The British 'Celts' are really just seperated Germanics? Agree or Not?

[Bellbeaking]

http://i.imgur.com/0RwfyPL.jpg Iron age pre-saxon british samples all look like this.


They are not similar to any 'Celtic' populations in Europe. The only western population these people are similar to are the Bretons, who are descendants of Brits.

[Freeroostah]

British Celts are fake Celts

Real Celts are the Swiss, Austrians, French and Bavarians

[Peterski]

Define "Celtic populations in Europe"?

[Token]

British Celts are mostly celticized Bell Beakers.

[Peterski]

This map is for Viking Age Sigtuna (average of ~20 samples):

https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ancient-human-dna_41837#10/59.4889/18.0277

https://i.imgur.com/oMxFaC6.png

[Bellbeaking]

This map is for Viking Age Sigtuna (average of ~20 samples):

[url]https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ancient-hdna_41837#10/59.4889/18.0277[/rl]

[img]https://i.imguom/oMxFaC6.png[/ig]

This supports the hypothesis in the OP, no?

And those are swedish samples, danish samples would be much closer

[Peterski]

This supports the hypothesis in the OP, no?

I don't think so. Hinxton-1 had 70-something similarity to Scandinavia as you can see in that map.

70-something is about the same as similarity of Russians to Latvians etc., yet you don't see people claiming that Balts = Slavs, right?

But there are Celtic samples with lower similarity to Scandinavia, for example this one had lower:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?213198-K36-Roman-era-gladiators-from-York-and-Anglo-Saxon-from-Teeside

http://i.imgur.com/ORhTxQ2.png

Or this one (this one has much more "continental Celtic" results, also his Y-DNA was R1b-U152):

http://i.imgur.com/2XqT7Hs.png

[Peterski]

Modern Lithuanians and Latvians have over 80-something similarity to Russians, even though one group are Balts and the other one are Slavs (and if you tell to a Latvian "you are just a Russian with a weird language and a Protestant religion", you will probably get your face punched):

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?212388-Lithuanians-amp-Latvians-in-Eurogenes-K36

http://i.imgur.com/JQZ0CIo.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/XcUIweU.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/nJD9gQZ.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ds2zLAR.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/FuY5qRr.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/jEe8sVa.jpg

[Peterski]

This guy is Eastern German (full genealogy can be found on his website), but a very Slavic-shifted one:

http://www.matthia.org/

http://i.imgur.com/NufIlr1.jpg

[Peterski]

British Celts are mostly celticized Bell Beakers.

Davidski suggests a Corded Ware connection here: http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/01/dutch-beakers-like-no-other-beakers.html

[Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić]

Modern Lithuanians and Latvians have over 80-something similarity to Russians, even though one group are Balts and the other one are Slavs (and if you tell to a Latvian "you are just a Russian with a weird language and a Protestant religion", you will probably get your face punched):

Do you have any East Prussian German samples mate ? I wonder are the genetically similar to Lithuanians or not

[Peterski]

Do you have any East Prussian German samples mate ? I wonder are the gentically similar to Lithuanians or not

They can range from fully Dutch-like (for example Vistula Delta Mennonites) to fully Lithuanian-like (for example Germanized Lietuvininkai) and everything in-between.

It was a very genetically diverse region.

[Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić]

This guy is Eastern German (full genealogy can be found on his website), but a very Slavic-shifted one:

http://www.matthia.org/

http://i.imgur.com/NufIlr1.jpg

Well this dude closest clusetring is with Slovenia like for me. It proves Slovenes are most German shifted Slavs if you ignore they are more southern puller compared to North Slavs ofc.

[Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić]

They can range from fully Dutch-like (for example Vistula Delta Mennonites) to fully Lithuanian-like (for example Germanized Lietuvininkai) and everything in-between.

It was a very genetically diverse region.

what about those from Konigsberg for example ?

[Token]

Davidski suggests a Corded Ware connection here: http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/01/dutch-beakers-like-no-other-beakers.html

Yeah, i'm following this discussion. There are some archeological problems with this theory (no battle-axes were ever found in a Beaker grave, for example) but i like it.

[Bellbeaking]

Sure Peterski. The Brits have obviously undergone some drift, making them their own category. But most of them in your thread tend to be more Dutch/Danish than French/Bavarian/Austrian

[Bellbeaking]

mmmmm84712


https://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=84712&d=1549322597


Interesting stuff, here user Aren took out the foreigners.

