Is there any consensus on how Celtic DNA made its way to Western Norway yet?

PaleBlueDot

Regular Member
Messages
14
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Ages ago I remember there was a debate about the surprisingly high amount of Y R1b-L21 present in Norway, especially on the west coast in regions where many viking raiders originated. The big question was whether this was due to some strange ancient anomaly, male slaves returned to Norway and allowed to procreate (perhaps freed thralls?) or maybe some much later Scottish immigrants (in huge numbers).
My understanding was there was no consensus, and perhaps some future (mtDNA?) tests would help clear up this issue.

Since then I have read that an even higher portion of male icelanders and over half of female icelanders carry celtic markers, which clearly came from vikings bringing celts along. I also read about some viking buried in Greenland that was more Celtic than Nordic, and that Orkney islanders have similar amounts of viking and celtic origins.
Is the issue of West coast Norway closer to being resolved yet? Has perhaps Norwegian mtDNA been mapped? If so, is celtic mtDNA in Norway more or less common than celtic Y-DNA? Was the contact prehistoric, viking era or much more recent?

Also, since we now know that there are so many people with both Celtic and Nordic blood in Iceland, Greenland, Ireland, Orkney etc - is it likely that the celtic DNA found in West Coast Norwegians came from protracted contact with these colonies, and was more "peaceful" than originally assumed?
 
who says R1b-L21 is exclusively Celtic ?

I read it on NorwayDNA, but lots of sources use this term. (I am not allowed to post links yet due to just joining.)

A quick search on Eupedia showing the distribution of R2b L21 shows a pretty convincing picture. You don't often see as concentrated and exclusive haplogroups as this one in Europe. Wherever it came from, it is huge in the "Celtic fringe", that is the non anglo-saxon parts of the UK as well as Brittany. I can call it something else than "celtic" if this offends you.

So, anything new in this area? I am particularly interested in knowing what the general consensus is (if there is any), not your personal theory, although you are of course free to suggest anything.
 
Ages ago I remember there was a debate about the surprisingly high amount of Y R1b-L21 present in Norway, especially on the west coast in regions where many viking raiders originated. The big question was whether this was due to some strange ancient anomaly, male slaves returned to Norway and allowed to procreate (perhaps freed thralls?) or maybe some much later Scottish immigrants (in huge numbers).
My understanding was there was no consensus, and perhaps some future (mtDNA?) tests would help clear up this issue.

BellBeaker.gif


The data I've seen suggests the Celts were a horse tribe in North Africa around 3000 BC with access to the early galley. When the Sahara dried up they moved into Western Europe. The Culture is known as Bell Beaker, haplogroup is R1b L21, language was Celtic.

Evidence:

1. Similarities in pottery styles of Bell Beakers and North Africa
2. Arrow head similarity maps
3. Y haplogroup R1b L21 split up around 3000 BC
4. Maternal DNA (Plenty of H in North Africa)
5. Celtic languages likely split around 3000 BC
6. Celtic has similarities with Afro-Asiatic
7. Bell Beaker first appeared in Iberia around 3000 BC with bronze technology
8. No evidence suggesting R1b L21 moved through Central Europe (why would they having a navy?)
9. Introduction of the horse in England between 2500 and 3000 BC
10. Introduction of African cattle in Iberia prior to 1500 BC
11. Strong connection between Iberian and Berber horses
12. Strong connection between Bell Beaker territory, Celtic language, and the presence of R1b.

Not surprisingly Bell Beaker artifacts were found in SW Norway as is R1b.

The theory that the Celtic language spread from the Hallstatt culture 600 BC is pretty much discredited, it was a much older culture and language. Seems correct to state that R1b-L21 is Celtic.
 
Ages ago I remember there was a debate about the surprisingly high amount of Y R1b-L21 present in Norway, especially on the west coast in regions where many viking raiders originated. The big question was whether this was due to some strange ancient anomaly, male slaves returned to Norway and allowed to procreate (perhaps freed thralls?) or maybe some much later Scottish immigrants (in huge numbers).
My understanding was there was no consensus, and perhaps some future (mtDNA?) tests would help clear up this issue.

Since then I have read that an even higher portion of male icelanders and over half of female icelanders carry celtic markers, which clearly came from vikings bringing celts along. I also read about some viking buried in Greenland that was more Celtic than Nordic, and that Orkney islanders have similar amounts of viking and celtic origins.
Is the issue of West coast Norway closer to being resolved yet? Has perhaps Norwegian mtDNA been mapped? If so, is celtic mtDNA in Norway more or less common than celtic Y-DNA? Was the contact prehistoric, viking era or much more recent?

Also, since we now know that there are so many people with both Celtic and Nordic blood in Iceland, Greenland, Ireland, Orkney etc - is it likely that the celtic DNA found in West Coast Norwegians came from protracted contact with these colonies, and was more "peaceful" than originally assumed?

