PDA

View Full Version : Ancient Germania vs Celtic Ancestry.



Twilight
01-05-17, 04:31
The French & German and the British & Irish components are less useful to differentiate ancient ancestry in the Benelux, as they are both hybrid components mixing ancient Celtic and Germanic populations.

The British & Irish component, although peaking in the British Isles, might represent Germanic ancestry of Danish, Saxon and Frisian origin in the Low Countries, where Insular Celtic ancestry in very low. 23andMe simply seems to have amalgamated all ancestries found in Ireland and Scotland to create this component, including Anglo-Saxon DNA. It should ideally be split in two to clearly differentiate Celtic from West Germanic ancestry. Outside the British Islesand France, this admixture peaks in Northwest Germany and Frisia, the ancient homeland of the Anglo-Saxons. It is higher in Flanders (23.5%, ranging from 16% to 38%) higher than Wallonia (17.5%, ranging from 6% to 30%), which makes sense since the Germanic ancestry of Flemings comes from both the Saxons and Franks, while in Wallonia is comes mostly from the Franks. Interestingly, the Dutch provinces of Noord-Brabant and Limburg get a closer score (17%) to Wallonia, and also have more Frankish ancestry historically. The northern provinces score 20 to 25%, similar to Denmark and Flanders. The Dutch average is 25%.
The French & German shows the reverse pattern of the British & Irish component. This admixture probably correspond to a blend of Gaulish and Frankish ancestry. It is in fact higher in Wallonia (45%, ranging from 28% to 70%) than in Flanders (36%, ranging from 10% to 46%). The Netherlands also has a strong north-south gradient, with 40% in the south and 18% in the north. The French and German admixture peaks in Wallonia, southern Germany and Switzerland, a region were the Franks and Alemani/Suebi mixed with the descendants of the La Tène Celts.


Maciamo has a pretty good point, the British/Irish and French/German components could simply be a blend of Celto-Germanic although this makes me curious. This is going to get complicated so I'm going to break these questions up.


1. If an Anglo-Saxon; like Hengist and Horsa immigrated to Sub-Roman England from Germany. Say if hypothetically archeologists actually found Horsea's grave and 23andme dna tested his remains, what would his DNA results be?


2. If Frankish kings like Childirec I and Clovis I got tested on 23andme also, how would they fair against Horsa?

3. Did the Franks and Suebi accumulate noticeable French/German ancestry simply because they intermarried heavily with the Gallo-Romans or was this component simply present in Roman's Germania?


I'm mostly curious and exited to see if we can possibly differentiate Celtic ancestry from Germanic ancestry. : D

Source: http://www.eupedia.com/europe/benelux_france_dna_project.shtml#Autosomal_Benelux

Fire Haired14
01-05-17, 05:54
Maciamo over confidently ties genetic data to whatever historical data he knows of. But genetic data may be the result of historical data he doesn't know of. Maybe a lot the 23andme components formed very recently like in the Middle Ages.

Twilight
01-05-17, 07:55
Maciamo over confidently ties genetic data to whatever historical data he knows of. But genetic data may be the result of historical data he doesn't know of. Maybe a lot the 23andme components formed very recently like in the Middle Ages.
Interesting, what kind of historical data do you think he leaves out? Hopefully there will be a way to radiocarbon date the 23andme components but on the other hand, perhaps we could upload some Iron Age and Mideval genetic samples into the website and see what happens. Idk, what do you think?

Fire Haired14
01-05-17, 10:02
Interesting, what kind of historical data do you think he leaves out?

I don't know of any historical data to suggest can explain 23andme components. I just think Maciamo wrongly thinks 23andme components are the legacy of prehistoric types of ancestry like EEF or that they can easily be explained by a handful of well known historical like Germanic tribes. He usually comes to quick conclusions without much data. He should add more "maybe"s, "could"s, and "probably"s to his posts.

mwauthy
01-05-17, 16:44
At a 90% confidence most Europeans in these areas are getting primarily broadly European results. Even at 50% speculative people in these areas are still getting high broadly northwestern percentages. This tells me that they don't have a concrete way of differentiating Celtic-Germanic mixes between the Isles and the mainland. It would be interesting if these companies would release info regarding their methods and whether they can say this is a Frankish snp as opposed to an Anglo-Saxon snp.

