Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 61 of 61

Thread: Do Hallstat Celts have some role in the formation of West Germanic ethnicities?

  1. #51
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,305
    Points
    34,401
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,401, Level: 57
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,049
    Overall activity: 33.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France





    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    Just some info, to confirm that West German nations formed from Germanics and Celtic tribes:
    In Wurtemberg West, R1B-P312 clades are 45%, from the paternal lines.
    R1B-S21 makes 18% of the paternal lines in Wurtemberg West.
    More detailed:
    R1B-U152 makes 21%, R1B-DF27 - 12 %, R1B-L21 6% and generic clades of R1B-P312 another 6%.
    In South Baden, R1B-L21 makes even 15% of the paternal lines.

    Think that Germany was actually the Urheimat of the Celts, Celts being allied to Germanic tribes from Germany and dwelling in the dense woods from Germany.
    It would be good to distinguish between Germanics formation where and when from the today Germany, still a bit unlevel today.

  2. #52
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,305
    Points
    34,401
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,401, Level: 57
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,049
    Overall activity: 33.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    What have we todate?
    - a first R1b-U106 in Sweden, was RISE98 I think, Battle Axe, 2275/2032 BC according to someones. The Oostwood one is a bit younger. Battle Axe is often associated with CWC but here I think this man was borderline, or we have to accept that Battle Axe was a bit different from CWC. The date is still interesting, in absence of an older one.
    - @ Mihaitzateo: NO, aside W-Austria, U106 is not denser in SW Germany than in North: it's the opposite: it's very NW! (Center: Frisia) - in Scandinavia U106 seems western too, and arrived after other post-L51 R1b in SE or N- Scandinavia. The Austrian ones could be the result of an early splitted branch from Bohemia of the original group, with founder effect, or very later an arrow-tip army from N-Germanics during the Völkerwanderung; but Germans were relatively soon in the surroundings (9/8 BC), pushing the Celtic Boians out of W-Bohemia, close to Austria. The linguistic germanization here could have been short, overwhelmed later by Latine or other tongues. The permanent germanization of the southern parts of today German speaking areas took effect very later. Austria doesn’t seem to me the initial source of U106 of North. ATW it’s current people’s Haplos.
    - I repeat here, spite today rather western gravity center, the U106 density in Benelux shows clearly a downward gradiant from Frisia to Wallonia and NE France. Its' almost sure that during the Belgae pre-Germanics period, the dominant R1b was not U106 but P312 descendants, L21 among them the first ones maybe, before the U152 rising during and after BB times. Its only later, I think, that U106 got southwards towards Belgium, France and SW Germany. Everywhere U106 (today) seems a Germanics "import", on mainland and in Britain.

  3. #53
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,305
    Points
    34,401
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,401, Level: 57
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,049
    Overall activity: 33.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    - The bulk of R-U106 seems arrived in North later than the core of CWC R1a; where came it from? Hidden somewhere ? Maybe in N-Bohemia and Thuringen/Saale valley, near the « metallic mounts » at Unetice times, becoming later an element among the « Rich Tumuli » culture before Urnfields, seemingly distinct from the Baviera Tumuli (proto-Celts?) which pushed later towards SW Poland via S Bohemia and Moravia, at the Lusacian culture dawn; if present around the Saale, they (U106) had the occasion to move northwards along the Elbe, what match the today maxima of R-U106. The density of L11* without L51 in Northern Europe/Britain could mark a demographically stagnant situation where a tiny group lost its few previous L51*, did not develop immediatelty at this stage and vegetated somewhere there before to flourish. I cannot imagine it was part of the big flow of L51 which gave us P312, L21, U152 and DF27, and I cannot imagine it came from too far south… but U106 is not by force the northernmost clade of R1b L11 ; the post P312 DF19 and L238 of current time seems showing northern subclades of P312 in North (Scandinavia, UK, Germany for the most) ; I think it shows that L51, even if not dense, were present in Northern Europe independantly from the alleged unique demographic boom of L51 in West, so it’s surely not a back move from SW Europe. But this could confirms U106 vegetated some time in between all these subclades of P312 before to emerge. Mountainous regions fit good enough. Or why not U106 the denser subclade of L11 in North, along some rare northern P312 (DF19, L238) ? Only more ancient DNA can tell us.