Maybe they're all Nordic. Yes, the recent study had the bulk of the R1b in Iceland belonging to R1b-L21 and R1b-U106.

Why would you assume only R1b are slaves?
 
Maybe they're all Nordic. Yes, the recent study had the bulk of the R1b in Iceland belonging to R1b-L21 and R1b-U106.
Why would you assume only R1b are slaves?
I'm assuming that lots of haplogroups including various branches of R1b as well as L1 are were common among slaves in Norway.


I wish I could link the image of distribution of haplogroup R1b-L21 (S145) from Eupedia.
On this map you can very clearly see that this is a branch only common in the celtic fringe, most strongly in Ireland and Scotland. It is also common in Iceland, where no one lived until the Vikings arrived.

It is not common at all in Sweden, which otherwise has very strong genetic ties with Norway. There is even a small hotspot in Northern Sicily.
This all makes sense, as Sweden got their trade contact/slaves from eastern countries rather than Britain, and tons of Normans settled in Northern Sicily (where L1 is unexpectedly common).

I thought this was the close to the prevailing view. I wanted to know if there is new evidence in this area, or if someone can confirm that viking slavery (or intermarriage) is the reason for this.
 
the Goidels, ancestral to the the British Celts would have entered England +/- 1000 BC, they have identified by their broader skulls.
http://www.huntingdonshire.info/history/1_3_bronze_age.asp
The unbroken typological sequence of weapon and tool forms which developed during the Early Bronze Age (characteristic forms, dagger and flat axe) c. 1700-1400 B.C. and the Middle Bronze Age (rapier and palstave), 1400-1000 B.C. suggest that during the second millennium the conditions in Eastern Britain were fairly stable and peaceful. The Late Bronze Age (c. 1000-500B.C.) is marked by the appearance of the leaf-shaped sword, replacing the rapier, and the socketed axe, replacing the palstave; and there are grounds for believing that the change is due to an invasion, the brunt of which fell on Eastern Britain.5 Some think that the new-comers were Goidels, the first Celtic-speaking peoples to reach these shores; the present writer accepts this view is probable.

but prior to that, 1300 BC there was the Atlantic Bronze Age http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Bronze_Age

maybe that was the time R1b-L21 spread al along the Atlantic coast (prior to arrival on the British Isles)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In my opinion, the most likely explanation for R1b-L21 in Norway and Iceland stem from Gaelic and Pictish slaves during the Viking period. Until ancient DNA shows up from Norway that proves that the presence is older, I hold this for the most likely explanation.

The data I've seen suggests the Celts were a horse tribe in North Africa around 3000 BC with access to the early galley. When the Sahara dried up they moved into Western Europe. The Culture is known as Bell Beaker, haplogroup is R1b L21, language was Celtic.

Evidence:

1. Similarities in pottery styles of Bell Beakers and North Africa
2. Arrow head similarity maps
3. Y haplogroup R1b L21 split up around 3000 BC
4. Maternal DNA (Plenty of H in North Africa)
5. Celtic languages likely split around 3000 BC
6. Celtic has similarities with Afro-Asiatic
7. Bell Beaker first appeared in Iberia around 3000 BC with bronze technology
8. No evidence suggesting R1b L21 moved through Central Europe (why would they having a navy?)
9. Introduction of the horse in England between 2500 and 3000 BC
10. Introduction of African cattle in Iberia prior to 1500 BC
11. Strong connection between Iberian and Berber horses
12. Strong connection between Bell Beaker territory, Celtic language, and the presence of R1b.

Not surprisingly Bell Beaker artifacts were found in SW Norway as is R1b.

No offense to you, but what you're doing there on the genetic side is take the modern distribution for granted and correlate it to a single historic event that lies in the far past (the Beaker-Bell culture). If you take a look at the subclades of R1b, the distribution pattern of R1b in Western Europe correlates very poorly overall with the Beaker-Bell culture.

From a linguistic perspective, your claim is untenable. The Celtic languages are demonstrably Indo-European languages, not Afroasiatic languages. They're related with the Indo-Iranic languages of the Indian subcontinent and the extinct Tocharian languages of the Tarim basin, not with the Berber languages, Ancient Egyptian, Chadic (e.g. Hausa), Kushitic (e.g. Somali) or Semitic (e.g. Arabic and Hebrew). The supposed similarities between Celtic and Afroasiatic are only with the modern (Insular) Celtic languages, there is no such similarity between the ancient Celtic languages (like Celtiberian and Gaulish), which were much more similar to Ancient Greek and Sanskrit.

There's also, I might add, zero evidence for linguistic presence of the Celts in Morocco. Not from place names, not from loanwords in the Berber languages.

By saying R1b-L21 is "exclusively" Celtic, you're also ignore the distribution patterns of two other major western European subclades, R1b-U152 and R1b-U106, which both point much more to a Central European origin.

Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif


Haplogroup-R1b-S21.gif


Furthermore, I'll pinpoint you to this very well-written discussion by Maciamo on the Beaker-Bell culture...

The theory that the Celtic language spread from the Hallstatt culture 600 BC is pretty much discredited, it was a much older culture and language. Seems correct to state that R1b-L21 is Celtic.

The Hallstatt theory is, in my opinion, the least bad theory that we currently have on the origin of the Celtic languages.
 
My view is the dramatic spread of certain R1b clades is connected to Bell Beaker (not necessarily all of R1b but the lucky clades were) and I think the ydna expansions connected to it may have followed a sequence starting in Cantabria, going north to Ireland/Britain/Breton and then the "Irish/British/Breton" clade expanding west to east e.g. to the west coast of Norway, later pushed back east to west again by later Nordic and Central European expansions.

Alternatively it's viking allies / captives.

#

so stage 1

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-DF27.gif

stage 2

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-L21.gif

stage 3+

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif

https://thecampblogbymike.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/haplogroup-r1b-s21.gif

something like that anyway
 
I'm assuming that lots of haplogroups including various branches of R1b as well as L1 are were common among slaves in Norway.


I wish I could link the image of distribution of haplogroup R1b-L21 (S145) from Eupedia.
On this map you can very clearly see that this is a branch only common in the celtic fringe, most strongly in Ireland and Scotland. It is also common in Iceland, where no one lived until the Vikings arrived.

It is not common at all in Sweden, which otherwise has very strong genetic ties with Norway. There is even a small hotspot in Northern Sicily.
This all makes sense, as Sweden got their trade contact/slaves from eastern countries rather than Britain, and tons of Normans settled in Northern Sicily (where L1 is unexpectedly common).

I thought this was the close to the prevailing view. I wanted to know if there is new evidence in this area, or if someone can confirm that viking slavery (or intermarriage) is the reason for this.

There is no evidence slaves have ever made up such a large portion of a gene pool. In fact the statement is ridiculous.
If we must consider a non-Germanic origin, it's far more likely the Norwegian coasts were settled with L21 before the Germanic migration period.

EDIT: Other more complicated scenarios include some L21+ arriving from Sweden during the Migration period - it's far from "non-existant", just check the Swedish FTDNA project. Some could have arrived in Norway with skilled labour immigrants within the last 300 years from L21+ rich countries like Britain, France, Belgium. Religious persecution from the Catholic Church was very severe at this time, and the Nordic countries very accommodating.
 
BellBeaker.gif


The data I've seen suggests the Celts were a horse tribe in North Africa around 3000 BC with access to the early galley. When the Sahara dried up they moved into Western Europe. The Culture is known as Bell Beaker, haplogroup is R1b L21, language was Celtic.

Evidence:

1. Similarities in pottery styles of Bell Beakers and North Africa
2. Arrow head similarity maps
3. Y haplogroup R1b L21 split up around 3000 BC
4. Maternal DNA (Plenty of H in North Africa)
5. Celtic languages likely split around 3000 BC
6. Celtic has similarities with Afro-Asiatic
7. Bell Beaker first appeared in Iberia around 3000 BC with bronze technology
8. No evidence suggesting R1b L21 moved through Central Europe (why would they having a navy?)
9. Introduction of the horse in England between 2500 and 3000 BC
10. Introduction of African cattle in Iberia prior to 1500 BC
11. Strong connection between Iberian and Berber horses
12. Strong connection between Bell Beaker territory, Celtic language, and the presence of R1b.

Not surprisingly Bell Beaker artifacts were found in SW Norway as is R1b.

The theory that the Celtic language spread from the Hallstatt culture 600 BC is pretty much discredited, it was a much older culture and language. Seems correct to state that R1b-L21 is Celtic.