Northener
04-05-17, 15:28
Maciamo has a pretty good point, the British/Irish and French/German components could simply be a blend of Celto-Germanic although this makes me curious. This is going to get complicated so I'm going to break these questions up.


1. If an Anglo-Saxon; like Hengist and Horsa immigrated to Sub-Roman England from Germany. Say if hypothetically archeologists actually found Horsea's grave and 23andme dna tested his remains, what would his DNA results be?


2. If Frankish kings like Childirec I and Clovis I got tested on 23andme also, how would they fair against Horsa?

3. Did the Franks and Suebi accumulate noticeable French/German ancestry simply because they intermarried heavily with the Gallo-Romans or was this component simply present in Roman's Germania?


I'm mostly curious and exited to see if we can possibly differentiate Celtic ancestry from Germanic ancestry. : D

Source: http://www.eupedia.com/europe/benelux_france_dna_project.shtml#Autosomal_Benelux

That are intriguing questions Twillight! I recently read a very interesting book about this kind of questions (unfortunately for you it’s in German), Sebastian Brather, Etnische Interpretation in der frühgeschichlichten Archäologie (Berlin 2004). Based on this and other books and privat thoughts the following remarks (excuse me for my staccato language English isn’t my mother tongue):
- Until mid twentieth century Celts and Germans were seen as homogenous, genetics-culture (language/identity etc)- material use (building-utensils) were seen as one, unmixed. And also with a certain kind of nationalism of German or Celtic kind. Nowadays this is more flexible and separated, genetics and language for example can for example be seen as very separated.
- When we separate German and Celtic cultures this only occurs for a certain period. There is no consistency (once German always….) through history in this respect.
- German and Celtic are verbs we simply inherent from the Romans. At first the Romans only talked about Barbarians (=strangers) this was the equivalent for Celts. Later on the Romans separate the Germans from the Celts. Famous is the statement of Caesar that everything right from the Rhine is Germanic. Before (and even fare after that) German was most probably not a very clear identity the tribes above the Rhine cultivated. So no sense of unity! The title German wasn’t ‘made in Germany’ ;)
- Nevertheless Bratner recognises some qualified differences between the Germans and the Celts. The Celts had ‘city like oppida, a certain kind of use of metal and coins, soldiers and druids’ the Germans had ‘long houses, livestock farming dominated and had fealties (Gefolgschaften).’
- The crucial difference between the Germans and Celts were the La Tene and Hallstatt cultures (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Tène_culture#/media/File:Hallstatt_LaTene.png), the bigger the influences of these cultures the more Celtic (and less Germanic).
- General rule: the more we go North in Europe the less influences of the Celts.
- There is one proto-Celtic (or Celtic avant la lettre) culture from central Europe who had a severe impact on the North, more specific during the Nordic Bronze Age, this was the Tumulus culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumulus_culture).
- I have no scientific prove but in Northwest Europe we see from the end of the Bronze Age a pretty consistent pattern in the aDNA. When I compare through Eurogenes K15 Gedmatch (I’am or North Dutch stock) my aDNA with those of Northern German and Scandinavian results of the Bronze/Iron Age (and even some of the Corded Ware) the compartments are equal (= about 40% North Sea, 25% Atlantic, 12,5% Baltic, 10% Eastern Europe). As figured out by Tomenable.
- The Celtic results from more Western and Central Europe are different, the North Sea component goes down, till about 33% or less the Atlantic one goes up, about 30% or more.
- Very remarkable: in the latest FTDNA my origins 2.0 version I had 0% Central and Western Europe, my wife from South-Holland/Northern France stock 91%.
- So I guess La Tene/Hallstatt were for Central and Western Europe (Austria, Switzerland, Southern Germany, Belgium, Northern France, South Dutch, parts of the UK) major game chancers.
- And although Germanic by name tribes like the Franks and the Suebi/Alemanni were heavily influenced by La Tene/Hallstatt (=same territory as those tribes) so more mixed Celtic.
- The migration period brought influx of the Anglo Saxons(=North Sea Germanic), some Hinxton results (http://eurogenes.blogspot.nl/2014/10/hinxton-ancient-genomes-roundup.html)(like Hinxton 1) equals the Germanic result, Hinxton 4 was more mixed or Celtic…
- So mythical or not: but Hengest and Horsa had most probably (North Sea) Germanic aDNA and Clovis I and Childeric I more (Central and West European) Celtic aDNA.