[Dacul]

What do you understand by "Germanics"?
British Bell Beakers were not for sure protoGermanic people.
It seems they were protoCeltic people,in fact.
So, actually, it would be more correct to say that some Germanic speakers are having strong ancestry from British Celts and not only from British Celts, from Hallstatt Celts also, if we take South Germany and Austria.
Celts existed before Germanics, as ethnicities so British Celts could not be separated Germanics.
First time when a Germanic language reached Britain is with AngloSaxons.
Celts were in Britain, very clearly, before AngloSaxons came there.

[Bellbeaking]

What do you understand by "Germanics"?
British Bell Beakers were not for sure protoGermanic people.
It seems they were protoCeltic people,in fact.
So, actually, it would be more correct to say that some Germanic speakers are having strong ancestry from British Celts and not only from British Celts, from Hallstatt Celts also, if we take South Germany and Austria.
Celts existed before Germanics, as ethnicities so British Celts could not be separated Germanics.
First time when a Germanic language reached Britain is with AngloSaxons.
Celts were in Britain, very clearly, before AngloSaxons came there.

many think the british beakers, where in fact, not celts but proto-something else

[Bellbeaking]

What do you understand by "Germanics"?
British Bell Beakers were not for sure protoGermanic people.
It seems they were protoCeltic people,in fact.
So, actually, it would be more correct to say that some Germanic speakers are having strong ancestry from British Celts and not only from British Celts, from Hallstatt Celts also, if we take South Germany and Austria.
Celts existed before Germanics, as ethnicities so British Celts could not be separated Germanics.
First time when a Germanic language reached Britain is with AngloSaxons.
Celts were in Britain, very clearly, before AngloSaxons came there.

many think the british beakers, where in fact, not celts but proto-something else

[Marco94]

The Celts were not a single ethnic group nor genetically uniform. They were a culture that comprised different peoples in Western Europe.

[Peterski]

in Western Europe.

Not just there, the Celts extended as far east as Anatolia (Galatians) and Western Ukraine.

In fact my haplogroup had its TMRCA around the same time when Hallstatt culture existed.

[Marco94]

Not just there, the Celts extended as far east as Anatolia (Galatians) and Western Ukraine.

In fact my haplogroup had its TMRCA around the same time when Hallstatt culture existed.

Yes, you’re right.

But they were not genetically uniform, were they? I think it was just a pan-European culture/shared language and not an ethnicity. They could have expanded from one particular area just like Germanics from Scandinavia or Latins from Rome.

[Peterski]

But they were not genetically uniform, were they?

No but they still had some Proto-Celtic DNA in common.

There is for example one Galatian Celtic sample and it can be modeled as a mix of Hallstatt + Native Anatolians.

[Marco94]

No but they still had some Proto-Celtic DNA in common.

There is for example one Galatian Celtic sample and it can be modeled as a mix of Hallstatt + Native Anatolians.

Wow, interesting. I thought Celts from different parts of Europe were not actually related.

[Grace O'Malley]

Wow, interesting. I thought Celts from different parts of Europe were not actually related.

I personally don't think they are. People conflate ydna like R1b with Celts but it is really Bell Beakers that spread R1b before any Celts existed. We really need more information about Bell Beakers, Corded Ware and also Celtic groups. We don't even have La Tene genomes only 2 Hallstatt Celts. From memory one of these Hallstatt Celts was U152.

[Dacul]

many think the british beakers, where in fact, not celts but proto-something else
Well, they were herding cows of the breed that is known as "Celtic ox" and there are archaeological proofs, of that.
From England,these proofs are.
They were also using ponies and bows and arrows.
Germanics and arrows, does not resonates so well, I think.

[Peterski]

I personally don't think they are.

Languages don't spread "just like that" - especially not in tribal pre-state societies.

A highly organized empire like Ancient Rome or Early Modern England can spread its language without mass migration.

But tribal migrations will not spread a language without a significant influx of people.

When barbarians are too few in numbers, they get assimilated by the locals (vide Germanic tribes in Iberia, Italy, Gaul).

Because Irish speak Celtic, they must have had a significant input from Proto-Celts.