    - dates : U106 Took the strongside after the CWC retreated? Or was already part of the move on the flanks ? The ancient presence of U106 in Sweden in Battle Axe Culture along with one Y-R1a Z645 (not too precise ?) could confirm contacts with CWC Y-R1a ; interistingly Eurogenes pretends the Battle Axe R1b U106 man clusters among today Norwegians, the R1a man among today Russians and Mordovians ; it could confirm the mixing between both sources was not yet achieved and that the most of U106 were close but apart from CWC R1a.
    . The today distribution in East-Germany is weaker, but Maciamo shows some non negligible scores in Central East-Germany, spite more recent historical events that could have changed the previous situations (Slavs colonization in Middle Age). The Elbe axis from Saale region, a rich region, could confirm the possibility of a force position for U106 people as a « Germanic-launcher » before mixing and evolution of their language. They could have launched the Elp (1800/1500 BC) culture in the N-Netherlands as proposed Northerner, and it could this lately that they mixed seriously with others, a lot of Y-I1 among them and some remnants of CWC R1a people their old neighbours, less than the first ones passed into Scandinavia. The Battle Axe R1b brethren had been assimilated by CWC R1a, I think, and the final elaboration of Germanic langage took place later with the Rich Tumuli descendants as promotors because they were numerically strong enough. When we look at current pops, Norwegians are the most provided for R1a, and the details show R1a is stronger in Central and Central North than in South ; Sweden has least ; Denmark has even least. In East-Germany, a lot of R1a is younger and Slavic (M458), not in direct links with the Scandinavian Z284 which corresponds surely to CWC input. So the initial Germanics, spite a mix, had few R1a, more I1 and even more R-U106, IMO.
    - Concerning the linguistic aspect, first Celts would have had less lasting contacts to first Germanics than had first Italics, according to some scholars and based on original basic language ; they would have been later contacts, after long time break away, and as a dominant culture, giving only specialized vocabulary to Germanics in a vertical way (up-down). So I think they were not the IE element which became Germanic by input of CWC and TRBK LN substrata. I think that in the Celto-Italic couple, Celtic dialects were very more western centered before Hallstatt, when Italics were staying later in Central Europe around Hungary, Croatia, parts of Austria, maybe even northernmost close to Moravia. It’s even possible that proto-Celts and proto-Italics had been deeply separated before coming back later in contact around Austria at Hallstatt stage (Qw- → P mutation?)
    &- possible explanation : scholars say Celtic, Italic and Germanic have been part of the north block of I-E dialects, with a special position of Germanics because of their specific contacts with some Satem languages (CWC?) and later with Baltic, itself a Satem one ; and among the Belgae tribes, someones are clearly Celtic, other Germanic and other undetermined ; for the undetermined one, Kuhn (and partly Meid) have supposed a language close to Italic or proto-Italic whose traces are found in the toponymic substratum of the great Belgia (NE France until Seine river, SW Germany, Benelux) ; the term ‘German’ would have been from this language, not from Germanics or Celtic ; as it’s sensible to think some old dialects more intermediary have been lost by time, it isn’t stupid, and could explain the proximity of Italic with Germanic. Could proto-Italic have been even closer to the “without-CWC-substrata” of proto-Germanic? This old NW extension of proto- or rather ‘pan-Italic’ dialects area could explain some proximities. Because spite the proximity Celtic-Italic, and the Germanic-Balto-Slavic one, it seems to me these ‘pan-Italics’ (or proto-) could have kept separated proto-Celtic from proto-Germanic for a while (pure speculation here).
    That said, plain Italics languages show some strong phonetic differences compared to Germanics and Celts, even Balto-Slavic, concerning PIE *Bh, *Gh, *Dh B.I., surely by Central and SE Europe
    people influences.
    Today we are seeing Italics people as southern ones (their clothes in Italy at the Imperial times) but earlier some of them were surely closer to Celts and to people of the North even in their clothings if I rely on some affirmations (multicolour squares or kind of tartan sometimes, as a whole “barbarian-look” dress and tattooings, similar burying, if we look at Veneti, pertaining to pan-Italic world).

