg?9d7bd4
http://www.sorrisi.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/alessandra.jpg

julia90
11-03-12, 22:15
I think more eastwards you go on the british isles you enconter more germanic types, also blondism studies says the eastern parts of the british isles are more lighter haired and more germanic, while the western parts are more celtic as well as more dark haired

zanipolo
12-03-12, 05:12
phenotype i associate with celtic people and also with pontid like people of eastern europe
http://www.lastampa.it/multimedia/cultura_spettacoli/24408_album/05burt.jpg
http://inciucio.myblog.it/media/00/01/234333862.jpg
http://www.newnotizie.it/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Roberto-Bolle.jpg
http://www.casa24.ilsole24ore.com/images2010/mercato-immobiliare/2011/03/cota-roberto-lapresse--488x255.jpg
http://www.optimaitalia.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Vasco-Rossi.jpg
http://multimedia.quotidiano.net/data/images/gallery/2010/18735/ballando8.JPG
http://www.mondotvblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Festival-di-Sanremo-2012-Gianni-Morandi-non-conduce-sar%C3%A0-direttore-artistico.jpg?9d7bd4
http://www.sorrisi.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/alessandra.jpg

apart from the last one, they all look Austrian

MOESAN
12-03-12, 15:11
firstly, the link i provided was only for the maps as they are accurate.



So its recorded that the celts arrived in Britain around 500BC, then what was the pictish language before this?




there is no good answer today:
firstable, we do not know seriously if there were not Celtic speakers before the dates you mention -
It is sure than the historical Pictish (Cruithni/Pretani?) people of Eastern Scoltand spoke PRINCIPALLY a brittonic celtic language - it is of no worth dispute that - someones speak about an other language spoken there and that would be neither celtic nor indo-european - let's note that non-celtic does not signify non-indo-européean (some old rivers names of Scotland could be of a previous indo-european stock) -

Some historians say the picts where from western France related to the basques, some say they are related to the spanish Galicians and others say they where scandinavian people as they where great seafarers.

for western France, this is based on the name of the gaulish tribe of PICTONS? I suppose - nothing more to prove nothing only maybe the too quick conclusions about Y-DNA - What I red and applies to the proto-historical territory of future Picts lands is that people came there from EASTERN GAUL, practizing cremation and coming not far from present Switzerland - in their mixture a lot of them was phenotypically 'alpine-looking' (brachycephalic) as a lot of Celts of Eastern Gaul (a little taste of 'dinaric' too, surely, from the Beaker period along the Rhine) - the pure 'nordic' concept of Celts is a dream - today Fifeshire is still a place of mesocephaly in the Isles (index more than 80 in the 30's), with Western Ireland - imput of gaulish Celts !

The Romans only mentioned them once physically
"Venit et extremis legio praetenta Britannis, Quae Scotto dat frena truci ferronque notatas Perlegit examines Picto moriente figuras"

- The Romans called this pre-Celtic people Pictii, or "Painted ones"
- The Picts spoke a non-Celtic language, although many Celtophiles feel the Picts spoke a Brythonic-Gaulish form of Celtic language. As I stated, since celtic only arrived in britain from 500BC, the pre langauge of the islands was not celtic based.

Pict is an historical concept I believe - SO, before that, there were Caledonians that looked physically closed enough to some sorts of Celts too - I'm not the Bible, so you could find more precise and reliable details on the forum BREIZH BERTAEYN BRITTANY on the web -

Again I will ask the question, is celtic related to a language or a people. .........my answer is that it is a language.

related to a language because surely the first proto-historical Celts did acculture some 'indigene' people of the Alps and Western Europe, their demic previous imput being erased in the historical celtic populations

MOESAN
12-03-12, 15:13
precise: these 'swiss' celtic people came about the Urnfields period if I do'nt mistake

mihaitzateo
12-03-12, 16:13
Well according to the history of Rollo (which etnicity I will not start to discuss now,since is contested if he was danish or norwegian) he came with danish (and I say with svear and geatish ) vikings and settled to Normandy,in France.
No ideea where is told that Rollo had also norwegian/norse vikings since that is not veryfied by Y DNA tests,because you barely can find any R1A1 in Normandy.
From Normandy where they adopted a french-like language,these vikings were called normans.From here they went and conquered England in 1066.
According to some map from here there is a lot of R1B germanic in England,the U106 clade.There are also good percentages of I1A and of I2B which I think are pretty clearly linked again with vikings. (think is about 20% I1A+I2B in England).
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26700-New-map-of-R1b-S21-%28U106%29
So here is a part of genetic make-up of Brittish Isles,which can be hardly denied since is confirmed by both history and Y DNA analysis and more,by the change the old english language suffered.