[celticdragongod]

http://i.imgur.com/0RwfyPL.jpg Iron age pre-saxon british samples all look like this.


They are not similar to any 'Celtic' populations in Europe. The only western population these people are similar to are the Bretons, who are descendants of Brits.

My view is that when the Germans were conquering Europe they were more likely to assimilate the people they conquered rather than exterminate them. This means that a lot of Germans are really just assimilated non-Germans.

[Peterski]

Hallstatt Celt DA111 is pretty much like the modern French (okay, a bit large distance but still):

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?276875-Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-850-700-BC-with-more-SNPs-than-before&p=5780892&viewfull=1#post5780892

[Token]

Yes, you’re right.

But they were not genetically uniform, were they? I think it was just a pan-European culture/shared language and not an ethnicity. They could have expanded from one particular area just like Germanics from Scandinavia or Latins from Rome.

All ancient Celtic samples and modern-day inhabitants of previously Celtic speaking places can be modelled with substantial contribution from Hallstatt or something identical to it. Central Europe is probably the Celtic homeland, where a purely and homogenously Celtic people once dwelled.

[Albannach]

The genetic similarity predates any concept of "Celtic" or "Germanic". And as Peterski said Define "Celtic populations in Europe".

[Lucas]

First of all really British Celts were just British Beakers. Even more, Beakers were more like modern Brits then like Roman-Age Celts.

Here is British Beaker sample with 104 000 snps so quite well coveraged Z792075
Highest similarity in Scotland

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/afcfb956-4bf3-4fbc-be2d-8a3b876cea01.png

[Grace O'Malley]

Languages don't spread "just like that" - especially not in tribal pre-state societies.

A highly organized empire like Ancient Rome or Early Modern England can spread its language without mass migration.

But tribal migrations will not spread a language without a significant influx of people.

When barbarians are too few in numbers, they get assimilated by the locals (vide Germanic tribes in Iberia, Italy, Gaul).

Because Irish speak Celtic, they must have had a significant input from Proto-Celts.

Are you calling Bell Beakers Proto-Celts because that's the only way you can account for places like Ireland as really the Bell Beakers had the largest input into Ireland and brought L21 with them and most Irishmen today are L21 so it's obvious there wasn't too much change. On any models I virtually have zilch input from Hallstatt Celts and the Irish on the Global25 have had very little input as well. The Irish appear to have the least input from Hallstatt of all the Isles groups. It's obvious that the Bell Beakers that came in the Bronze Age had the biggest effect on the Irish gene pool.

I don't know if this is good model so if anyone can suggest a better model for myself and Irish let me know?

http://i66.tinypic.com/28lv38j.jpg

[Leto]

First of all really British Celts were just British Beakers. Even more, Beakers were more like modern Brits then like Roman-Age Celts.

Here is British Beaker sample with 104 000 snps so quite well coveraged Z792075
Highest similarity in Scotland
Just as British as modern Britons, even though it's a Bronze age person. Fascinating!


MDLP K23b Oracle results:

MDLP K23b Oracle Rev 2014 Sep 16

Kit Z792075

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 European_Hunters_Gatherers 34.99
2 European_Early_Farmers 31.36
3 Caucasian 19.48
4 South_Central_Asian 6.36
5 Ancestral_Altaic 4.42
6 Melano_Polynesian 1.17
7 Amerindian 0.94
8 East_African 0.9
9 Australoid 0.3
10 African_Pygmy 0.07

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 English_Cornwall_GBR ( ) 2.39
2 English_Kent_GBR ( ) 2.62
3 Welsh ( ) 2.91
4 British ( ) 2.94
5 CEU ( ) 3.03
6 North_European ( ) 3.9
7 English ( ) 4.43
8 Irish ( ) 4.65
9 Frisian ( ) 5.85
10 Belgian ( ) 5.89
11 Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR ( ) 6
12 Norwegian_West ( ) 6.19
13 French ( ) 6.59
14 Norwegian_East ( ) 6.83
15 Orcadian ( ) 6.84
16 Icelandic ( ) 7.36
17 Dutch ( ) 8.92
18 Swede ( ) 9
19 Dane ( ) 10.02
20 South_German ( ) 10.49