ANSWER

some good points but we cananalyse some of them from an other perspective1. Bell Beakers in NorthAfrica can as well be an importation2. Same remark : theywere part of the same « kit ».3. OK but Y-R1b-L21 is notdense in places where BBs are, for the most. If LATE BBs can belinked to Celts they can be linked too proto-stages of others I-Eancultures (surely Italic, maybe Germanic).5. Celtic languages since 3000BC ? It is not sure but possible, even if I think the genuineproto-Celtic separated from proto-Italic begun only about the 2500BC, without solid proof I acknowledge so : OK here, but does itprove a link with FIRST BBs and North Africa ?6. Celtic and Afro-Asiaticlanguages ? Neo-Celtic yes (maybe substrata), but old Celticlanguages ? I 'm not sure the ancient celtic syntaxis was soclose to the A-A ones...7. OK no remark, but ?8. Y-R1b-L21 had more chancesto be born in Western Europe than in Alps, but it come from Y-R-P310as U152 and others of West and West-Central Europe. Its maritimeorigin is to be proved : Celts were more continental people thanmaritime people at first, but they learned quick and well accordingto the Ancients, and can impose their rules upon, or deal withprevious shores people.9. the Horse in the Islesabout 3000/2500 BC ? Seems coherent with BBs being horsemen andbowmen (rather the 2500 BC?) - What else can this prove ?10. African cattle in Iberiabefore the 1500 BC... at what precise date ? And Neolithiccolonization and/or subsequent trade can explain that :north-african cattle in the Isles would have been more probant.11. Connexion betweenberberian and iberian horses : same answer : berberianhorses in the Isles ?12. Strong connexion forterritories concerning BBs, Celts and R1b ? The BBs territories,spotty for the most, leaved huge territories without any BB. Theheavier regions for Y-R1b are in Northern Spain, not in SouthernPortugal. It is truer concerning the Y-R1b-L21 distribution. What wecould imagine is that the BB culture (an elite one, for I think) andits subsequent action of acculturation, had a heavy imput on theCelts culture developpment, leaving 2 hypothesis : creation ofthe celtic distinction upon a West-I-Ean communauty, or doping analready existing proto-celtic communauty. For me the most importantimput of BBs upon Celts took place in Germany along the Rhine riverabout the 2500/2200 BC before provocating expansions on differentdirections. It 's true celtic myths speak of a far Scythic origin anda way across Mediterranea through southern shores before reachingIberia ; what to think of that ? Legends are false orLegends contain a bit of truth but also can melt down the myths ofthe diverse previous components of a resulting mixed population, whatdoesn't exclude borrowings to more respected civilizations ?Uneasy to be sure of some things, I'm not even sure first genuine BBpromotors (East Carpathians origin, then Croatian?) were I-Eanspeaking !I'm not trying to destroy yourthoughts but I propose other interpretations of the facts.Wait and see more clues...
for R1b L21 in Norway and BBs possible but not sure - but what kind of BBs??? L21 = Celt? very possible I agree! -
the presence there as a slaves imput seems a bit surprising - maybe too some alliances with irishmen? (the famous Gaels-Vikings and Vikings-Gaels) - if I recall well, some supposed 'viking' ligneages of the Hebrides islands in Scotland were of Y-R1b ligneages -

concerning the map, I saw a lot of diverging maps, all spotty !!! here it lacks the Southern Meseta BBs "lands" (an accultured one more than a cradle one)
 
ANSWER
some good points but we cananalyse some of them from an other perspective1. Bell Beakers in NorthAfrica can as well be an importation2. Same remark : theywere part of the same « kit ».3. OK but Y-R1b-L21 is notdense in places where BBs are, for the most. If LATE BBs can belinked to Celts they can be linked too proto-stages of others I-Eancultures (surely Italic, maybe Germanic).5. Celtic languages since 3000BC ? It is not sure but possible, even if I think the genuineproto-Celtic separated from proto-Italic begun only about the 2500BC, without solid proof I acknowledge so : OK here, but does itprove a link with FIRST BBs and North Africa ?6. Celtic and Afro-Asiaticlanguages ? Neo-Celtic yes (maybe substrata), but old Celticlanguages ? I 'm not sure the ancient celtic syntaxis was soclose to the A-A ones...7. OK no remark, but ?8. Y-R1b-L21 had more chancesto be born in Western Europe than in Alps, but it come from Y-R-P310as U152 and others of West and West-Central Europe. Its maritimeorigin is to be proved : Celts were more continental people thanmaritime people at first, but they learned quick and well accordingto the Ancients, and can impose their rules upon, or deal withprevious shores people.9. the Horse in the Islesabout 3000/2500 BC ? Seems coherent with BBs being horsemen andbowmen (rather the 2500 BC?) - What else can this prove ?10. African cattle in Iberiabefore the 1500 BC... at what precise date ? And Neolithiccolonization and/or subsequent trade can explain that :north-african cattle in the Isles would have been more probant.11. Connexion betweenberberian and iberian horses : same answer : berberianhorses in the Isles ?12. Strong connexion forterritories concerning BBs, Celts and R1b ? The BBs territories,spotty for the most, leaved huge territories without any BB. Theheavier regions for Y-R1b are in Northern Spain, not in SouthernPortugal. It is truer concerning the Y-R1b-L21 distribution. What wecould imagine is that the BB culture (an elite one, for I think) andits subsequent action of acculturation, had a heavy imput on theCelts culture developpment, leaving 2 hypothesis : creation ofthe celtic distinction upon a West-I-Ean communauty, or doping analready existing proto-celtic communauty. For me the most importantimput of BBs upon Celts took place in Germany along the Rhine riverabout the 2500/2200 BC before provocating expansions on differentdirections. It 's true celtic myths speak of a far Scythic origin anda way across Mediterranea through southern shores before reachingIberia ; what to think of that ? Legends are false orLegends contain a bit of truth but also can melt down the myths ofthe diverse previous components of a resulting mixed population, whatdoesn't exclude borrowings to more respected civilizations ?Uneasy to be sure of some things, I'm not even sure first genuine BBpromotors (East Carpathians origin, then Croatian?) were I-Eanspeaking !I'm not trying to destroy yourthoughts but I propose other interpretations of the facts.Wait and see more clues...
 