mwauthy
04-05-17, 16:30
When you look at y haplogroups in Belgium and England you see the influence of the Franks and Anglo-Saxons. I wonder though how much of an autosomal influence they had compared to the Celtic inhabitants. For example, I am 50% Wallonia Belgium with a Germanic Y haplogroup but I received 90% West and Central European on FTDNA 2.0. I also get a higher Atlantic % than North Sea % on Eurogenes.

Northener
04-05-17, 16:48
'I also get a higher Atlantic % than North Sea % on Eurogenes.'
Yes indeed, (North Sea) Germanic is in K15 the North Sea part always about 40% and at least relatively far bigger than the Atlantic component.
I assume that the Franks were Celtic/Germanic and the Anglo-Saxon immigrant Germanic. Wallonia is certainly 'hardcore' ;) Celtic (look at the different oppida (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppidum#Belgium.2FLuxembourg) in Wallonia.
Flandres (also the France one) had Gemanic influx, the old Frisii for example were already there at the end of the Roman Empire (third century AD), so before the big migration (Luit van der Tuuk 2013).

Elizabeth60
04-05-17, 17:07
'I also get a higher Atlantic % than North Sea % on Eurogenes.'
Yes indeed, (North Sea) Germanic is in K15 the North Sea part always about 40% and at least relatively far bigger than the Atlantic component.
I assume that the Franks were Celtic/Germanic and the Anglo-Saxon immigrant Germanic. Wallonia is certainly 'hardcore' ;) Celtic (look at the different oppida (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppidum#Belgium.2FLuxembourg) in Wallonia.
Flandres (also the France one) had Gemanic influx, the old Frisii for example were already there at the end of the Roman Empire (third century AD), so before the big migration (Luit van der Tuuk 2013).

I think North Sea is just a component that is highest in Norway and spreads out from there. I don't think it is Germanic because I get higher North Sea than Atlantic (I'm Irish). It just seems to be regional like a lot of these components. Regarding Atlantic in Eurogenes people like the Danes and Dutch get larger amounts than the Galicians for example.

Northener
04-05-17, 17:23
I think North Sea is just a component that is highest in Norway and spreads out from there. I don't think it is Germanic because I get higher North Sea than Atlantic (I'm Irish). It just seems to be regional like a lot of these components. Regarding Atlantic in Eurogenes people like the Danes and Dutch get larger amounts than the Galicians for example.

It's also high in Norway indeed. But doesn't necessarily mean that it spread from Norway (although the Vikings could spread it to the Isles and beyond!). Most probably Norway has a very homogenous population. Less influxes than in other Germanic parts. I don't know any results from the Germanic areas bordering the North Sea with a relative low 'North Sea' component in K15 (North Sea<Atlantic). But maybe there are cases...????

Elizabeth60
04-05-17, 17:45
It's also high in Norway indeed. But doesn't mean that it spread from Norway. Most probably Norway has a very homogenous population. Less influxes than in other Germanic parts. I don't know any results from the Germanic areas bordering the North Sea with a relative low 'North Sea' component in K15 (North Sea<Atlantic). But maybe there are cases...????