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 99.1% English_Cornwall_GBR ( ) + 0.9% Bougainville ( ) @ 2.05
2 72.9% Welsh ( ) + 27.1% Frisian ( ) @ 2.08
3 98.9% English_Cornwall_GBR ( ) + 1.1% Naasioi ( ) @ 2.08
4 93.8% British ( ) + 6.2% Kosovar ( ) @ 2.11
5 92.5% Irish ( ) + 7.5% Basque_Spanish ( ) @ 2.12
6 85.4% Dutch ( ) + 14.6% Basque_Spanish ( ) @ 2.13
7 85.9% Dutch ( ) + 14.1% Basque_French ( ) @ 2.14
8 90.6% Irish ( ) + 9.4% Spanish_Pais_Vasco_IBS ( ) @ 2.14
9 92.7% Irish ( ) + 7.3% Basque_French ( ) @ 2.14
10 97.8% British ( ) + 2.2% Georgian_Laz ( ) @ 2.14
11 95% British ( ) + 5% Central_Greek ( ) @ 2.15
12 97.7% British ( ) + 2.3% Georgian_Imereti ( ) @ 2.15
13 94.6% British ( ) + 5.4% Albanian_Tirana ( ) @ 2.16
14 97.4% British ( ) + 2.6% Turk_Trabzon ( ) @ 2.16
15 93.9% British ( ) + 6.1% Greek_Northwest ( ) @ 2.17
16 98.9% English_Kent_GBR ( ) + 1.1% Bougainville ( ) @ 2.17
17 97.6% British ( ) + 2.4% Georgian_Megrelia ( ) @ 2.17
18 95.5% British ( ) + 4.5% Greek_Athens ( ) @ 2.18
19 94.7% British ( ) + 5.3% Greek_Thessaloniki ( ) @ 2.18
20 98.7% English_Kent_GBR ( ) + 1.3% Naasioi ( ) @ 2.18

[Token]

Are you calling Bell Beakers Proto-Celts because that's the only way you can account for places like Ireland as really the Bell Beakers had the largest input into Ireland and brought L21 with them and most Irishmen today are L21 so it's obvious there wasn't too much change. On any models I virtually have zilch input from Hallstatt Celts and the Irish on the Global25 have had very little input as well. The Irish appear to have the least input from Hallstatt of all the Isles groups. It's obvious that the Bell Beakers that came in the Bronze Age had the biggest effect on the Irish gene pool.

I don't know if this is good model so if anyone can suggest a better model for myself and Irish let me know?

http://i66.tinypic.com/28lv38j.jpg

Globular Amphora (unadmixed Neolithic farmers) is obviously 'eating' southern admixture. There is no Globular Amphora contribution in modern-day Brits except for what came together with the Beaker package, so it makes no sense to put it in a model. Here is what happens when you excludes GAC:

[1] "distance%=2.3662"
Irish
Beaker_Britain,63.8
Hallstatt_Bylany,36.2

[Peterski]

Highest similarity in Scotland

And modern Scotland has lowest similarity to Hallstatt Celts, so Picts were not very Hallstatt-descended.


Here is British Beaker sample with 104 000 snps so quite well coveraged Z792075

"Kit not found" - and why do you use British Beakers instead of Rathlin Bronze Age, which was Irish?

Rathlin Bronze Age was NOT very similar to modern Irish, and you can see it in nMonte below.

=====

Modern Ireland modeled in nMonte as a mix of Hallstatt DA111 & DA112, Rathlin1, Nordic RISE174, Sigtuna Medieval and Iceland SVK-A1:

Ireland_Munster (Average):

Rathlin1-BA,32.2
Iceland-SVKA1,29
Hallstatt-DA111,26.8
Hallstatt-DA112,12

Ireland_Connacht (Average):

Iceland-SVKA1,31
Rathlin1-BA,30.6
Hallstatt-DA111,22
Hallstatt-DA112,16.4

[Grace O'Malley]

And modern Scotland has lowest similarity to Hallstatt Celts, so Picts were not very Hallstatt-descended.



"Kit not found" - and why do you use British Beakers instead of Rathlin Bronze Age, which was Irish?

Rathlin Bronze Age was NOT very similar to modern Irish, and you can see it in nMonte below.