BellBeaker.gif


The data I've seen suggests the Celts were a horse tribe in North Africa around 3000 BC with access to the early galley. When the Sahara dried up they moved into Western Europe. The Culture is known as Bell Beaker, haplogroup is R1b L21, language was Celtic.

Evidence:

1. Similarities in pottery styles of Bell Beakers and North Africa
2. Arrow head similarity maps
3. Y haplogroup R1b L21 split up around 3000 BC
4. Maternal DNA (Plenty of H in North Africa)
5. Celtic languages likely split around 3000 BC
6. Celtic has similarities with Afro-Asiatic
7. Bell Beaker first appeared in Iberia around 3000 BC with bronze technology
8. No evidence suggesting R1b L21 moved through Central Europe (why would they having a navy?)
9. Introduction of the horse in England between 2500 and 3000 BC
10. Introduction of African cattle in Iberia prior to 1500 BC
11. Strong connection between Iberian and Berber horses
12. Strong connection between Bell Beaker territory, Celtic language, and the presence of R1b.

Not surprisingly Bell Beaker artifacts were found in SW Norway as is R1b.

The theory that the Celtic language spread from the Hallstatt culture 600 BC is pretty much discredited, it was a much older culture and language. Seems correct to state that R1b-L21 is Celtic.

ANSWER

some good points but we cananalyse some of them from an other perspective1. Bell Beakers in NorthAfrica can as well be an importation2. Same remark : theywere part of the same « kit ».3. OK but Y-R1b-L21 is notdense in places where BBs are, for the most. If LATE BBs can belinked to Celts they can be linked too proto-stages of others I-Eancultures (surely Italic, maybe Germanic).5. Celtic languages since 3000BC ? It is not sure but possible, even if I think the genuineproto-Celtic separated from proto-Italic begun only about the 2500BC, without solid proof I acknowledge so : OK here, but does itprove a link with FIRST BBs and North Africa ?6. Celtic and Afro-Asiaticlanguages ? Neo-Celtic yes (maybe substrata), but old Celticlanguages ? I 'm not sure the ancient celtic syntaxis was soclose to the A-A ones...7. OK no remark, but ?8. Y-R1b-L21 had more chancesto be born in Western Europe than in Alps, but it come from Y-R-P310as U152 and others of West and West-Central Europe. Its maritimeorigin is to be proved : Celts were more continental people thanmaritime people at first, but they learned quick and well accordingto the Ancients, and can impose their rules upon, or deal withprevious shores people.9. the Horse in the Islesabout 3000/2500 BC ? Seems coherent with BBs being horsemen andbowmen (rather the 2500 BC?) - What else can this prove ?10. African cattle in Iberiabefore the 1500 BC... at what precise date ? And Neolithiccolonization and/or subsequent trade can explain that :north-african cattle in the Isles would have been more probant.11. Connexion betweenberberian and iberian horses : same answer : berberianhorses in the Isles ?12. Strong connexion forterritories concerning BBs, Celts and R1b ? The BBs territories,spotty for the most, leaved huge territories without any BB. Theheavier regions for Y-R1b are in Northern Spain, not in SouthernPortugal. It is truer concerning the Y-R1b-L21 distribution. What wecould imagine is that the BB culture (an elite one, for I think) andits subsequent action of acculturation, had a heavy imput on theCelts culture developpment, leaving 2 hypothesis : creation ofthe celtic distinction upon a West-I-Ean communauty, or doping analready existing proto-celtic communauty. For me the most importantimput of BBs upon Celts took place in Germany along the Rhine riverabout the 2500/2200 BC before provocating expansions on differentdirections. It 's true celtic myths speak of a far Scythic origin anda way across Mediterranea through southern shores before reachingIberia ; what to think of that ? Legends are false orLegends contain a bit of truth but also can melt down the myths ofthe diverse previous components of a resulting mixed population, whatdoesn't exclude borrowings to more respected civilizations ?Uneasy to be sure of some things, I'm not even sure first genuine BBpromotors (East Carpathians origin, then Croatian?) were I-Eanspeaking !I'm not trying to destroy yourthoughts but I propose other interpretations of the facts.Wait and see more clues...
for R1b L21 in Norway and BBs possible but not sure - but what kind of BBs??? L21 = Celt? very possible I agree! -
the presence there as a slaves imput seems a bit surprising - maybe too some alliances with irishmen? (the famous Gaels-Vikings and Vikings-Gaels) - if I recall well, some supposed 'viking' ligneages of the Hebrides islands in Scotland were of Y-R1b ligneages -
 
No offense to you, but what you're doing there on the genetic side is take the modern distribution for granted and correlate it to a single historic event that lies in the far past (the Beaker-Bell culture). If you take a look at the subclades of R1b, the distribution pattern of R1b in Western Europe correlates very poorly overall with the Beaker-Bell culture.
You're very incorrect here - in fact it correlates very well with Bell Beaker. Quite possibly all the major subclades of R1b below L11+ and their successes (in Western Europe) are through the distribution of this new culture. Most Bell Beaker men to date have been found P312+, and others highly likely to be. Surely this counts for something.