  4. #54
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,305
    Points
    34,401
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,401, Level: 57
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,049
    Overall activity: 33.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    put order in my brain diarrhea.
    linguistically: I think BA R1b-U106 was the bearers of the pre-proto-Germanic, it's to say the IE basis, a dialect surrounded by other families of IE, then not so differentiated than later. But Elp C and others of these periods are to early for the well defined Germanics, even for the proto-Germanics, and U106 is not = "equal" = Germanics, only a "teacher" of IE.
    I don't know if I can rely on, but some maps show in 700 BC Germanics core centered on Denmark, S-Sweden and N-Germany, and Frisia was germanized only between 500 and 250 BC? later than N-Poland by instance.
    so Germanics is born in North by a mix where U106 met numerous Y-I1 end various Y-R1a (CWC+new ones?) without speaking of less dense haplos; is this which made it so special phonetically, or the odd traits were there already in the IE dialect transmitted to them?
    ATW it seems Germanics had the same mix, but with different percentages here and there. Maciamo was right.
    I remember the IA in Denmark saw a new physical type, akin to coon's "Iron Keltic" type BUT more pure. future Teutons and Cimbers? their type could be come from Austria (Hallstatt? damned!) but why not from Bohemia, so close. Austria could please to someones here. But auDNA, phenotypes and Y-haplo's are not so tightly linked; and this type, 'nordic-like' in a broad sense, is not the subtype dominant todate among the Scandinavian or N Germany 'nordic' ones; to date, we have only 2 old U106, very sooner than IA and Hallstatt.

  5. #55
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,305
    Points
    34,401
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,401, Level: 57
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,049
    Overall activity: 33.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    @Northerner:
    The Penguin historic map of 1988 on Wiki waked me. You're right: in 750 BC there were not plain Germanics in Frisia, not more in Poland, spite some extension in NE Germany.
    Perhaps, an IE pop of northern tumuli from E-Saxony and Czechia could have spoken one of this kind of continuum of archaic dialects with strong links to pan-Italics (B.Sergent and others), maybe a diagonal band of dialects between Flanders and Austria, and U106 among some of them. With cristallization of Celtic and Italic (first) and Germanic (after) the tribes speaking them have been swallowed for a part bit after bit in Belgia by Celts getting North and Germanics getting South. so it would be lately enough than well defined Celts came in contact with Germanics, rather still northernly; but later than the IA ages?
    AS you say the roman Germany name is a bag name for unkown people. Among them, so called tribes of Germany, not only old Belgia, there were still some tribes speaking these archaic dialects, strong in Y-U106?
    the ancient well defined ethnies with their changing frontiers were born by the absorbsion of more numerous but littler ethnies not so well differentiated, them and their intermediary dialects of ancient continuum.

    Culture: it seems the Celts have been some time the "teachers" of the Germanics, but the strength changed side, and they retreated in front of the Germanics; but culturally, the material found among the germanic new owners of their lands in S-C Germany was still of La Tène style, so celtic.

  6. #56
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    876
    Points
    12,080
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,080, Level: 33
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 570
    Overall activity: 1.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    @Moesan:
    I am a in FB group with paternal lines from Germany.
    I can tell for sure that in most of Germany R1B-P312 paternal lines are making more than R1B-U106.
    So those should be from assimilated Celtic/Gaulish ethnics. In Austria, there are places where R1B-U152 makes even more than 50% of the paternal lines.
    In Germany, most R1B-P312 is of R1B-U152 variant and there are also R1B-DF27 and R1B-L21. So, clearly, some Celtic tribes were assimilated as Germans.
    I think the Roman Empire historians are calling "Germans" the tribes that were living on the land of Germany.
    The genetic testing tells that those tribes were Germanic and Celtic speakers.Now Celtic speakers were a group of ethnicities which was from Britain and Ireland till in SE Europe, so we cannot expect too much common genetics on autosomal testing.
    However, on autosomal testing Germans are scoring closer to the British people than they score to the French people.

