PDA

View Full Version : Neolithic Celts and Germanics



Twilight
18-09-13, 21:13
Hello there, I've been roughly mapping my genetic profile and I was wondering. Does anyone know how the Neolithic cultures bearing E1b1b, G2a, J, T and (I2?) made it into Celtic and Germanic territory and what their names are or is the answer still a mystery? Thanks :)

adamo
18-09-13, 22:16
1. I2 is a European haplogroup, in fact virtually all I is European (other than ancient pre-I mutations such as IJK or very basal forms of I from the Middle East possibly.) the other Neolithic markers made it to Celtic Germany by reaching the Mediterranean world first probably via Anatolia or a similar source. From here, as the gene flow reflects, south-eastern Europeans would be affected much more by the Neolithic genetic influence. In much smaller numbers/%, some of them eventually arrived in Celtic/Germanic continental Europe but as we can see, up to 40-45% of Greek and italian male lineages are from the Neolithic. These frequencies are maybe like 10-20% of Germans, have Neolithic influence, maybe less, so there's an obvious European ''difference'' in who is more largely affected by the arrival of middle eastern agriculturalists.

Fire Haired
18-09-13, 23:43
The Y DNA I2a2 in mainly central Europe, I2a1a in western, I2a1b in eastern were all probably at least partly in those areas before farming spread mainly 9,000-6,000ybp. THey spread E1b1b V13(probably also some of its father E1b1b M73 and other E1b's), G2a, and probably at least some J1 and J2 i dont know all the subclades. Were brought to Europe by farmers. I dont know what u mean how they made into Celtic and Germanic territory what is so hard to believe. The only people in their way were Mesolithic hunter gathers who it seems they conquered and mixed with. Celtic and Germanic languages culture and whatever began in the bronze age way after these farmers spread.

Celtic and Germanic dont define genetics it is true that there is some genetics involved deiftley y DNA. But they are just a mix of ethnic groups who lived before them and German speaking people in Norway and alot different genetically than German speakers in Austria. U should look click on Germanic Italo Celts (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?93100-Germanic-Italo-Celts) and Eupedia R1b page (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml). Indo European language itself began round Russia Ukraine and north mid east 7,000-8,000ybp. THe R1a1a1 M417 mainly in INdo Iranian(R1a1a1b2 Z93) Balto Slavic(R1a1a1b1 Z283)languages spread out of the traditional areas of the Kurgen hypothesis Ukriane and Russia. But Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11 grandfather R1b1a2a L23 is around 20-30% in Antolia, Caucus, and Iraq and R1b in Europe period at some point came out of that area of the mid east either R1b1a2a L23 or its fathers. So Germanic Italo celtic Y DNa does not exactley fit with the Kurgen theory. But there is a connection with 6,000 year old Kurgen in Caucus and the Maykop culture.

The proto Germanic Italo Celtic speakers made it to Germany about 5,000ybp and had formed into R1b1a2a1a L11. From there they spread mixing with native Bell Beaker culture and spreading into south Scandnavia and Netherlands as proto germanic speakers and R1b1a2a1a1 s21 and into central Europe with Unetice culture and R1b1a2a1a2 S116 and proto Italo Celtic languages then kept spreading. from 2,000bc-1,000ybp almost all of western Europe was conquered by Italo Celts and more than 50% of the native Paternal lineages replaced by Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a2 S116. It is incredible how fast the Germanic Italo Celts spread acroos western Europe. FTDNA actulley agrees with what i am saying so u dont think i am conpsiricy theoryisy
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1b/default.aspx?section=results

R1b1a2a1a l11 spread acroos western Europe extremely quickly.

Twilight
18-09-13, 23:53
Excuse me, but we are kind of getting off subject here. With all do respect, this subject has nothing to do with the Indo-european cultures and more to do with what the archeologests call these farmers in the British Isles.

Fire Haired
18-09-13, 23:59
Excuse me, but we are kind of getting off subject here. With all do respect, this subject has nothing to do with the Indo-european cultures and more to do with what the archeologests call these farmers in the British Isles.