The Hallstatt theory is, in my opinion, the least bad theory that we currently have on the origin of the Celtic languages.

We have La Tene remains, and ironically 2 of the 3 remains belonged to your branch of R1b. The other was the common European/Western Caucasus G variety.
 
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Thedata I've seen suggests the Celts were a horse tribe in North Africaaround 3000 BC with access to the early galley. When the Sahara driedup they moved into Western Europe. The Culture is known as BellBeaker, haplogroup is R1b L21, language was Celtic.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Evidence:[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]1.Similarities in pottery styles of Bell Beakers and North Africa[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]2.Arrow head similarity maps[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]3.Y haplogroup R1b L21 split up around 3000 BC[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]4.Maternal DNA (Plenty of H in North Africa)[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]5.Celtic languages likely split around 3000 BC[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]6.Celtic has similarities with Afro-Asiatic[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]7.Bell Beaker first appeared in Iberia around 3000 BC with bronzetechnology[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]8.No evidence suggesting R1b L21 moved through Central Europe (whywould they having a navy?)[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]9.Introduction of the horse in England between 2500 and 3000 BC[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]10.Introduction of African cattle in Iberia prior to 1500 BC[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]11.Strong connection between Iberian and Berber horses[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]12.Strong connection between Bell Beaker territory, Celtic language, andthe presence of R1b.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Notsurprisingly Bell Beaker artifacts were found in SW Norway as isR1b.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Thetheory that the Celtic language spread from the Hallstatt culture 600BC is pretty much discredited, it was a much older culture andlanguage. Seems correct to state that R1b-L21 is Celtic.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]ANSWER [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]some good points but we cananalyse some of them from an other perspective[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]1. Bell Beakers in NorthAfrica can as well be an importation[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]2. Same remark : theywere part of the same « kit ».[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]3. OK but Y-R1b-L21 is notdense in places where BBs are, for the most. If LATE BBs can belinked to Celts they can be linked too proto-stages of others I-Eancultures (surely Italic, maybe Germanic).[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]5. Celtic languages since 3000BC ? It is not sure but possible, even if I think the genuineproto-Celtic separated from proto-Italic begun only about the 2500BC, without solid proof I acknowledge so : OK here, but does itprove a link with FIRST BBs and North Africa ?[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]6. Celtic and Afro-Asiaticlanguages ? Neo-Celtic yes (maybe substrata), but old Celticlanguages ? I 'm not sure the ancient celtic syntaxis was soclose to the A-A ones...[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]7. OK no remark, but ?[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]8. Y-R1b-L21 had more chancesto be born in Western Europe than in Alps, but it come from Y-R-P310as U152 and others of West and West-Central Europe. Its maritimeorigin is to be proved : Celts were more continental people thanmaritime people at first, but they learned quick and well accordingto the Ancients, and can impose their rules upon, or deal withprevious shores people.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]9. the Horse in the Islesabout 3000/2500 BC ? Seems coherent with BBs being horsemen andbowmen (rather the 2500 BC?) - What else can this prove ?[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]10. African cattle in Iberiabefore the 1500 BC... at what precise date ? And Neolithiccolonization and/or subsequent trade can explain that :north-african cattle in the Isles would have been more probant.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]11. Connexion betweenberberian and iberian horses : same answer : berberianhorses in the Isles ?[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]12. Strong connexion forterritories concerning BBs, Celts and R1b ? The BBs territories,spotty for the most, leaved huge territories without any BB. Theheavier regions for Y-R1b are in Northern Spain, not in SouthernPortugal. It is truer concerning the Y-R1b-L21 distribution. What wecould imagine is that the BB culture (an elite one, for I think) andits subsequent action of acculturation, had a heavy imput on theCelts culture developpment, leaving 2 hypothesis : creation ofthe celtic distinction upon a West-I-Ean communauty, or doping analready existing proto-celtic communauty. For me the most importantimput of BBs upon Celts took place in Germany along the Rhine riverabout the 2500/2200 BC before provocating expansions on differentdirections. It 's true celtic myths speak of a far Scythic origin anda way across Mediterranea through southern shores before reachingIberia ; what to think of that ? Legends are false orLegends contain a bit of truth but also can melt down the myths ofthe diverse previous components of a resulting mixed population, whatdoesn't exclude borrowings to more respected civilizations ?Uneasy to be sure of some things, I'm not even sure first genuine BBpromotors (East Carpathians origin, then Croatian?) were I-Eanspeaking ![/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I'm not trying to destroy yourthoughts but I propose other interpretations of the facts.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Wait and see more clues...[/FONT]
 