I don't think it spread from Norway but that is where it reaches a peak. I think that closer populations share a lot of crossover in genetics so the closer you are geographically you will have higher amounts. I don't think North Sea is Germanic because there are populations that have high North Sea that aren't Germanic e.g. the Irish. There are Germanic populations with lower North Sea than the Irish, Scots etc. I don't think a lot of these components can be linked to language groups as I think they were spread before these languages formed. All the populations closest to North Sea get relatively high amounts whether they are now Germanic or Celtic.

mwauthy
04-05-17, 18:32
'I also get a higher Atlantic % than North Sea % on Eurogenes.'
Yes indeed, (North Sea) Germanic is in K15 the North Sea part always about 40% and at least relatively far bigger than the Atlantic component.
I assume that the Franks were Celtic/Germanic and the Anglo-Saxon immigrant Germanic. Wallonia is certainly 'hardcore' ;) Celtic (look at the different oppida (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppidum#Belgium.2FLuxembourg) in Wallonia.
Flandres (also the France one) had Gemanic influx, the old Frisii for example were already there at the end of the Roman Empire (third century AD), so before the big migration (Luit van der Tuuk 2013).

It was interesting to see so many Celtic Oppidums in Wallonia, even one in my paternal ancestral home of Gougnies.

Northener
04-05-17, 18:38
I don't think it spread from Norway but that is where it reaches a peak. I think that closer populations share a lot of crossover in genetics so the closer you are geographically you will have higher amounts. I don't think North Sea is Germanic because there are populations that have high North Sea that aren't Germanic e.g. the Irish. There are Germanic populations with lower North Sea than the Irish, Scots etc. I don't think a lot of these components can be linked to language groups as I think they were spread before these languages formed. All the populations closest to North Sea get relatively high amounts whether they are now Germanic or Celtic.

Le me be more precise. North en West Germanic Bronze and Iron Age results have exact the same K15 as mine. As said: about 40% North Sea, 25% Atlantic, 12,5% Baltic, 10% Eastern Europe. That's typically Germanic.
Distance is in this respect relative because my Gedmatch Eurogenes K13 and K15 results are closer to Danish (on K13 my number one) , Swedes, Norwegians, North Gemans, Orkney Islanders than to South Dutch. Although South Dutch is, besides Northern Germany, fare more closer than Denmark etc. So there is a kind of North Sea factor (besides the Eurogenes K15 the exact content of 'North Sea' is a black box to me....)

My results:
K13
Using 1 population approximation:
1 Danish @ 1.742467
2 North_Dutch @ 2.503399
3 Norwegian @ 2.936815
4 North_German @ 4.368844
5 Orcadian @ 4.697951
6 Swedish @ 4.926437
7 Irish @ 5.600447
8 West_Scottish @ 6.118611
9 Southeast_English @ 6.190817
10 Southwest_English @ 7.859173


Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Danish +50% Norwegian @ 1.723689


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Danish +25% Danish +25% Norwegian @ 1.494796


K15


Using 1 population approximation:
1 North_Dutch @ 2.662666
2 Danish @ 3.078913
3 West_Scottish @ 4.199471
4 Orcadian @ 4.770091
5 Norwegian @ 4.771307
6 Irish @ 4.923634
7 West_Norwegian @ 5.078017
8 Southeast_English @ 6.210367
9 Swedish @ 6.318136
10 North_German @ 6.876086
Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Norwegian +50% West_Scottish @ 1.545855

Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Irish +25% Norwegian +25% West_Norwegian @ 1.528969

Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Swedish + West_Norwegian + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 1.415054