When looking at Y DNa in the British isles take out all the ones of Germanic origin and don't really exist in Ireland. R1b1a2a1a2c L21 which is a Italo Celtic subclade estimated to be about 4,000 years old comdined with other Italo Celtic R1b but vast vast majority bi=eing this subclade would be about 80-95% in the British isles before Germanic invasions 400-600ad. Also Y DNa I2a2a M223 which is most popular in central Europe and shows signs of being partly spread by Germanic and Celtic tribes but is from the pre Germanic Italo Celtic Y DNa if central Europe. has its own subclade in the British isles estimated to be about 3,000 year sold it is I2a2a1 it also was probably brought over by Celts. Then I2a1b3 L161.1 which is estimated to be about 6,600 years old and is found throught out central europe south Scandnavia and central eastern Europe but is highest in the British isles but raelly gets up to 1%. It is probably Neolithic pre Celtic same with most G2a and E1b1b v13 but not J2 maybe J1.

The Celts almost completely exterminated the natives y DNa deifntley by conquest so Celtic migration to the British isles was major it was not random and undirect like historians have said before all this DNA stuff. The Neolithic culture dominate because they were more advanced and had better chances of surviving than Mesolithic hunter gathers what else do u want.

Twilight
19-09-13, 21:37
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25163-Y-DNA-haplogroups-of-ancient-civilizations It says in here that the Italo-celto-Germanics only mixed with I2b when they reached the british isles unless Maciamo updated this idea. are you sure I2b is a farming culture :/? However it seems like the Romans mixed with the britons after all with the Italics absorbing the Terrimare and Etruscans exept J1 populations appears to have withered out at the French english Channel.

Fire Haired
19-09-13, 23:10
I2b is now called I2a2 the part that never changes is P224 that is what u should remember. No They would have inter married with I2a2 when first arriving in central Europe 5,000ybp i am talking about Germanic Italo Celts (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?93100-Germanic-Italo-Celts). And I2a2 P224 originated in pre Neolithic Europe probably central and later mixed with G2a, E1b1b V13, and maybe also J1, J2, and T farmers.

There is not alot of evidence Romans mixed with Britons at least romans from Rome or Italy. excet maybe J2 which in Europe looks pretty close to the Roman empire and is more popular in southern Britian. There was some that thought dominte Y DNa haplogroup in northern and central Italy R1b1a2a1a2b S28 was fro Romans but now we know Hallstat and Urnfield Celts had settled there and they also are dominated by the same haplogroup. U can read the Germanic Italo Celts link to learn more about that. For some reason Romans did not spread their main Y DNa haplogroup it seems mid eastern J2 spread with Rome at least a little bit which i would guess was not originally because of Romans.

Sile
20-09-13, 11:20
The Y DNA I2a2 in mainly central Europe, I2a1a in western, I2a1b in eastern were all probably at least partly in those areas before farming spread mainly 9,000-6,000ybp. THey spread E1b1b V13(probably also some of its father E1b1b M73 and other E1b's), G2a, and probably at least some J1 and J2 i dont know all the subclades. Were brought to Europe by farmers. I dont know what u mean how they made into Celtic and Germanic territory what is so hard to believe. The only people in their way were Mesolithic hunter gathers who it seems they conquered and mixed with. Celtic and Germanic languages culture and whatever began in the bronze age way after these farmers spread.

.

I never heard of this term celto-italic-germanic , do you have a link...I searched everywhere for it. I doubt it existed as the celts and germans ( in central europe) could only have merged after the fall of the roman Empire. You must mean the merger in Belgium lands.

Again , if you say I2a2 is central european, then it surely could never been Germanic, because the germans where not in central Europe anytime in the bronze-age or early iron age. So, would this central european I2a2be either celtic, gallic, raetic, venetic or illyric...with maybe a touch of Dacian?

Twilight
20-09-13, 20:02
[QUOTE=Fire Haired;416362]I2b is now called I2a2 the part that never changes is P224 that is what u should remember. No They would have inter married with I2a2 when first arriving in central Europe 5,000ybp i am talking about Germanic Italo Celts (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?93100-Germanic-Italo-Celts). And I2a2 P224 originated in pre Neolithic Europe probably central and later mixed with G2a, E1b1b V13, and maybe also J1, J2, and T farmers.

Yeah, according to the link I posted earlier, the Gaulish Celts mixed with the Terrimare people who were I2a1&2 and E before celtification in france. The Etruscans who were J1/2 & also E but if there is another way besides Romans pushing these cultures besides J1 into Briton, I'd love to hear it. ;)

Twilight
20-09-13, 21:30
I never heard of this term celto-italic-germanic , do you have a link...I searched everywhere for it. I doubt it existed as the celts and germans ( in central europe) could only have merged after the fall of the roman Empire. You must mean the merger in Belgium lands.

Again , if you say I2a2 is central european, then it surely could never been Germanic, because the germans where not in central Europe anytime in the bronze-age or early iron age. So, would this central european I2a2be either celtic, gallic, raetic, venetic or illyric...with maybe a touch of Dacian?

Here you go, it's a quote from Maciamo from a while back ;)
Romans, Celts and Germans

Celtic, Italic and Germanic people are all descended from the same R1b1b2 stock. They split north of the Alps.

The Italic branch went south and mixed with the Terramare people who were I2a, G2a and E-V13. Northern Italians have more Indo-European Celto-Italic blood, while southern Italian have more indigenous blood (the highest being Sardinia, then Basilicata).

The Germanic branch moved north and mixed with the indigenous I1 and I2b people, who had already mixed with R1a migrants from the Corded Ware (Battle Axe) culture. The new hybrid Germanic people retained the highest percentage of aboriginal haplogroup I.

Celtic people split in several groups : the Brythonic went to Britain and Ireland, the Gaulish to France, the Iberian to Spain and Portugal, and the Alpine remained around Austria, Switzerland, southern Germany, Eastern France and Belgium. The Iberian and Gaulish groups mixed with I2b, I2a and E people, the Alpine with I2b and E, and the Brythonic just with I2b people.

It is likely that the language of the aboriginal Europeans influenced the various Celtic, Italic and Germanic dialects. Germanic languages diverted the most from the original European R1b language because it assimilated a very large part of aborigines.

From about 700 BCE, the Etruscans settled around Tuscany and the Greeks in southern Italy. Etruscans probably came from Palestine and brought haplogroups J1, J2 and E with them. The Greeks in Italy were Doric and brought J2, E, G2a and probably more R1b (see above). The Romans progressively absorbed the Etruscans and Italian Greeks and mixed with them. By the time of Julius Caesar Roman citizens were probably composed of 45% of R1b, 20% of J, 15% of E, 15% of G2a and 5% of I2a.
Source: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25163-Y-DNA-haplogroups-of-ancient-civilizations
And the map http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml

Sile
20-09-13, 21:51
Here you go, it's a quote from Maciamo from a while back ;)
Romans, Celts and Germans

Celtic, Italic and Germanic people are all descended from the same R1b1b2 stock. They split north of the Alps.

The Italic branch went south and mixed with the Terramare people who were I2a, G2a and E-V13. Northern Italians have more Indo-European Celto-Italic blood, while southern Italian have more indigenous blood (the highest being Sardinia, then Basilicata).

The Germanic branch moved north and mixed with the indigenous I1 and I2b people, who had already mixed with R1a migrants from the Corded Ware (Battle Axe) culture. The new hybrid Germanic people retained the highest percentage of aboriginal haplogroup I.

Celtic people split in several groups : the Brythonic went to Britain and Ireland, the Gaulish to France, the Iberian to Spain and Portugal, and the Alpine remained around Austria, Switzerland, southern Germany, Eastern France and Belgium. The Iberian and Gaulish groups mixed with I2b, I2a and E people, the Alpine with I2b and E, and the Brythonic just with I2b people.

It is likely that the language of the aboriginal Europeans influenced the various Celtic, Italic and Germanic dialects. Germanic languages diverted the most from the original European R1b language because it assimilated a very large part of aborigines.

From about 700 BCE, the Etruscans settled around Tuscany and the Greeks in southern Italy. Etruscans probably came from Palestine and brought haplogroups J1, J2 and E with them. The Greeks in Italy were Doric and brought J2, E, G2a and probably more R1b (see above). The Romans progressively absorbed the Etruscans and Italian Greeks and mixed with them. By the time of Julius Caesar Roman citizens were probably composed of 45% of R1b, 20% of J, 15% of E, 15% of G2a and 5% of I2a.
Source: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25163-Y-DNA-haplogroups-of-ancient-civilizations
And the map http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml

Does he need to rewrite the paper as its found the Etruscans descended from modern South Germany ( I have already linked the paper)?. They ( Etruscans) could not have brought J ( 1 or 2 ) into Italy unless J was already in the alps. Most likely it was G2* and either R1b* and I2*

Is he also saying that the Germanic moved north to Denmark and beyond and did not originate in jutland, north germany, scandinavian lands?

adamo
20-09-13, 22:07
The Etruscans came from Germany? What kind of nonsense is that?

Twilight
20-09-13, 22:12
What kind of nonsense is what?