I've some problems with a post I tried to copy-stick and it is still running away without any chance to erase it or write it correctly - by the Hell, wht is that ??? MY god!
I hope we 'll find a solution
 
ANSWER
some good points but we cananalyse some of them from an other perspective1. Bell Beakers in NorthAfrica can as well be an importation2. Same remark : theywere part of the same « kit ».3. OK but Y-R1b-L21 is notdense in places where BBs are, for the most. If LATE BBs can belinked to Celts they can be linked too proto-stages of others I-Eancultures (surely Italic, maybe Germanic).5. Celtic languages since 3000BC ? It is not sure but possible, even if I think the genuineproto-Celtic separated from proto-Italic begun only about the 2500BC, without solid proof I acknowledge so : OK here, but does itprove a link with FIRST BBs and North Africa ?6. Celtic and Afro-Asiaticlanguages ? Neo-Celtic yes (maybe substrata), but old Celticlanguages ? I 'm not sure the ancient celtic syntaxis was soclose to the A-A ones...7. OK no remark, but ?8. Y-R1b-L21 had more chancesto be born in Western Europe than in Alps, but it come from Y-R-P310as U152 and others of West and West-Central Europe. Its maritimeorigin is to be proved : Celts were more continental people thanmaritime people at first, but they learned quick and well accordingto the Ancients, and can impose their rules upon, or deal withprevious shores people.9. the Horse in the Islesabout 3000/2500 BC ? Seems coherent with BBs being horsemen andbowmen (rather the 2500 BC?) - What else can this prove ?10. African cattle in Iberiabefore the 1500 BC... at what precise date ? And Neolithiccolonization and/or subsequent trade can explain that :north-african cattle in the Isles would have been more probant.11. Connexion betweenberberian and iberian horses : same answer : berberianhorses in the Isles ?12. Strong connexion forterritories concerning BBs, Celts and R1b ? The BBs territories,spotty for the most, leaved huge territories without any BB. Theheavier regions for Y-R1b are in Northern Spain, not in SouthernPortugal. It is truer concerning the Y-R1b-L21 distribution. What wecould imagine is that the BB culture (an elite one, for I think) andits subsequent action of acculturation, had a heavy imput on theCelts culture developpment, leaving 2 hypothesis : creation ofthe celtic distinction upon a West-I-Ean communauty, or doping analready existing proto-celtic communauty. For me the most importantimput of BBs upon Celts took place in Germany along the Rhine riverabout the 2500/2200 BC before provocating expansions on differentdirections. It 's true celtic myths speak of a far Scythic origin anda way across Mediterranea through southern shores before reachingIberia ; what to think of that ? Legends are false orLegends contain a bit of truth but also can melt down the myths ofthe diverse previous components of a resulting mixed population, whatdoesn't exclude borrowings to more respected civilizations ?Uneasy to be sure of some things, I'm not even sure first genuine BBpromotors (East Carpathians origin, then Croatian?) were I-Eanspeaking !I'm not trying to destroy yourthoughts but I propose other interpretations of the facts.Wait and see more clues...
it' s my first part of post - I hope it will work now! good luck!
 
There is no evidence slaves have ever made up such a large portion of a gene pool. In fact the statement is ridiculous.
It's far more likely the Norwegian coasts were settled with L21 before the migration period.

Obviously, there is no absolute proof either way. What we do know is:

- Over half of females in Iceland carry mtDNA from Celtic areas. Transporting lots of slaves/wifes was at the very least not impossible.
- 15-20% of males in Iceland carry L21. This is a lot more than west coast Norwegians. Quite a few celtic males (and/or their descendants) must have been transported to Iceland and been allowed to procreate, in addition to females.
- Vikings did bring at least some slaves back to Norway, and also freed some slaves. There even was a lot of ceremony around this act. Thralls could buy themselves free, or be freed by their master or a third person. Is it not possible that (over time) generation after generation of slaves were brought into Norway and freed? After all Norway had a very small population at the time.

Even if this was impossible, we know that intermarriage between Celts and Norwegians must have been common in many areas, such as the Orkney Islands where people today descent from as much nordic as celtic "blood". These areas - Iceland, Greenland, Orkney etc were either controlled by or in close contact with Norway over many centuries. Perhaps much L21 came from this protracted contact?

If L21 came long before the viking age, one would have expected it all over Scandinavia - or at least further inland, rather than being clustered around the coastal regions of the West were viking kingdoms just happen to emerge much later.
The fact that L21 is surprisingly common in the areas of Sicily where Normans ruled makes it seem unlikely that L21 came to Norway after the viking age.
 