=====

Modern Ireland modeled in nMonte as a mix of Hallstatt DA111 & DA112, Rathlin1, Nordic RISE174, Sigtuna Medieval and Iceland SVK-A1:

Ireland_Munster (Average):

Rathlin1-BA,32.2
Iceland-SVKA1,29
Hallstatt-DA111,26.8
Hallstatt-DA112,12

Ireland_Connacht (Average):

Iceland-SVKA1,31
Rathlin1-BA,30.6
Hallstatt-DA111,22
Hallstatt-DA112,16.4

Can you model other populations on that as well? The problem with these models is that other populations get a good fit with those categories so just showing Irish can be misleading. I think it is interesting to compare what other populations get to see if that model is a good one.

[Lucas]

And modern Scotland has lowest similarity to Hallstatt Celts, so Picts were not very Hallstatt-descended.



"Kit not found" - and why do you use British Beakers instead of Rathlin Bronze Age, which was Irish?{/quote]

It work in oracles. It's just on research mode.


[quote]
Rathlin Bronze Age was NOT very similar to modern Irish, and you can see it in nMonte below.



I'm not talking about Rathlin but about British Beakers which are very simialr to modern Brits.

[Peterski]

I'm not talking about Rathlin but about British Beakers which are very simialr to modern Brits.

And they somehow time-travelled to modern times ??? I don't think so.

Also most of them do not get British in Oracles as closest populations.


It work in oracles. It's just on research mode.

Nope.

ERROR: Kit number Z792075 not found (I tried Eurogenes K13 Oracle).

[Lucas]

And they time-travelled to modern times ??? I don't think so.

What you think is not important. Important is that they are similar in Gedmatch or elswhere.

[Peterski]

Important is that they are similar in Gedmatch or elswhere.

You said they are more similar to modern British than Iron Age Celts.

So how do you explain it? Iron Age Celts got extinct and replaced by Early Bronze Age Beakers who time-travelled from the past?

[Lucas]

And they somehow time-travelled to modern times ??? I don't think so.

Also most of them do not get British in Oracles as closest populations.



Nope.

ERROR: Kit number Z792075 not found (I tried Eurogenes K13 Oracle).

Genesis:) Leto above did MDLP k23b :)))))))

[Peterski]

Ah sorry, I logged in to GEDmatch instead of Genesis by mistake.

Still, this Beaker is not like modern Brits but more Germanic-shifted.

=====

So if we find out that Late Bronze Age Lusatian Culture (Biskupin etc.) was similar to modern Poles, does it mean that Late Iron Age can be ignored? :)

I mean, Lusatians could time-travel from Late Bronze Age to 950 AD, right?

[Lucas]

Genesis Z760891 I2443 Beaker_Britain

Most similar to Irish.

Amerindian 1.07 Pct
Basque 4.04 Pct
Central_Euro 4.06 Pct
East_Balkan 1.87 Pct
East_Central_Euro 12.53 Pct
Eastern_Euro 8.47 Pct
Fennoscandian 7.43 Pct
French 7.03 Pct
Iberian 13.60 Pct
North_Atlantic 12.75 Pct
North_Caucasian 3.89 Pct
North_Sea 16.64 Pct
South_Central_Asian 5.44 Pct
Volga-Ural 1.18 Pct

128075 SNPs used in this evaluation


https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/ea35ddd2-e125-4169-89ee-ef364fbf6e93.png

BTW first was Z792075 I1767 Beaker_Britain

[Lucas]

Ah sorry, I logged in to GEDmatch instead of Genesis by mistake.

Still, this Beaker is not like modern Brits but more Germanic-shifted.

=====

So if we find out that Late Bronze Age Lusatian Culture (Biskupin etc.) was similar to modern Poles, does it mean that Late Iron Age can be ignored? :)

I mean, Lusatians could time-travel from Late Bronze Age to 950 AD, right?

No it's like modern Britsh, what map shows. And second one is like Irish.

[Peterski]

Genesis Z760891 I2443 Beaker_Britain

Amerindian 1.07 Pct
Basque 4.04 Pct
Central_Euro 4.06 Pct
East_Balkan 1.87 Pct
East_Central_Euro 12.53 Pct
Eastern_Euro 8.47 Pct
Fennoscandian 7.43 Pct
French 7.03 Pct
Iberian 13.60 Pct
North_Atlantic 12.75 Pct
North_Caucasian 3.89 Pct
North_Sea 16.64 Pct
South_Central_Asian 5.44 Pct
Volga-Ural 1.18 Pct

128075 SNPs used in this evaluation


https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/ea35ddd2-e125-4169-89ee-ef364fbf6e93.png

BTW first was Z792075 I1767 Beaker_Britain

Do you have K36 average for all of them? I don't think it makes sense to check individually if we have so many.