Sile
20-09-13, 22:28
What kind of nonsense is what?

this
http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/were-etruscans-after-all-native-italians.html

(http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/were-etruscans-after-all-native-italians.html)http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0055519



The study finds that ancient Etruscan mtDNA is closest among modern populations (by FST) to Southern Germans

Twilight
20-09-13, 23:25
Perhaps J and E hijacked the local woman?

Sile
21-09-13, 01:16
Perhaps J and E hijacked the local woman?

yes, I can accept this!. We can apply this theory to every tribe that migrated

MOESAN
21-09-13, 09:49
its a not too informative evidence but as a whole female populations moved less than male one at those times adn they mixed one to the others more on the geographic neighbouring model (slow osmose) than on the "forefronts" model (fast and far moves)

MOESAN
21-09-13, 09:56
Etruscans were maybe a male foreign elite so... but we have also the second language (non-IE) of Rhetia, don't forget...
but Alinei porposed a link in central Europe between Etruscans and Hungarians, estimating their languages presented some links with a kind of proto-turkic !!! (for him, they would be autochtonous people, at least partly: Alinei is the supporter of every kind of old presence and autochtony of every sort of ethny and language... nobody moved, for him, almost!)
I remain very prudent here... but that Urnfields could be AT FIRST non IE people is making its way in my mind, waiting more data

Nobody1
21-09-13, 11:26
"As for the Etruscans’ origins, ancient DNA is of little use, because pre-Etruscan dwellers of Central Italy, of the Villanovan culture, cremated their dead [1], and hence their genetic features are unknown"

Thats the key note from the study;
And the pre-Etruscan dwellers of Central Italy, of the Villanovan culture were none other than the Indo-European Umbrians + remnant pop. of the Neolithic; And app. thats the most important part of the maternal lineage of the Etruscan Civilization;

Anybody who knows Classical History ancient Greek and Roman scholars and Archaeology knows it already;

MOESAN
21-09-13, 16:15
"As for the Etruscans’ origins, ancient DNA is of little use, because pre-Etruscan dwellers of Central Italy, of the Villanovan culture, cremated their dead [1], and hence their genetic features are unknown"

Thats the key note from the study;
And the pre-Etruscan dwellers of Central Italy, of the Villanovan culture were none other than the Indo-European Umbrians + remnant pop. of the Neolithic; And app. thats the most important part of the maternal lineage of the Etruscan Civilization;

Anybody who knows Classical History ancient Greek and Roman scholars and Archaeology knows it already;

good reply at first sight - I cannot be sure of anything, but apparently a study is pretending having examined mt DNA from Etruscans !?! SO Etruscans did not cremate their dead people, or if they did, is it possible to analyse some only partially cremated bodies? I confess my ignorance about these details... if ture for Etruscans, this last remark applies to previous incinerating peoples ... I red nevertheless that cremation in ancient times was very often incomplete -
good afternoon

Maciamo
21-09-13, 16:36
Hello there, I've been roughly mapping my genetic profile and I was wondering. Does anyone know how the Neolithic cultures bearing E1b1b, G2a, J, T and (I2?) made it into Celtic and Germanic territory and what their names are or is the answer still a mystery? Thanks :)

It is an anachronism to talk of Neolithic Celts and Germanics. The Celtic and Germanic linguistic families did not appear until the Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age. The Indo-European (mostly R1b) people who brought the Proto-Celto-Germanic genes, culture and language to Europe were still living in the Caucasus region or in the Middle East (probably around northern Mesopotamia or eastern Anatolia) during the Neolithic.

If you mean "Who were the people living in the territories later conquered by the Proto-Celto-Germanics", then that includes over half of Europe, and the answer depends on where exactly and when, since the European Neolithic spans a period of nearly 4000 years.

Maciamo
21-09-13, 16:41
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25163-Y-DNA-haplogroups-of-ancient-civilizations It says in here that the Italo-celto-Germanics only mixed with I2b when they reached the british isles unless Maciamo updated this idea. are you sure I2b is a farming culture :/? However it seems like the Romans mixed with the britons after all with the Italics absorbing the Terrimare and Etruscans exept J1 populations appears to have withered out at the French english Channel.

I should update this page. When the Proto-Celts arrived in the British Isles from circa 2300 BCE the Neolithic/Chalcolithic people they met were mostly I2a1 (M26), G2a and E1b1b. I now think that the first I2b (now called I2a2) came to Britain with continental Celts between 1000 and 500 BCE (many more came later with La Tène Celts and Germanic peoples).

Fire Haired
21-09-13, 17:53
I should update this page. When the Proto-Celts arrived in the British Isles from circa 2300 BCE the Neolithic/Chalcolithic people they met were mostly I2a1 (M26), G2a and E1b1b. I now think that the first I2b (now called I2a2) came to Britain with continental Celts between 1000 and 500 BCE (many more came later with La Tène Celts and Germanic peoples).

U think I2a1a M26 was popular in the British isles before Celts arrived. I would think I2a1b3 L161.1, G2a, and E1b1b. But what subclades of E1b1b i think E1b1b V13 would make the most sense or anything E1b1b M73 and downstream of it.

Fire Haired
21-09-13, 17:57
It is an anachronism to talk of Neolithic Celts and Germanics. The Celtic and Germanic linguistic families did not appear until the Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age. The Indo-European (mostly R1b) people who brought the Proto-Celto-Germanic genes, culture and language to Europe were still living in the Caucasus region or in the Middle East (probably around northern Mesopotamia or eastern Anatolia) during the Neolithic.

If you mean "Who were the people living in the territories later conquered by the Proto-Celto-Germanics", then that includes over half of Europe, and the answer depends on where exactly and when, since the European Neolithic spans a period of nearly 4000 years.

Wait early iron age if Celts who later spoke Insular Celtic languages arrived in the British isles 4,300ybp like u say that is way before early iron age over 1,000 years. U know Germanic languages would have begun in the bronze age. Also It was the ancestor's of R1b1a2a1a L11 that were in the north mid east for most of the Neolithic or at least early Neolithic 7,000-9,000ybp. I think though most of the ancestry of the Germanic Italo Celts that arrived in west Europe 5,000ybp. Is from Europeans in southern Russia or southeast Europe the R1b1a2a L23 people inter married with or conquered because of the connection with red hair and R1b1a2a1a L11.

Nobody1
21-09-13, 18:06
good reply at first sight - I cannot be sure of anything, but apparently a study is pretending having examined mt DNA from Etruscans !?! SO Etruscans did not cremate their dead people, or if they did, is it possible to analyse some only partially cremated bodies? I confess my ignorance about these details... if ture for Etruscans, this last remark applies to previous incinerating peoples ... I red nevertheless that cremation in ancient times was very often incomplete -
good afternoon

They did get 30 Etruscan mtDNA samples that come from 6 diff. sites (of former Etruria) ranging from the 6th-1st cen BC;

Barbara S. Tinsley - Reconstructing Western Civilization (2006)
The Etruscans preferred inhumation to cremation, though they settled into Etruria where cremation was common, for the Villanovans with whom they gradually intermingled practiced it. Etruscan newcomers in the seventh century preferred to build whole cities underground to house their dead so that they might "live" in death as pleasantly as in life. Indo-Europeans could do as they pleased, but in death the Etruscans surrounded themselves with the finer things of life. In the end, they refused to go to pot.

But keep in mind that even within the hot phase of Cremation there are Burials of Inhumation such as at Hallstatt A-D there are 455 graves Cremation and 525 graves Inhumation; Also the famous Urnfield Lischtenstein cave corpses are not burned;

Sarunas Milisauskas - European Prehistory (2002)
There were, however, notable instances where certain individuals were inhumed not burnt; though most Urnfield cemeteries predominantly used cremation, there were often instances where a few burials were inhumed, and a few cemeteries where inhumation was actually more common than cremation.

And those 30 Etruscan corpses also def. come from a time thats post the Urnfield (Villanova) Complex;
But the Maternal lineage must have stayed the same whether their ancestors were torched or not;
Just because they were torched there is no (unfortunately) direct comparison possible; As the study notes;

Heres an attempt at defining the Hg's of the
30 Etruscan mtDNA samples; mostly JT, U5 some H1b
http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com.es/2013/02/guest-article-by-gail-tonnesen-comments.html