In my opinion, the most likely explanation for R1b-L21 in Norway and Iceland stem from Gaelic and Pictish slaves during the Viking period. Until ancient DNA shows up from Norway that proves that the presence is older, I hold this for the most likely explanation.

My opinion is that R1b-L21 does not stem from the British Celts, but R1b-L21 in SW Norway and the British Celts have the same ancestors.
It seems we're both just guessing.
Anciant DNA could prove who's right, but other info could help as well : which subclades of R1b-L21 are in the British Isles and which are in SW Norway? Are they the same or are there differences? And how old are these subclades? Is there any info about that?
 
The data I've seen suggests the Celts were a horse tribe in North Africa around 3000 BC with access to the early galley. When the Sahara dried up they moved into Western Europe. The Culture is known as Bell Beaker, haplogroup is R1b L21, language was Celtic.

Evidence:

1. Similarities in pottery styles of Bell Beakers and North Africa
2. Arrow head similarity maps
3. Y haplogroup R1b L21 split up around 3000 BC
4. Maternal DNA (Plenty of H in North Africa)
5. Celtic languages likely split around 3000 BC
6. Celtic has similarities with Afro-Asiatic
7. Bell Beaker first appeared in Iberia around 3000 BC with bronze technology
8. No evidence suggesting R1b L21 moved through Central Europe (why would they having a navy?)
9. Introduction of the horse in England between 2500 and 3000 BC
10. Introduction of African cattle in Iberia prior to 1500 BC
11. Strong connection between Iberian and Berber horses
12. Strong connection between Bell Beaker territory, Celtic language, and the presence of R1b.

Not surprisingly Bell Beaker artifacts were found in SW Norway as is R1b.

The theory that the Celtic language spread from the Hallstatt culture 600 BC is pretty much discredited, it was a much older culture and language. Seems correct to state that R1b-L21 is Celtic.

ANSWER

some good points but we can analyse some of them from an other perspective
1. Bell Beakers in North Africa can as well be an importation
2. Same remark : they were part of the same « kit ».
3. OK but Y-R1b-L21 is not dense in places where BBs are, for the most. If LATE BBs can be linked to Celts they can be linked too proto-stages of others I-Ean cultures (surely Italic, maybe Germanic).
5. Celtic languages since 3000 BC ? It is not sure but possible, even if I think the genuine proto-Celtic separated from proto-Italic begun only about the 2500 BC, without solid proof I acknowledge so : OK here, but does it prove a link with FIRST BBs and North Africa ?
6. Celtic and Afro-Asiatic languages ? Neo-Celtic yes (maybe substrata), but old Celtic languages ? I 'm not sure the ancient celtic syntaxis was so close to the A-A ones...
7. OK no remark, but ?
8. Y-R1b-L21 had more chances to be born in Western Europe than in Alps, but it come from Y-R-P310 as U152 and others of West and West-Central Europe. Its maritime origin is to be proved : Celts were more continental people than maritime people at first, but they learned quick and well according to the Ancients, and can impose their rules upon, or deal with previous shores people.
9. the Horse in the Isles about 3000/2500 BC ? Seems coherent with BBs being horsemen and bowmen (rather the 2500 BC?) - What else can this prove ?
10. African cattle in Iberia before the 1500 BC... at what precise date ? And Neolithic colonization and/or subsequent trade can explain that : north-african cattle in the Isles would have been more probant.
11. Connexion between berberian and iberian horses : same answer : berberian horses in the Isles ?
12. Strong connexion for territories concerning BBs, Celts and R1b ? The BBs territories, spotty for the most, leaved huge territories without any BB. The heavier regions for Y-R1b are in Northern Spain, not in Southern Portugal. It is truer concerning the Y-R1b-L21 distribution. What we could imagine is that the BB culture (an elite one, for I think) and its subsequent action of acculturation, had a heavy imput on the Celts culture developpment, leaving 2 hypothesis : creation of the celtic distinction upon a West-I-Ean communauty, or doping an already existing proto-celtic communauty. For me the most important imput of BBs upon Celts took place in Germany along the Rhine river about the 2500/2200 BC before provocating expansions on different directions. It 's true celtic myths speak of a far Scythic origin and a way across Mediterranea through southern shores before reaching Iberia ; what to think of that ? Legends are false or Legends contain a bit of truth but also can melt down the myths of the diverse previous components of a resulting mixed population, what doesn't exclude borrowings to more respected civilizations ? Uneasy to be sure of some things, I'm not even sure first genuine BB promotors (East Carpathians origin, then Croatian?) were I-Ean speaking !
I'm not trying to destroy your thoughts but I propose other interpretations of the facts.
Wait and see more clues...
 

This thread has been viewed 44055 times.

Back
Top