As for percentages of R1A1 in Scotland and Ireland from here,I do not know how accurate they are,I read in some other places that you can found in Scotland in some places even 33% R1A1,which can be linked to norse vikings who settled here.

Look what is told about Icelandic women,which they say are in proportion of 60% scottish,brought by norse vikings who settled in Scotland and after came back from there.
http://www.electricscotland.com/history/iceland/icelandic_women.htm
Sorry did not found any better site to link this article.
But here is told also that a lot of icelandic women are of british isles descent:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v14/n4/fig_tab/5201578t2.html#figure-title
According to the table above,in Scottish NW coast 15% of Y DNA is from Scandinavia and 15% of mt DNA is from Scandinavia.
In Orkney 30% of mt-dna and 30% of Y DNA is from Scandinavia.
As a curiosity most women from Faroe Islands and Iceland are from Brithish Isles.
So is clear that at least in Scotland people are pretty mixed with norse vikings.

MOESAN
15-03-12, 21:10
as a whole, Scotland shows more germanic imput than Ireland and Wales, and Cornwall too (but what is Cornwall today?) and among these, a more strong imput of Norwegian Viking origin than England and Ireland - but this imput is not so important as in England in a whole - the strong viking imput is in the Isles and far North lands and not homogenous: well balanced for fathers and mothers in Caithness (a few) and Shetland and Orkney,unbalanced in the Hebrieds (more males, less females) as in Iceland and the Faroe's - I believe that the weight of british females is exageratedin some surveys because phenotypically Icelandmen are closer to Norwegians than to british Celts, Scottish Highlanders or Irishmen...
I suppose the high percentages of Y-R1a in Scotland was found in these Vikings areas but demographically these regions have almost no importance -
I think we have to be carefull and wait more data about french Normandy because the samples we have are too scarce to prove something for the lower percentages of HGs... and don't forget that other germanic peoples as Saxons and Franks settled there too, long time before big William -

Taranis
16-03-12, 17:07
So its recorded that the celts arrived in Britain around 500BC, then what was the pictish language before this?

Nobody actually recorded when Celtic-speaking peoples arrived in Britain. The Mediterranean world was entirely unaware of Britain until the 4th century BC (the journeys of Pytheas of Massilia), and the Romans didn't visit Britain until the 1st century BC (Caesar's expedition during the Gallic Wars).

From the archaeological perspective, the people known to the Greeks/Romans as Celts/Gauls were the bearers of the iron age culture of La-Tène. Iron working entered Britain around 800 BC (it entered Ireland even later), but the typical La-Tene style didn't arrive in Britain until ca. 500 BC. Does that mean that Celtic languages as a whole arrived only then? I find that highly doubtful, especially considering that Ireland was wholly Celtic by historic times yet from the archaeological only received a peripherial influence from the La-Tene culture.

It is thus my opinion that there probably were several waves of Celtic migrations towards the British Isles. The first wave during the great upheavals of the bronze age (13-12th century BC, coinciding roughly with the collapses of the civilizations in the eastern Mediterranean) bringing a Proto-Celtic (Q-Celtic) language to Britain, and a second wave during the iron age bringing a P-Celtic language to Britain.

From the genetic perspective, this may be reflected by Y-Haplogroups R1b-L21 and R1b-U152, but I'd be cautious with such an interpretation.

There are some people who propose that the Beaker-Bell Culture (3rd millennium BC) was already Celtic, but I have my serious doubts that it was even Indo-European at all, partially due to it's continuity with the earlier Megalithic traditions, partly due to it's age and due to it's very widespread nature (including North Africa and Sardinia).


Some historians say the picts where from western France related to the basques, some say they are related to the spanish Galicians and others say they where scandinavian people as they where great seafarers.

From my expirience, these are just urban legends. At least, I am unaware of a single reference in peer-reviewed sources of any of the above statements.


The Romans only mentioned them once physically
"Venit et extremis legio praetenta Britannis, Quae Scotto dat frena truci ferronque notatas Perlegit examines Picto moriente figuras"

- The Romans called this pre-Celtic people Pictii, or "Painted ones"
Caesar clearly stated that the British as a whole painted themselves blue.


Bello Gallico, Book 5, chapter 14:


"Omnes vero se Britanni vitro inficiunt, quod caeruleum efficit colorem, atque hoc horridiores sunt in pugna aspectu."


"All the Britons, indeed, dye themselves with woad, which occasions a bluish color, and thereby have a more terrible appearance in fight."



- The Picts spoke a non-Celtic language, although many Celtophiles feel the Picts spoke a Brythonic-Gaulish form of Celtic language. As I stated, since celtic only arrived in britain from 500BC, the pre langauge of the islands was not celtic based.

The little evidence that there is of the Pictish language that there is in Graeco-Roman and (much later) Gaelic sources suggests that it was a P-Celtic language akin to ancient Brythonic and Gaulish.

It is my opinion that prior to the Roman invasion of Britain (1st century BC/AD), there probably was little difference between inhabitants of southern and northern Britain, and the difference between "Britons" and "Picts" was a product of the Hadrian's Wall. So, by the time the Romans withdrew from Britain (5th century AD), Brythonic and Pictish were two different languages.


Again I will ask the question, is celtic related to a language or a people. .........my answer is that it is a language.

In the context of linguistics, "Celtic" obviously refers to the Celtic language family.

MOESAN
20-03-12, 23:37
The little evidence that there is of the Pictish language that there is in Graeco-Roman and (much later) Gaelic sources suggests that it was a P-Celtic language akin to ancient Brythonic and Gaulish.

It is my opinion that prior to the Roman invasion of Britain (1st century BC/AD), there probably was little difference between inhabitants of southern and northern Britain, and the difference between "Britons" and "Picts" was a product of the Hadrian's Wall. So, by the time the Romans withdrew from Britain (5th century AD), Brythonic and Pictish were two different languages.

In the context of linguistics, "Celtic" obviously refers to the Celtic language family.

to confirm the brittonic quality of the prédominent languages spoken in the historical pictish territory there is a book written by W/. NIcolaisen where he affirms there was a big density of brittonic celtic placenames in the lands of Picts: important, they are not big town been official centers but at the contrary everyday things naming where nature was concerned, not 'Bigchiefmagos' or 'Bigchiefbriga'... some studies affirm that there were two different languages in these lands !???
kouskit mad ha gwrit hunvreoù c'hweg!

Taranis
20-03-12, 23:43
to confirm the brittonic quality of the prédominent languages spoken in the historical pictish territory there is a book written by W/. NIcolaisen where he affirms there was a big density of brittonic celtic placenames in the lands of Picts: important, they are not big town been official centers but at the contrary everyday things naming where nature was concerned, not 'Bigchiefmagos' or 'Bigchiefbriga'... some studies affirm that there were two different languages in these lands !???
kouskit mad ha gwrit hunvreoù c'hweg!

I must admit I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say there. The idea that there were two Pictish languages has been suggested, that is a P-Celtic and a non-Indo-European (it is also discussed here (http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/2081/1/languagepictland.pdf)), but I find it unlikely for such an arrangement to exist over a period of many centuries.

MOESAN
29-03-12, 15:32
I must admit I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say there. The idea that there were two Pictish languages has been suggested, that is a P-Celtic and a non-Indo-European (it is also discussed here (http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/2081/1/languagepictland.pdf)), but I find it unlikely for such an arrangement to exist over a period of many centuries.


I said that PEOPLE affirm they was an other language in the pictish area and that this language was not indo-european (I have no competence to judge it, it is just a report) -
on an other side Nicolaisen seams thinking that yet a not too much differentiated indo-european language was spoken in the Isles before Celts arrived... I would be glad if I could find more knowledge on that, as you I suppose...

wormhole
07-08-12, 05:50
The existence of the celts if first atested by the galeic languages (which are celtic languages),as irish,scotish,welsh are.You are living in Germany, you say you are irish,you ever visited Ireland?
If you did not,go search on youtube and see there people speaking in irish language,which is a celtic language.
Second,there is some nordid profile clearly asociated with celtic ancestry, called keltic nordid,as a lot of people in UK looks (about 25%-30% from the people in UK).
If you have some R1b branch on paternal line,that is good only for history,what matters most is how you look like,for example even if you find common R1b subclades in Italy/Spain and UK,people are not looking same.
Those from Italy are usually brown/dark brown/black eyed and darker skin,with softer facial lines etc while those in UK are usually with green/blue eyes/light eyes and diferent look of their faces,a little straighter lines,etc.
In old Europe only thracians and celts were red haired,so in UK you have a lot of people red haired,because of the celts first and second because of those vikings who came and raided there and some even settled there,who were red haired also.(I do consider those vikings red haired,descendants of thracians from Troy).That red haired pretty present in UK (think most common is in Scotland) is a serious proof of celtic ancestry.
Beside,except Y DNA there is also maternal DNA,H is a large group for mt-dna (which is most common in Europe ),for sure it haves a lot of sub-branches,but research should be done to see them.
Go search a little on google images "keltic nordid" to make an ideea,about how people of this profile looks.
Just searched on google,highest percent of red heads from Europe is in Scotland,about 13% of the population and 2nd in Ireland,10% of the people.
Since you asked about genetics,if you see R1a in Scotland/Ireland is very very likely viking norse ancestry.
That's bull-crap and you know it. Especially with the "darker skin" part. You can find PLENTY of Italians with Blue/Green eyes. I'm living proof of that. Not all Italians have dark skin either. They're pretty much on average with the rest of Southern Europe, skin pigmentation wise. Yes, they're not as light as a Dutchman, but they're not as Dark as a North/SSA either. You're Romanian huh? You lot actually look a lot like darker Italians. Not much difference.

LeBrok
07-08-12, 06:35
That's bull-crap and you know it. Especially with the "darker skin" part. You can find PLENTY of Italians with Blue/Green eyes. I'm living proof of that. Not all Italians have dark skin either. They're pretty much on average with the rest of Southern Europe, skin pigmentation wise. Yes, they're not as light as a Dutchman, but they're not as Dark as a North/SSA either. You're Romanian huh? You lot actually look a lot like darker Italians. Not much difference.
Lighten up a bit wormhole, and try not to offend members of Eupedia.
Welcome to Eupedia.

wormhole
07-08-12, 06:59
Lighten up a bit wormhole, and try not to offend members of Eupedia.
Welcome to Eupedia.
Nah, I'm fine. That comment was uncalled for and intentional. "try not to offend members", ahh the Irony in that statement :rolleyes2:

Thanks.

RaHoWa
21-10-12, 16:00
First as for the Celts in England yes they are still there,England really is a mixed Anglo-Celtic land today and it varies depending on where you are in England.There are people from places like Somerset and the South-West who have large amounts of British Celtic dna as well as Alpine-Celtic types found throughout all of SOuthern England,part of Wales and part of Northern England going up to the Eastern Scottish Lowlands.Plus there are people in southern ENgland with lagre matches for Roman and southern European autosomal dna.Of course the dominant types in England really are Germanic and Northern European but many English are mixed with Celtic genes also and some,have mostly or soley Celtic genes.But there really are 2 different Celtic types found in England not only the British Celtic type but also the Alpine or Gaullish type is frequent but none are as freqeuent as the Saxon-Germanic types.SO to answer your question,England really is a mixture of Celtic and Germanic and even Roman genes but it differs and varies depending on what part of the country you are referring to.As for the Picts and Germanic parts of Scotland the best source is to get The Scots:A genetic journey by Dr James WIlson and Alistair Moffat who used to work for ethnoancestry a Scottish dna company that specializes in British Isle dna types and tests,it changed it's name to Scottish DNA now.The Pict Y-dna is called R1b-L21 str47.and they know now the Pictish language was originally a Brythonic dialect that was related to Ancient/early Proto-Gaullish and not closely related at all to Old British or Welsh and Cumbric