MOESAN
21-09-13, 22:11
I put here my "elucubrating" post because Germanics and Celts are part of it , even if "neolithic Celts and Germanics" is not the very purpose - I beg your pardon in advance!
About Germanics again


reading again some notes from the H.HUBERT work about germanic formation, I constate he thought, based on archeology principally:
after LGM southern populations got up to North (Maglemose evocates more the Magdalenian than Azilean, with few stone tools but bones, anters) until the scandinavian coast (Sweden, Norway) and Onega Lake! - some traces of Tardenoisian among Maglemose (silex), partly akin to the Capsian of southern Spain – all that lasted until the Neolithic – just before Neolithic too (5000/4000 BC), the 'kjökkenmodings' coastal culture in Denmark, N-Germany >> Saale river, >> S-Sweden (Scania) >> Wolhynia, Lithuania maybe? – physically some 'cromanoids' plus more or less «brutal» shaped brachycephals plus some 'nordic', different from the 'proto-mediterraneans' of Ofnet cave (who mixed with 'proto-alpine' types) –
the kjökkenmodings people knew already pottery but did not polish their stone axes! (common with W-Aremorica, ancient Britain...) - some links with the Campinian of Italy -
to conclude, at these times, scarce population in N-Europe-Scandinaviadivided as:
a) some little bands of hunters-river-fishers near lakes and ponds, remnants of the old Mesolothic hunters-gatherers (bet: majority of Y-I1)-
b) seashores fishers, more numerous along the coasts rich in shellfishs, between sea and dense woodlands, and originated from agricultors Neolithic groups from South


some litlle groups of agricultors in cleared zones in the woods, not too numerous – (bet: Y-G2 + Y-E1bV13) – supposedly, iron gave later way to swifter clearing of woodlands -



strinking change at Eneolithic (transition to Calcholithic-Copper): dense populations, well organised, agriculture and fishing (boats), territories and cheftains!!!
3500/2000 BC: neolitihical groups of megalithers occupied the land (divided into North-West megaliths of N-Germany and W-Elbe, scandinavian megaliths and Elbe-Saale megaliths group of Thuringen and surroundings) along the Artic culture people, frequently well separated but sometimes the too overlapped – dense net of population, even Norway is well colonised, Trondheim is reached through the mountains passes! - the Artic culture overlap with Finland -
leaving the coasts (but East?) and the islands to the megalithers - a continental inland population with individual tombs under tumuli (barrows), sometimes with pits, occuped the North and the West of Denmark (Jutland); they had a corded pottery with BB influences (I suppose the «Britain-Rhineland BBs», common in West and in the local dolmens but uncommon among the 'gallery sepultures' (= 'long barrows' megalithers, coastal, OK! Normal!) – they had assymetrical 'hammer-axes', and in Sweden, 'boat-axes' («haches naviformes») - $: the danish models of axes were found too in Fatjanovo, in Kouban, and around Dniepr and Donetzk -
no extermination of the megalithers: the same occurs in the Netherland with the 'corded' people taking even the worst sandy places on coasts because megalithers ('long barrows' rulers) held already the good shores (this could prove the strength at that time of the descendants of the earlier peasants of Britain in their other possessions, if I don't mistake) – but at last, the tumuli-individual sepultures took the strong side upon the megalithers that had hard time too in the Isles (their «home»?) with the 'round barrows' BB folks came frome the Rhine mouth after having left the Weser-Hannover-Westphaly-Frisia great region with an archeological vacuum (HUBERT thought they were ancestors of the gaelic-celtic speaker folks) -
these people got into Southern Sweden (SW Skania >> SE Blekinge) and covered (?) the 'artic' peoples until the Norway «doors» (around Oslo passes?) – according to HUBERT? This civilisation, with some light loans to the 'Artic' and the 'megalithic culture', had extended northwards and also until Russia – ('battle axes culture'?)
HUBERT thought the 'artic' people has furnished a dominent demic basis to the future Germanics and has done so among Finns (no way to differenciate Scandinavia 'artic' and Finland 'artic' on archeology criteria ... - he thought the individual tombs folks were close in origin to the Celts and were come from the Danau (Don) river through the Saale valley and that they have had only a slight influence in the demic constitution of the Germanics -
after, the sepultures contained wooden coffins under tumuli (different from the later stones circles tumuli of pre-Lusace Culture in Czechia and S+W Poland) – new axes with upturned edges («rebords relevés»)
me: all the way, in this northern region, the incineration or cremation system seems having taken place without great populations movements – the first incinerations were under tumulus as before : at least in this region, because in other regions, the first launching involved demic process, see under -