    It seems Celtic and Germanic tribes from current land of Germany were living together and had West German as common language, which later lead to the Celtic ethnics being assimilated as German ethnics.
    In Alsatia/South Baden R1B-L21 is making 15% of the paternal lines, so this is a very interesting thing to research.

    A mention, no one doubts French people are descending from mostly some Celtic tribes but it seems the Hallstatt Celtic tribes were different, in genetics, from the French Celtic tribes, being more closed to British Celts, than to French Celts.
    http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/0...urope.html?m=1

    At it can be seen Germans are scoring not far from Hallstatt sample that was used to make this map.
    Actually, they are scoring closer to Hallstatt People (which should have been Celtic ethnics) than Brits,Irish or French.


    There is also an AngloSaxon sample, which were people from current land of Germany, Saxony which is scoring very remote from current days Germans.
    This map is rather suggesting that Hallstatt Celts gave more genetics to current day Germans, than the originally Germanic speakers tribes did.
    Last edited by mihaitzateo; 21-02-19 at 12:26.

  7. #57
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    876
    Points
    12,080
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,080, Level: 33
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 570
    Overall activity: 1.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    It would be needed a serious research to see how much from the Hallstatt Celtic culture and life style it still present at today Germans.

  8. #58
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842
    Points
    10,677
    Level
    31
    Points: 10,677, Level: 31
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 573
    Overall activity: 76.0%


    Country: Germany



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Bylany is really at the fringe of Hallstatt. What's needed are the elite samples from Austria, Switzerland etc. .

    As I mentioned earlier, West Germanics were immigrants from Scandinavia and when they arrived not much was left of the Celts. West Germanic dialects were heavily influenced by Italic languages.

  9. #59
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,305
    Points
    34,401
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,401, Level: 57
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,049
    Overall activity: 33.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    @Moesan:
    I am a in FB group with paternal lines from Germany.
    I can tell for sure that in most of Germany R1B-P312 paternal lines are making more than R1B-U106.
    So those should be from assimilated Celtic/Gaulish ethnics. In Austria, there are places where R1B-U152 makes even more than 50% of the paternal lines.
    In Germany, most R1B-P312 is of R1B-U152 variant and there are also R1B-DF27 and R1B-L21. So, clearly, some Celtic tribes were assimilated as Germans.
    I think the Roman Empire historians are calling "Germans" the tribes that were living on the land of Germany.
    The genetic testing tells that those tribes were Germanic and Celtic speakers.Now Celtic speakers were a group of ethnicities which was from Britain and Ireland till in SE Europe, so we cannot expect too much common genetics on autosomal testing.
    However, on autosomal testing Germans are scoring closer to the British people than they score to the French people.

    It seems Celtic and Germanic tribes from current land of Germany were living together and had West German as common language, which later lead to the Celtic ethnics being assimilated as German ethnics.
    In Alsatia/South Baden R1B-L21 is making 15% of the paternal lines, so this is a very interesting thing to research.

    A mention, no one doubts French people are descending from mostly some Celtic tribes but it seems the Hallstatt Celtic tribes were different, in genetics, from the French Celtic tribes, being more closed to British Celts, than to French Celts.
    http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/0...urope.html?m=1

    At it can be seen Germans are scoring not far from Hallstatt sample that was used to make this map.
    Actually, they are scoring closer to Hallstatt People (which should have been Celtic ethnics) than Brits,Irish or French.