Or tell me which one is most similar to modern Irish, I will check that nMonte model again with Beakers added.

[Lucas]

Do you have K36 average for all of them? I don't think it makes sense to check individually if we have so many.

Or tell me which one is most similar to modern Irish, I will check that nMonte model again with Beakers added.

above https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?275636-The-British-Celts-are-really-just-seperated-Germanics-Agree-or-Not&p=5781011&viewfull=1#post5781011

He had only atypical 5% South-Central Asian, sign of Steppe of course.

[Peterski]

(...)

If we find out that Lusatian culture was genetically Slavic, but Late Iron Age Poland was Germanic, will you admit that autochtonists were right, or not?

Because you have a similar situation here - you are ignoring Iron Age and Roman era...

[Lucas]

Kit Number: Z131879 I2447 Beaker_Britain

His component proprtions are very modern.

Amerindian 1.30 Pct
Basque 0.78 Pct
Central_Euro 4.86 Pct
East_Central_Euro 10.97 Pct
Eastern_Euro 7.65 Pct
Fennoscandian 8.10 Pct
French 7.92 Pct
Iberian 6.57 Pct
North_Atlantic 19.37 Pct
North_Caucasian 4.22 Pct
North_Sea 23.56 Pct
South_Asian 0.47 Pct
South_Central_Asian 3.82 Pct
West_Caucasian 0.39 Pct


128430 SNPs

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/f6a74a7f-85fc-4200-8d80-d35e4215bdf6.png

[Lucas]

There are dozen like them. Only those BB with very low snp number are different, every with about 100 000 snps is like modern Brit.

[Peterski]

Another nMonte for modern Irish, this time including I2443 Beaker_Britain (sample suggested by Lukasz) in the model:

Ireland_Connacht

Iceland-SVK-A1 30.9
Rathlin1-BA 30.6
Hallstatt-DA111 22.0
Hallstatt-DA112 16.4
Scania-RISE174 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0
I2443-BeakerBritain 0.0

Ireland_Munster

Rathlin1-BA 32.2
Iceland-SVK-A1 29.0
Hallstatt-DA111 26.7
Hallstatt-DA112 12.1
Scania-RISE174 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0
I2443-BeakerBritain 0.0

^^^ As you can see this sample was not preferred by the algorithm... So probably not very ancestral to modern Irish.

^^^ Updated. As you can see above nMonte (pen=0) did not pick up I2443 as its preferred choice. Rathlin was preferred still.

Maybe average of all British Beakers (or at least all Irish-shifted ones) would work better?

=====

By the way:

In terms of CLOSEST SINGLE ITEM DISTANCES, my Irish averages are still closer to Rathlin than to your British Beaker (which comes 2nd). So still closer to Rathlin than to British Beakers. But distances are high in both cases (indicating that modern Irish are mixed - not just 100% Rathlin or 100% I2443).


There are dozen like them.

So what if nMonte pen=0 still prefers Rathlin?

And even with penalization it would still choose Rathlin, because Rathlin is closer to modern Irish (to my averages at least) than I2443.

But... distances are high (higher than what is typical if someone is 100% descended from one population / one region).

So, modern Irish are not 100% descended from either Rathlin or Beakers - they received some additional admixtures from Celts & Vikings.

=====

Okay I will try with other British Beaker samples as well (for example with the 2nd one you suggested).

Adding I2447 did not help, this sample is not ancestral to modern Irish (at least not any more than Rathlin):

Ireland_Connacht

Iceland-SVK-A1 30.9
Rathlin1-BA 30.6
Hallstatt-DA111 22.0
Hallstatt-DA112 16.4
Scania-RISE174 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0
I2443-BeakerBritain 0.0
I2447-BeakerBritain 0.0

Ireland_Munster

Rathlin1-BA 32.2
Iceland-SVK-A1 29.0
Hallstatt-DA111 26.7
Hallstatt-DA112 12.1
Scania-RISE174 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0
I2443-BeakerBritain 0.0
I2447-BeakerBritain 0.0