&: HUBERT spoke of Illyrians but in a curious way: he spoke sometimes of an illyrian domain, more cultural than ethnic ? where he placed too Latins and Umbrians, Greeks, Cimmerians, Veneti, Phrygians, Karpodacians (these last ones baptized 'Illyrians' by KOSSINA)- he considered these culturally Illyrians as the primary source of the propagation of cremation and Urnfields and he thought it is during their influence period that germanic language formed up definitely without saying why – he said same linguistic place-names were found among the Lusace (and W-Veneti places?) and Adriatic regions even if we did not find lusacian pottery in Adriatic region -
I personally, at this stage of my knowledge, should be attracted to think this cremation system (religious) is the fact of an Anatolian Near-Eastern population(s) (what size?): metallurgy professionals? Yet cremation appeared at Unetice times in Czechia and other types of sepultures in big urns (not every time the tandem cremation-urn at beginning) implying some castes of southeastern origin; but Cucuteni-Triploje knew too something close – and some anthropologic studies link more or less directly Tripolje people (males for the most) with south Caucasus (Armenia) - # maybe an Illyrian branch having reached the Adriatic coast could have ignored this type of sepulture and indeed, the cast practizing it could have gained reputation after only in central Europe (say between Hungary and Moravia?) and passed its religion to I-Eans of different but yet close enough stocks: E-Celts, E-Italics, N-Hellenes??? plus a northern branch of Illyrians becoming Lusacians – other hypothesis: Illyrian was a too well known term extended too much without any proof: so the «lusacian» language of toponymy could be the North Illyricum language, akin to NE-Italy Veneti language (Eh! Eh!), centum as a whole, and not true «illyrianish»; same problem: only a part of the tribes adopted the «new religion» (cremation in urns)- I suppose Veneti ancestors as Umbrians ancestors have been neighnours in a central Europe position before and around the 1000 BC... by the way, the Umbrians seem having worn clothes close to the last Celts ones – these lands around Don river have knew so numerous invasions and colonisations and contacts! A highway!!! It would be interesting to make a rapid survey about the Y-diversity near the Don compared to other regions of Europe (even if mt-DNA is more quiet)-




Hubert said Germanic tribes kept the cremation system (without pottery, contrary to Celts and «Illyrians»<> me: rather Umbrians or Veneti?) and that Celts reversed to inhumation after the Urnfields period -
to go back to Germanics synthesis, on the demic plan, I think the imput of neolithical people has been weak enough in Northern Europe and Scandinavia (it is not a scoop); even the megalithers did not leave a strong signature (at individual levels, we find some atavic phenotypes, but rare – the rare skeletons of the Netherlands neolithic until the Funnelbeaker (already some I-Eans introgression?) were about 1m65 of stature when the Germanics after showed 1m72-1m74 statures) – the most of the ancestors were taken among the autochtonous mesolithical artic people (a lot of Y-I >> Y-I1?) and the diverse I-Ean tribes were genuine Corded (flat tombs: Y-R1a) and a mix of Corded-BBs-other western °autochtones (tumuli) and °°some South-Baltic «artic» autochtones indo-europeanized (result: Y-R1a + Y-R1b (U106 principally + some U152 and L21?) + °Y-I2a2? + °°Y-I1: the Y-I1 are more dense in South-Scandinavia than in North) -