Sile
04-05-17, 20:19
That are intriguing questions Twillight! I recently read a very interesting book about this kind of questions (unfortunately for you it’s in German), Sebastian Brather, Etnische Interpretation in der frühgeschichlichten Archäologie (Berlin 2004). Based on this and other books and privat thoughts the following remarks (excuse me for my staccato language English isn’t my mother tongue):
- Until mid twentieth century Celts and Germans were seen as homogenous, genetics-culture (language/identity etc)- material use (building-utensils) were seen as one, unmixed. And also with a certain kind of nationalism of German or Celtic kind. Nowadays this is more flexible and separated, genetics and language for example can for example be seen as very separated.
- When we separate German and Celtic cultures this only occurs for a certain period. There is no consistency (once German always….) through history in this respect.
- German and Celtic are verbs we simply inherent from the Romans. At first the Romans only talked about Barbarians (=strangers) this was the equivalent for Celts. Later on the Romans separate the Germans from the Celts. Famous is the statement of Caesar that everything right from the Rhine is Germanic. Before (and even fare after that) German was most probably not a very clear identity the tribes above the Rhine cultivated. So no sense of unity! The title German wasn’t ‘made in Germany’ ;)
- Nevertheless Bratner recognises some qualified differences between the Germans and the Celts. The Celts had ‘city like oppida, a certain kind of use of metal and coins, soldiers and druids’ the Germans had ‘long houses, livestock farming dominated and had fealties (Gefolgschaften).’
- The crucial difference between the Germans and Celts were the La Tene and Hallstatt cultures (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Tène_culture#/media/File:Hallstatt_LaTene.png), the bigger the influences of these cultures the more Celtic (and less Germanic).
- General rule: the more we go North in Europe the less influences of the Celts.
- There is one proto-Celtic (or Celtic avant la lettre) culture from central Europe who had a severe impact on the North, more specific during the Nordic Bronze Age, this was the Tumulus culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumulus_culture).
- I have no scientific prove but in Northwest Europe we see from the end of the Bronze Age a pretty consistent pattern in the aDNA. When I compare through Eurogenes K15 Gedmatch (I’am or North Dutch stock) my aDNA with those of Northern German and Scandinavian results of the Bronze/Iron Age (and even some of the Corded Ware) the compartments are equal (= about 40% North Sea, 25% Atlantic, 12,5% Baltic, 10% Eastern Europe). As figured out by Tomenable.
- The Celtic results from more Western and Central Europe are different, the North Sea component goes down, till about 33% or less the Atlantic one goes up, about 30% or more.
- Very remarkable: in the latest FTDNA my origins 2.0 version I had 0% Central and Western Europe, my wife from South-Holland/Northern France stock 91%.
- So I guess La Tene/Hallstatt were for Central and Western Europe (Austria, Switzerland, Southern Germany, Belgium, Northern France, South Dutch, parts of the UK) major game chancers.
- And although Germanic by name tribes like the Franks and the Suebi/Alemanni were heavily influenced by La Tene/Hallstatt (=same territory as those tribes) so more mixed Celtic.
- The migration period brought influx of the Anglo Saxons(=North Sea Germanic), some Hinxton results (http://eurogenes.blogspot.nl/2014/10/hinxton-ancient-genomes-roundup.html)(like Hinxton 1) equals the Germanic result, Hinxton 4 was more mixed or Celtic…
- So mythical or not: but Hengest and Horsa had most probably (North Sea) Germanic aDNA and Clovis I and Childeric I more (Central and West European) Celtic aDNA.



if you look at ancient Bronze age Germany, you will see that only northern Germany and modern Denmark where germanic .............west of them where the gallic/celts and also central and south Germany ( where Gallic/celts) . The biggest Gallic/celtic "royal" capital being in central germany at Glauberg ( near Frankfurt).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glauberg

Unsure when central germany became germanic, but south Germany became germanic after the fall of the Roman empire

La Tene and Halstatt have no Germanic influence, they are .........La Tene = southern Celts mix with helvetic peoples and Halstatt = Celts mix with Illyrians.

Suebi are Suevi germans from northern germany and later these are renamed as Swabians