After removing Iceland_SVK-A1 (which could be mixed with Gaels, even though the study claims it was not...) from the model, this is what I get:

Ireland_Connacht

I2447-BeakerBritain 45.5
Hallstatt-DA111 23.8
Scania-RISE174 16.1
Hallstatt-DA112 14.5
Rathlin1-BA 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0
I2443-BeakerBritain 0.0

Ireland_Munster

I2447-BeakerBritain 37.4
Hallstatt-DA111 28.9
Scania-RISE174 18.3
Hallstatt-DA112 9.7
Rathlin1-BA 5.8
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0
I2443-BeakerBritain 0.0

So Rathlin and British Beakers are quite interchangeable, but still every model is choosing at least 1/3 of Hallstatt Celtic admixture, that's a lot.


First of all really British Celts were just British Beakers. Even more, Beakers were more like modern Brits then like Roman-Age Celts.

Here is British Beaker sample with 104 000 snps so quite well coveraged Z792075
Highest similarity in Scotland

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/afcfb956-4bf3-4fbc-be2d-8a3b876cea01.png

Last try, with this one (I1767) also included - still at least 1/5 Hallstatt admixture is necessary to explain modern Irish:

Ireland_Munster

I1767-BeakerBritain 45.2
Hallstatt-DA111 21.4
I2447-BeakerBritain 12.8
Rathlin1-BA 10.4
Scania-RISE174 10.2
Hallstatt-DA112 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0
I2443-BeakerBritain 0.0

Ireland_Connacht

I1767-BeakerBritain 49.70
I2447-BeakerBritain 17.15
Hallstatt-DA111 16.70
Scania-RISE174 8.05
Rathlin1-BA 6.70
Hallstatt-DA112 1.70
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.00
I2443-BeakerBritain 0.00

Note that Germanic admix (Scania-RISE174) also declined after including I1767, so it was a northern-shifted sample.

^^^ What it shows is that the modern Irish are up to 70% Bell Beaker, at least 20% Celtic and up to 10% Germanic.

Still twice more Celtic than Germanic, so the hypothesis in the OP (Insular Celts more Germanic than Celtic) is wrong.

[Grace O'Malley]

^^^ What it shows is that the modern Irish are up to 70% Bell Beaker, at least 20% Celtic and up to 10% Germanic.

Still twice more Celtic than Germanic, so the hypothesis in the OP (Insular Celts more Germanic than Celtic) is wrong.

Well to be fair he was just asking the question. I'd like to see Germans modelled with Hallstatt as well. You would think it likely that Germans have Hallstatt as after all they originated from their stomping ground.

[Peterski]

Okay, I averaged all Beakers Britain with at least 50 thousand SNPs in Eurogenes K36.

Ireland_Munster

Beakers-Britain-Average 70.8
Hallstatt-DA111 23.2
Scania-RISE174 5.5
Hallstatt-DA112 0.5
Rathlin1-BA 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0

Ireland_Connacht

Beakers-Britain-Average 71.7
Hallstatt-DA111 18.1
Scania-RISE174 6.2
Hallstatt-DA112 4.1
Rathlin1-BA 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0


Well to be fair he was just asking the question. I'd like to see Germans modelled with Hallstatt as well. You would think it likely that Germans have Hallstatt as after all they originated from their stomping ground.

Okay but for West and South Germans I need to include other populations as well in the model. Because they have "Mediterranean" ancestry as well.

BTW, see my latest model (with average of all Beakers) - Beaker admixture increases at the expense of declining Germanic (RISE174), not Hallstatt.

The more Beaker-descended the Irish are, the less Germanic-descended they are. Meanwhile, Hallstatt admixture stays at 1/4 - 1/5 no matter what.

[Grace O'Malley]

Okay, I averaged all Beakers Britain with at least 50 thousand SNPs in Eurogenes K36.

Ireland_Munster

Beakers-Britain-Average 70.8
Hallstatt-DA111 23.2
Scania-RISE174 5.5
Hallstatt-DA112 0.5
Rathlin1-BA 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0

Ireland_Connacht

Beakers-Britain-Average 71.7
Hallstatt-DA111 18.1
Scania-RISE174 6.2
Hallstatt-DA112 4.1
Rathlin1-BA 0.0
Sigtuna-Medieval 0.0

Irish definitely have a lot of Rathlin but then Beakers have a lot of Rathlin affinity so I'm presuming that Beakers are masking input into the Irish. We do know that the Irish share a lot of affinity with Rathlin from the Cassidy study. With these models though it depends on what samples you choose. From my understanding there is more La Tene influence in Ireland anyway.