me: personally, I am astonished by all these changes in sepultures and the non-stop alternance of tumuli-no tumuli or inhumation-cremation systems: what is the part of ethny and the one of believings exchanges? - two short studies about Czechoslovakia and Lusace Bronze Age seems showing that the cremation and the urns came from the South before 'historic' Celts and did not impose themselves in the whole population: the culture linked to them were firstable born by distinct population not immediatly mixing with their predecessors – in Silesia and around the Wisla/Vistula the new coming urnfields people did not replace the precedent Tumuli people passed before by the same Moravia «pass» (I don't go into the details here) and it is only after interminglings (geographical) during some time that diverse forms of mixed forms of sepultures appeared... the successive Tumuli cultures were different at first sight, arrived at different times in different places, but maybe they marked steppic tribes waves from East having kept this old mode of sepulture (for elite, it's true...) or at least some forgotten inland tribes having kept on with?
Someones say: the proto-celtic tumuli culture of Southern Germany took its tumuli from the last Corded Wares people (first Corded before inhumed their dead fellows in individual flat tombs that became the unique mode among well evolved Germanics)
+ the tumuli people of Bohemia seemed coming from North Bohemia before progressing southwards and eatswards to Moravia and SW-Poland– the Lower Rhine Bell Beakers used tumuli too according to 'round barrows' of Britain(maybe it is them who gave tumuli to the Corded? It seems to me the Harz (metals) and Thuringen-Saale-South-Saxe-Anhalt region was the core of the «rich» Tumuli («princes tumuli») and a mixing place where Y-I2a2 fellows and Y-R1b from close South and West (BB influences*) created a new culture upon the Unetice one, associated to North-East Y-R1a Corded...the «pure» initial Corded were stayed more northern or eastern...
*: at this stage, I don't say BB promotors = Y-R1b's – just their constated following settlements envolved Y-R1b's -
&&: I note some authors spoke about the first tumuli people of Czechia-Poland as if they were different from the historic Celts who reached after them and after the Urnfields – I think they are right -
concerning cremation and urns, I red that in 2600/2400 BC in Tripolje a 'pile dwelling' population of dominant agricultural culture presented few inhumations and at contrary numerous incinerations and urns! At Bronze Age, the cremation system would be come from Hungary or carpathian Bassin, before to reach S-Bohemia and SW Slovakia and to pass to Lusace and Poland through Moravia – it is about the 1000 BC that the 'celtic Tumuli' zone of S-Germany adopted cremation in urns under flat tombs, come from N-E (it is to say: Bohem) before coming back to old inhumations practices under tumuli -
at Hallstatt (beginning of Iron) we had a mix of inhumations and incineration: I have some difficulty to believe it was only a question of transmitted mode: dead is too important to be assimilated at clothes or arms or pottery. When religious, it needs time to be transmitted OR domination of a foreign elite I think that at first different culture tribes were living along in a kind of patchwork and that there was not a religious mode without future... the tumuli came back in force after the beginning, rich ones extented from Don river and Julian Alps to Balkans: BUT according to scholars, the skeletons were different (as a mean, I suppose) and the artefacts too (?)


I red somewhere the range of northern tumuli made a highway from S-Sweden to S-Norway showing the progression of the newcomers – I think they were a mix of predominent Y-R1a classical 'corded' from Thuringen-Saale mixed with some «foreign» elite more western? from Harz? Bell Beakers (genuine or influenced only) creators of the new BB Rhine style ? Proto-Celts as say someones ? (I keep sceptical but it is possible the first wave, could be proto-celtic: the Thuringen region was for me a crossing place between Y-R1a Corded and Y-??? Bell Beakers, where Y-I2a2 were involved too) – nevertheless I think the propagation of «boat-axes» is more typical of dominently genuine Corded people maybe partly satemized: it could explain the strong presence of Y-R1a in central parts of Norway and even if less, in Sweden, when we see less Y-R1a in SW Norway (these last ones more «proto-Celtic»?) and even less in Denmark? A very mixed population at first (autochtones + BB + Corded (in Thuringen) creating dynamics and after gained more Corded (R1a) people to this culture, this last ones being the more numerous to pass in Scandinavia?
&; me: contrary to the thoughts of HUBERT concerning germanic Scandinavia, the Finn scientists think the Battle Axe 'corded' tribes who colonised the ancient territories of the Comb Ceramic culture were flesh and blood demic «imports» and not only accultured autochtones – the alleged particular links between germanic and slavic could reside in this 'corded' presence on the two sides of the Oder??? but if Veneti/Venedi were from Carpathian bassin and around, it could also explain a partial satemization (origin closer to the eastern-slavic-dacian-thracian group: let us recall illyrian is considered {at final stage only? By convergeance?} as a satem language too... but Veneti were classified in the centum group by others (not completely centum for others!)


&&: the supposed «proto-Celts» of the tumuli spoke surely an archaïc N-W european I-Ean on way to the future celtic but at that time the linguistic process was not finished – maybe a specimen of the future Belgae language? Or proto-gaelic?

Twilight
22-09-13, 20:23
It is an anachronism to talk of Neolithic Celts and Germanics. The Celtic and Germanic linguistic families did not appear until the Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age. The Indo-European (mostly R1b) people who brought the Proto-Celto-Germanic genes, culture and language to Europe were still living in the Caucasus region or in the Middle East (probably around northern Mesopotamia or eastern Anatolia) during the Neolithic.

If you mean "Who were the people living in the territories later conquered by the Proto-Celto-Germanics", then that includes over half of Europe, and the answer depends on where exactly and when, since the European Neolithic spans a period of nearly 4000 years.

Yeah, probably not the best name for the subject. But hey, this is my first time creating a forum page here so if anyone has some tips on how to make my forum pages better, please feel free to pm me, I'm all ears. :) I was meaning before Italo-Celto-Germanic came along to be honest with you. :)