    There is also an AngloSaxon sample, which were people from current land of Germany, Saxony which is scoring very remote from current days Germans.
    This map is rather suggesting that Hallstatt Celts gave more genetics to current day Germans, than the originally Germanic speakers tribes did.
    I agree for the most with what you wrote here.
    My question was: are we speaking of the influence of Celts in the making of first Germans (genesis apparently around Denmark), or of the later infuences of later Celts on so called Germanic tribes in C and S Germany, closer to our era? And what kind f influence? Language? Demic? Artefacts? The whole package?
    Sure today Germans, more in South and West, have a lot of P312 sons, no surprise; a lot of them are Celts (and undetermined Belgae) partly germanized.
    Hallstatt? Surely some cultural influence? But the swords found in Europe at those times were often very distinctly distributed and the IA swords of Denmark, if I don't mistake, were homogenous and different from the multiple types of the diverse Celts, ressembling to a found of N- Italy, I think. To be checked, this story of swords, I'm not sure, and after lost the notes of old Harold PEAKE I have not found yet something serious on the net for types. For jewellery and some artefacts, sure, the Germans have been influenced by IA Celts, before becoming as good artists as them. I think both have had some input of Scythian art too, but I am not competent.
    concerning auDNA and the Eurogenes map I saw: it's a "worked" PCA, but I 've some confidence in it nevertheless. The Hallstatt Celts were surely closer to the Central Europe of the time. N surprise if they were closer to East French and South German people of today. The British Celts had absorbed from a side some more Iberia Neolithic people with some local WHG, and on another side they have ancestry from more Northern pops since BB's. So less input from SE or CE. If you look at the PCA, Medieval Germans are closer to 'north', to 'anglo-saxon' and today Scandinavians, as are 'north-dutch'; logical. Closer to genuine Germanics. But here again, today Belgian are even closer than 'german' and 'english IA' are not farther than 'german' from 'hallstatt' . If NW French or better, Bretons, had been put on this PCA they would have been closer too, than 'E-france'. A caution: Eurogene PCA exagerate the N-S difference and flatten the W-E one...
    Aside: 1/4 of the higher statute of Celtic Hallstatt tombs have a new type, found also in Moravia and in Silesia: higher statured than the Keltic noble type, higher skulled, more dolicho wiht higher faces, lower orbits and compressed temporals, more brutal I think (I would see here some return of old 'brünn-like' input, more present in east): all the way, it was a strangers introgression in the elites, from East I think: famous 'Illyrians' or?... they don't look like the IA dolicho's of Denmark, themselves closer to IA Celts. But this concerns only an elite and doesn't have too great input onto auDNA of the pop. This new type of men almost disappeared later in La Tène.
    Personally, I think the La Tène Celts have had a total influence because they are become part of the S and SW German people, even genetically (along Rhaetians?). Before it was maybe rather a cultural influence of Hallstatt.
    the Hallstatt contacs have been through between people, I think. The post-La Tène contacts have taken place very very later in N Germany (300 BC? even later?) before the Germanics expansion at the depends of Celts.

  10. #60
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    876
    Points
    12,080
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,080, Level: 33
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 570
    Overall activity: 1.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    Bylany is really at the fringe of Hallstatt. What's needed are the elite samples from Austria, Switzerland etc. .

    As I mentioned earlier, West Germanics were immigrants from Scandinavia and when they arrived not much was left of the Celts. West Germanic dialects were heavily influenced by Italic languages.
    I think the Hallstatt Celts samples from Austria are clustering more closer to the current day Germans, than Hallstatt Celts from Bylany.

  11. #61
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,305
    Points
    34,401
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,401, Level: 57
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,049
    Overall activity: 33.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    3 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Some Czech authors seem thinking the Bylany Hallstatt culture (North and NW of Czechia), whose territory was partly shared with Billendorf Urnfield culture (center in E-Saxony) was somehow distinct from the Hallstatt "Tumuli" culture neighbouring them in South and W-SW Czechia; this last one would be a continuation of the tumuli cultures already present there since before Urnfields; I think personally that this tumuli culture was already Celtic: some of these people crossed Moravia to SW Poland just before the Urnfield period which became the Lusacian culture (from their own evolution or acculturation by another folk?) # different I think from the "Rich Tumuli" of Saxony before Urnfield, present in North Czechia too. So in my mind I don't attach to closely the Hallstatt Tumuli C. (more southern) to future Germanics. But I'm not very knowledged in archeology.
    I 've to read this study about Bylany, where diverse authors are cited, not by force in accord all of them about the unity of 'tumuli' cultures or 'hallstatt' cultures.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •