PDA

View Full Version : French Ethnicity



St Delcambre
27-05-11, 03:14
I find the history of this nation to be fascinating but I'll try and keep this short. We all know that the people who inhabit modern-day France are quite culturally and ethnically diverse. In regards to the key contributors, (Romans/Franks/Gauls) is it possible to tell who left the biggest "genetic footprint", so to speak? In other words, would most native-Frenchmen be of Germanic, Celtic, or Roman descent?

Antigone
27-05-11, 06:58
Wouldn't it depend on what area of France a person is from, the northern French would have a higher Germanic influence than southern French?

Maciamo
28-05-11, 09:42
Antigone is right, it highly depends on the region. Overall, it is the Gauls who have contributed the most to the French genetic pool, but the Gauls were far from being a uniform ethnic group. True Celts came from Central Europe in the Bronze Age and "conquered" the Neolithic peoples that lived in France at the time. These indigenous populations were an admixture of three main populations :

- descendants of the Paleolithic hunter-gatherers (primarily Y-DNA I2 and mtDNA H1, H3, U5 and V)
- the Mediterranean wave of Neolithic farmers
- the Danubian wave of Neolithic farmers

Both waves of Neolithic farmers probably carried Y-DNA G2a, E1b1b and J2 with mtDNA H, J, T, K and X. There is evidence that the earliest Danubian wave (LBK culture) had Y-DNA F and G2a with mtDNA N1a, which hints at a Caucasian origin. It is likely that it was followed by one or several other waves of Near Eastern immigrants from Anatolia. The Mediterranean wave was probably more Levantine and southern Anatolian in origin.

The Celts probably conquered Gaul at least twice. The first conquest took place around 2000 BCE, and brought mostly R1b-L21. The second conquest was a more progressive expansion from the Alps during the Hallstatt and La Tène periods (1200-100 BCE) and brought R1b-U152.

That's a lot of immigration towards France in the last 10,000 years. Naturally these peoples settled at different densities in different regions of France. Some sought refuge in the mountains when others arrived, so that mountain populations better reflect the genetic make-up of the earliest inhabitants. Auvergne, for instance, was found to have a much higher percentage of G2a (9-10%, about twice the national average), and to a lower extent also J2 and E1b1b than the national average, but less R1b. This is a good indication that the R1b Celts pushed Neolithic farmers into the mountains. The same is true of Switzerland, which represents a peak of G2a within Europe.

spongetaro
28-05-11, 12:03
I don't find the North/South contrast so relevant. The difference between eastern and western French may be higher.In terms of haplogroups eastern French people are rather R1b U152 while western French have more SRY2627 and R1b L21.
In the west germanic features can only be found in Flander and Normandy while in the east it can extend to the Alps. I recently saw a woman's rugby match between Paris and Grenoble. Almost 2/3 of the Grenoble team were blonde girls while Paris had just two blonde girls in the team. In fact I think that the Franks only have an influence North of Paris. The Burgudians and the german tribes employed to defend the limes in the eastern border of the Roman empire may have had a deeper impact.

Most of native French population would be of Celtic descent but:
*In southwest France you can hardly call the local people "Celtic" since Gallia Aquitania was said to be different from the rest of Gaul, probably related to the Basques.
*In Southeast France (after Marseille) people are rather Ligurians and Greek than Celts.

Even between the descendants of Celtic populations you have to make difference between eastern Celts (Alsace, Lorraine, Burgundy, Champagne, Franche comté) related to Central European Celts (La Tène, Halstatt), The Belgae (Upper Normandy, Flander, Picardy) and the British-related Celts (Brittany).

Taranis
28-05-11, 12:27
I don't find the North/South contrast so relevant. The difference between eastern and western French may be higher.In terms of haplogroups eastern French people are rather R1b U152 while western French have more SRY2627 and R1b L21.

In my opinion, R1b-U152 is tied with the cummulative effect of the Urnfield/Hallstatt/La-Tene expansions, whereas R1b-L21 appears to be tied with the Atlantic/Insular (Pre-)Celts.


In the west germanic features can only be found in Flander and Normandy while in the east it can extend to the Alps. I recently saw a woman's rugby match between Paris and Grenoble. Almost 2/3 of the Grenoble team were blonde girls while Paris had just two blonde girls in the team. In fact I think that the Franks only have an influence North of Paris. The Burgudians and the german tribes employed to defend the limes in the eastern border of the Roman empire may have had a deeper impact.

In my opinion, the Franks probably had a vastly larger impact than the Burgundians.


Most of native French population would be of Celtic descent but:
*In southwest France you can hardly call the local people "Celtic" since Gallia Aquitania was said to be different from the rest of Gaul, probably related to the Basques.
*In Southeast France (after Marseille) people are rather Ligurians and Greek than Celts.

Regarding Aquitania, from what is known, the Aquitanian language was either the same as Old Basque, or a closely-related language. There probably were also Iberian tribes in Southwestern France, specifically in the Roussillon.


Even between the descendants of Celtic populations you have to make difference between eastern Celts (Alsace, Lorraine, Burgundy, Champagne, Franche comté) related to Central European Celts (La Tène, Halstatt), The Belgae (Upper Normandy, Flander, Picardy) and the British-related Celts (Brittany).

A small nitpick there: the Belgae were actually closer tied with the British (for instance, the Atrebates and Parisii tribes also lived in Britain - and there was also a tribe named "Belgae" in Britain). Ancient Armorica did have, at least by tribal affiliation, no direct ties with Britain.

St Delcambre
30-05-11, 21:05
Any estimate on how significant the Roman contribution was? I'm guessing they made a greater cultural/linguistic impact than a genetic one? Would the genetic contribution have been the smallest out of the groups discussed so far?

spongetaro
31-05-11, 15:41
Auvergne, for instance, was found to have a much higher percentage of G2a (9-10%, about twice the national average), and to a lower extent also J2 and E1b1b than the national average, but less R1b. This is a good indication that the R1b Celts pushed Neolithic farmers into the mountains. The same is true of Switzerland, which represents a peak of G2a within Europe.

Haplogroup G is high in every area settled by Halstatt and La Tène Celts with 8% in Austria, 7,5% in southern Germany and 10% in switzerland

Taranis
31-05-11, 18:33
Haplogroup G is high in every area settled by Halstatt and La Tène Celts with 8% in Austria, 7,5% in southern Germany and 10% in switzerland

There's an interesting question. The distribution pattern of Haplogroup G clearly shows similarities with the spread of the Celts but we don't know how exactly that correlation worked. I mean, obviously Haplogroup G in Europe predates the Celtic languages by several millennia since it is Neolithic in age and the Proto-Celtic language was likely spoken no earlier than the Bronze Age.

I wonder if there's some kind of negative-positive effect: Haplogroup G was thinned out in most of Europe by the spread of the Indo-Europeans, but fared better in hilly/mounainous areas - including what would later be the Hallstatt core area.


Any estimate on how significant the Roman contribution was? I'm guessing they made a greater cultural/linguistic impact than a genetic one? Would the genetic contribution have been the smallest out of the groups discussed so far?

I would argue that the Roman impact was the greatest in Narbonensian Gaul. It was the part of Gaul that was seized first by the Romans.

spongetaro
31-05-11, 19:54
There's an interesting question. The distribution pattern of Haplogroup G clearly shows similarities with the spread of the Celts but we don't know how exactly that correlation worked. I mean, obviously Haplogroup G in Europe predates the Celtic languages by several millennia since it is Neolithic in age and the Proto-Celtic language was likely spoken no earlier than the Bronze Age.

I wonder if there's some kind of negative-positive effect: Haplogroup G was thinned out in most of Europe by the spread of the Indo-Europeans, but fared better in hilly/mounainous areas - including what would later be the Hallstatt core area.

One scenario could be that a strong concentration of haplogroup G from the LBK remained around the Alps until the bronze age. Then all the R1b P312 migrations that started from the Halstatt area brought haplogroup G to Portugal (Lusitanian), southern and central Italy (Italics tribes) and Auvergne (Gallic tribes like the Arvernes)

sparkey
31-05-11, 20:10
Do we have an estimate on the age of the subclade(s) of the G2a that corresponds with the Halstatt/La Tene expansions? Because that could help us determine whether it is an early farming marker that expanded later with it or whether it is a fellow traveler with Proto-Celtic R1b.

zanipolo
01-06-11, 09:00
check
http://www.u152.org/

if you check the site ( which is continously update ) you will see the heart of U152 is the ligurian and french alps area

We need to update our maps

................

Gallia Aquitania is Gascon land , whaich are linguistically related to teh basques and also to the occitan languages. they represent the buffer for the basques from the french.

MOESAN
18-01-12, 20:37
I don't find the North/South contrast so relevant. The difference between eastern and western French may be higher.In terms of haplogroups eastern French people are rather R1b U152 while western French have more SRY2627 and R1b L21.
In the west germanic features can only be found in Flander and Normandy while in the east it can extend to the Alps. I recently saw a woman's rugby match between Paris and Grenoble. Almost 2/3 of the Grenoble team were blonde girls while Paris had just two blonde girls in the team. In fact I think that the Franks only have an influence North of Paris. The Burgudians and the german tribes employed to defend the limes in the eastern border of the Roman empire may have had a deeper impact.

Most of native French population would be of Celtic descent but:
*In southwest France you can hardly call the local people "Celtic" since Gallia Aquitania was said to be different from the rest of Gaul, probably related to the Basques.
*In Southeast France (after Marseille) people are rather Ligurians and Greek than Celts.

Even between the descendants of Celtic populations you have to make difference between eastern Celts (Alsace, Lorraine, Burgundy, Champagne, Franche comté) related to Central European Celts (La Tène, Halstatt), The Belgae (Upper Normandy, Flander, Picardy) and the British-related Celts (Brittany).

I'm late on this topic
your posts I red yet are sensitive and often well informed, but please, don't look at the girls hair colours: in France more than the half are artificially coloured hairs, sorry. the mean of blonds is 12% in France and very inequal (from 4% to 28% in some countrysides for extremes, so...) according to regions or subregions (even cantons!!!) + and for future, even the true european French people will soon go down to 8-6% of blonds (Spanish Portuguese Italian Balkan immigration without speaking about Turks - the North and East immigration will be ever scarcer than that. I don't speak here of Maghrebins -

MOESAN
18-01-12, 20:44
One scenario could be that a strong concentration of haplogroup G from the LBK remained around the Alps until the bronze age. Then all the R1b P312 migrations that started from the Halstatt area brought haplogroup G to Portugal (Lusitanian), southern and central Italy (Italics tribes) and Auvergne (Gallic tribes like the Arvernes)

Sure the Celts and the celtizied people carried some Y-G with them but the region where Y-G is strong are very often mountainous ones and the Bretons and British and Irish "Celts" have almost no Y-G (even the Welshes have far lesser than previoulsy believed and it seams to be a Neolothic stock) - only along France and Belgium North Sea shores and inland are some Y-G: I wait precise suveys on their qualities because some of them could be of Alani origin and not from Neolithic caucasus origin-

spongetaro
18-01-12, 21:10
Sure the Celts and the celtizied people carried some Y-G with them but the region where Y-G is strong are very often mountainous ones and the Bretons and British and Irish "Celts" have almost no Y-G (even the Welshes have far lesser than previoulsy believed and it seams to be a Neolothic stock) - only along France and Belgium North Sea shores and inland are some Y-G: I wait precise suveys on their qualities because some of them could be of Alani origin and not from Neolithic caucasus origin-

I wonder if the clannic system in Ireland and Scotland increased the % of R1b there. I don't know how it worked with the Gaulish Tribes though (similar clannic structure?).

MOESAN
19-01-12, 13:06
check
http://www.u152.org/

if you check the site ( which is continously update ) you will see the heart of U152 is the ligurian and french alps area

We need to update our maps

................

Gallia Aquitania is Gascon land , whaich are linguistically related to teh basques and also to the occitan languages. they represent the buffer for the basques from the french.

let's be carefull: the commentary of the map speaks about areas where U152 is MOST LIKELY to be prominent (all SNPs not examined?) - even if I think this map is correct as a whole for some remote regions I'm not sure...

Gallia Aquitania at the Roman time was a mixed territory with some true celtic gaulish tribes holding some lands when previous Aquitanians was holding others (I believe the coasts showed denser Aquitanian occupation than, say the inland and East of the Les Landes department or the Garonne valley for instance) -- even in Pyrenees we see different impacts of a brachycephalic population I link to continental Celts (not pure but statisticlly dominant among them)
in Corsica the R-U152 should have been male bearers only because I'm expecting more brachycephalic alpine-like people than we find in this island -
Ligurians was a mix at these times (celtic admixture) but all the way yet there language appears as in I-E one, considered by someones as phonetically closer to celtic than to italic -

MOESAN
19-01-12, 13:14
I wonder if the clannic system in Ireland and Scotland increased the % of R1b there. I don't know how it worked with the Gaulish Tribes though (similar clannic structure?).

I think british clannic system is a very archaic one and I am not sure for Gauls, but the gaulish system of noble family pool and clientele is not so far from the clannic system where "clients" or pretected nobles and freemen took even the surname of the clann ('clann' in gaelic is for "children", 'plant' in welsh) they was affiliated to... - I red somwhere the first clannic system of gaelic people was based on females (mothers) and not on males - according to some lines of Caesar it is possible it had been the same matriarcal system among first Brittons - in ancient Brittain noble sons was fostered by their uncles on their mother's side - (some readings I did because I'm too young to have known that!)

spongetaro
19-01-12, 13:25
'clann' in gaelic is for "children"

It is offtopic but note that Etruscan for son is also "clan"

spongetaro
19-01-12, 13:28
I red somwhere the first clannic system of gaelic people was based on females (mothers) and not on males - according to some lines of Caesar it is possible it had been the same matriarcal system among first Brittons

Really? I don't know how this could fit with Maciamo theory of Patriarcal R1b society with polygamy etc to explain R1b dominance in western Europe.
It seems that Basque society (high level of R1b too) was matriarcal too

MOESAN
19-01-12, 15:23
Really? I don't know how this could fit with Maciamo theory of Patriarcal R1b society with polygamy etc to explain R1b dominance in western Europe.
It seems that Basque society (high level of R1b too) was matriarcal too

I reported only what I red somewhere - I have no precise competence to support or deny that -
and the words 'patriarcal' and 'matriarcal' are very often misleading words when speaking about human society too -
for Y-R1b age of presence in Europe I am still waiting more...

about 'clann' (??? << KwLA-N* ???) I think (a bet) to some words like breton 'kolen', 'kolin', welsh 'colwyn' (very young animal progeniture), dialectal 'koulin' = rabbit, but maybe from latin 'conill' << 'cuniculus'? -
nevertheless the welsh form 'plant' evoques a word that was never stressed afore the -L- in it ;
a 'clan' word (as in Etruscan) should not have turned in a 'p-l-' word I believe

MOESAN
27-01-12, 20:11
I take on again, about general problems of evaluating demic contributions in the making of ancient and today populations - often enough I read Romans carried Y-E1b + Y-J2 + maybe some Y-G2a...
Roman people was a mixture yet + true italic people came from North and the Osco-Ombrian ones (surely arrived with the beginning of Villanova culture) carried also Y-R1b (the majority, I guess, was R-U152/S28) + the roman legions was made of a lot of foreign people taken among the tribes Roma vainquished, often among the VERY people of the lands Roma occupied even if it's surprising for us- So it's very difficult to guess the true weight of the Roma armies in genetics, I think - surely the bulk of "true" roman (civil) citizens firstable settled the closer regions and countries - (for J,G, E, it would be necessary to have the details of the SNPs and STRs in play)

zanipolo
27-01-12, 20:47
I take on again, about general problems of evaluating demic contributions in the making of ancient and today populations - often enough I read Romans carried Y-E1b + Y-J2 + maybe some Y-G2a...
Roman people was a mixture yet + true italic people came from North and the Osco-Ombrian ones (surely arrived with the beginning of Villanova culture) carried also Y-R1b (the majority, I guess, was R-U152/S28) + the roman legions was made of a lot of foreign people taken among the tribes Roma vainquished, often among the VERY people of the lands Roma occupied even if it's surprising for us- So it's very difficult to guess the true weight of the Roma armies in genetics, I think - surely the bulk of "true" roman (civil) citizens firstable settled the closer regions and countries - (for J,G, E, it would be necessary to have the details of the SNPs and STRs in play)

i do not understand your meaning of arrived with the beginning of Villanova culture.
The aboriginal cultures of italy are 4 only.
ligurian in all of northern italy
umbrian from the po river down to rome
osci from rome and the rest of mainland italy and the
sicels of sicily.

etruscans, romans, veneti, greek, illyrian, lombards, celts etc etc are all immigrants.
the romans are descendent from a southern etruscan tribe

the term osco-umbrian reflects all of mainland italy except north of the po river

MOESAN
27-01-12, 23:39
i do not understand your meaning of arrived with the beginning of Villanova culture.
The aboriginal cultures of italy are 4 only.
ligurian in all of northern italy
umbrian from the po river down to rome
osci from rome and the rest of mainland italy and the
sicels of sicily.

etruscans, romans, veneti, greek, illyrian, lombards, celts etc etc are all immigrants.
the romans are descendent from a southern etruscan tribe

the term osco-umbrian reflects all of mainland italy except north of the po river

Maybe (it' svery possible in fact) you know more than me about italy History-
some personal thoughts:
none of the peoples you mention can be looked at it as "aboriginal" (if 'aboriginal' has a sense)
If you speak of Ligurians of the Bell Beaker period (<-2000 to ???) they was indo-european speakers (language close to celtic an italic) even if certainly they had mixed with previous neolithic (numerous?) and mesolithic (scarce,) populations -
For the Osci and Umbrian tribes, i believed (maybe I misred some text) than as 'P-' Otalics they was arrived in the Peninsula only at the beginning of Iron Age (linked to Villanova)

Romans was descendants for the most of latin Qw- italic people and I red they was supposed to enter Italy before Osco-Umbrians – maybe as for celtic this chronoligical dichotomy between languages in Qw- >< P- is a misconception ? I'm not up-to-date for that I confess – but some Italic people the Latins derived from was very early in Italy (Terramare?) - I read now in Wikipedia that Sicles/Siculi and Latins are considered as villanovian culturally, it's new for me...What is sure is that in every case all these peoples was coming from North after others and was not autochtonous at all... it could explain the relatively high presence of Y-R1b-U152 in South Italy & Sicily without search on the Normand side (whoever gave them this R-U152 (Indo-European ancestor, other population) -
$: R-U152 is prevalent amon North Corsican (fathers only, an other story for the mums?) and it's tempting to link it to the Bell Beakers Culture period (someones did it)

- for Romans = Etruscans, it's not the prevalent theory among scholars for now – not a demic origin, only a sometime elite – and Empire Romans of italy was a mix with all kinds of Italics, Etruscans, Ligurians and previous and newcome other populations been accultured (Celts, Veneti, some Greeks...) - Lombards came after -

Buona notte - god natt - nos vad -

the term osco-umbrian reflects all of mainland italy except north of the po river[/QUOTE]

zanipolo
28-01-12, 01:57
Maybe (it' svery possible in fact) you know more than me about italy History-
some personal thoughts:
none of the peoples you mention can be looked at it as "aboriginal" (if 'aboriginal' has a sense)
If you speak of Ligurians of the Bell Beaker period (<-2000 to ???) they was indo-european speakers (language close to celtic an italic) even if certainly they had mixed with previous neolithic (numerous?) and mesolithic (scarce,) populations -
For the Osci and Umbrian tribes, i believed (maybe I misred some text) than as 'P-' Otalics they was arrived in the Peninsula only at the beginning of Iron Age (linked to Villanova)

Romans was descendants for the most of latin Qw- italic people and I red they was supposed to enter Italy before Osco-Umbrians – maybe as for celtic this chronoligical dichotomy between languages in Qw- >< P- is a misconception ? I'm not up-to-date for that I confess – but some Italic people the Latins derived from was very early in Italy (Terramare?) - I read now in Wikipedia that Sicles/Siculi and Latins are considered as villanovian culturally, it's new for me...What is sure is that in every case all these peoples was coming from North after others and was not autochtonous at all... it could explain the relatively high presence of Y-R1b-U152 in South Italy & Sicily without search on the Normand side (whoever gave them this R-U152 (Indo-European ancestor, other population) -
$: R-U152 is prevalent amon North Corsican (fathers only, an other story for the mums?) and it's tempting to link it to the Bell Beakers Culture period (someones did it)

- for Romans = Etruscans, it's not the prevalent theory among scholars for now – not a demic origin, only a sometime elite – and Empire Romans of italy was a mix with all kinds of Italics, Etruscans, Ligurians and previous and newcome other populations been accultured (Celts, Veneti, some Greeks...) - Lombards came after -

Buona notte - god natt - nos vad -

the term osco-umbrian reflects all of mainland italy except north of the po river[/QUOTE]

i am talking bronze age
You should know that ligurians where roughly from montpellier through north italy until nearly at vienna. the majority of grves are between the rhone and the french alps.
North east italy - history says the veneti landed in the area and pushed out the ligurian euganei tribe. On and , near vienna, settle by taurisci a gallic-ligurian people

there was no romans, only from the arrival of the etruscans in about 900BC , which says on the settled land, the southern border was the tiber river and beyond was the osci.
factual italian scholars , say Roman evolved from etruscans .............."fantasy " italian scholars maintain that they come from trojans.

I refer to the naming of aboriginal as the indigenous people of the land

spongetaro
28-01-12, 14:55
The Q Italic speakers are descended from Vucedol culture while P Italics speakers are descended from Cnetral european urnfielder

MOESAN
29-01-12, 20:37
IS spoke about Empire Romans because this topic is about French Ethnicity & the diverse movements of people that can have contributed to its demic formation - 'roman' is a final stage where melted a lot of different populations, making hard to figure out correctly the impact Romans could have had on the countries they occupied because the carried a lot of different ligneages -
" Romans" send by the Empire to other lands was not the first Romans whatever the impact of Etruscans impact I believe it was important for culture, not so for demography...

L.D.Brousse
09-03-12, 05:15
I'm sry2627+ my Y dna line came from Cognac