Rise 150 is my top match but Rathlin is 2nd.

http://i63.tinypic.com/20qaonp.jpg

[Smaug]

No.

[Bellbeaking]

No.

you don't think the British Bell beakers are a germanic population smaug?

[Vasconcelos]

you don't think the British Bell beakers are a germanic population smaug?

That would be anachronic, because Bell Beakers predate the proto-germanic language. At best proto-germanic split when BB was in its infacy. Regardless, it has little to do with bell beakers in western Europe

[Peterski]

I modeled Grace's mom, here is what I got (see also my PM Grace):

Beakers-Britain-Avg 61.2
Sigtuna-VikingAge-Avg 14.6
Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-low 12.1
Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-high 12.1
Hallstatt-Celt-DA112 0.0
Hallstatt-Celts-Avg 0.0
Sweden-IronAge-RISE174 0.0
Rathlin1-BronzeAge 0.0
Ballynhatty-Neolithic 0.0

DA111-high is my upload, DA111-low is older upload:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?276875-Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-850-700-BC-with-more-SNPs-than-before

We can add also RISE150 from Silesia (this sample really looks "Insular Celtic") and see how it changes.

[Lucas]

^^^ What it shows is that the modern Irish are up to 70% Bell Beaker, at least 20% Celtic and up to 10% Germanic.

Still twice more Celtic than Germanic, so the hypothesis in the OP (Insular Celts more Germanic than Celtic) is wrong.

It was my point. British Islanders no matter Ireland or Scotland are mainly Beakers to this day. And if we talk about Roman period, maybe those samples were freshly after arriving Belgae Celts and some centuries later old BB background reemerged again.
Could be also possible that Celts living in Roman Britain were displaced / exterminated by Anglosaxons, and older population with more BB which lived outside Roman area persisted better.

OP question was irrelevant to me.

[Grace O'Malley]

I modeled Grace's mom, here is what I got (see also my PM Grace):

Beakers-Britain-Avg 61.2
Sigtuna-VikingAge-Avg 14.6
Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-low 12.1
Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-high 12.1
Hallstatt-Celt-DA112 0.0
Hallstatt-Celts-Avg 0.0
Sweden-IronAge-RISE174 0.0
Rathlin1-BronzeAge 0.0
Ballynhatty-Neolithic 0.0

DA111-high is my upload, DA111-low is older upload:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?276875-Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-850-700-BC-with-more-SNPs-than-before

We can add also RISE150 from Silesia (this sample really looks "Insular Celtic") and see how it changes.

Thank you. That's a really interesting model.

[Peterski]

It was my point. British Islanders no matter Ireland or Scotland are mainly Beakers to this day.

I agree. But saying that they don't have any Celtic would be wrong. They have doube-digits % of Celtic ancestry.

By they way:

RISE150 (Silesian Unetice sample) is so similar to British Beakers, that you wouldn't notice if a population like RISE150 migrated to Britain and replaced the local Beaker descendants. So this is another possibility - that Celts from the continent were very similar to British Beakers, so replacement is "invisible". :)

This is what Grace's mom scores after adding RISE150 (Silesia Unetice culture - Proto-Celtic culture perhaps?): :)

Grace-Mom

Poland-BronzeAge-RISE150 42.50
Beakers-Britain-Avg 28.00
Sigtuna-VikingAge-Avg 14.30
Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-low 14.05
Ballynhatty-Neolithic 1.15
Hallstatt-Celt-DA111-high 0.00
Hallstatt-Celt-DA112 0.00
Hallstatt-Celts-Avg 0.00
Sweden-IronAge-RISE174 0.00
Rathlin1-BronzeAge 0.00


Could be also possible that Celts living in Roman Britain were displaced / exterminated by Anglosaxons (...)

Those Med-shifted Romano-Celts (Romano-Britons) were rather ABSORBED by Anglo-Saxons, which is what made modern South-East English more Med-shifted:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43712587

Quote: "Most people from south-east Britain still trace most of their ancestry to the Beaker people, but the later mixing event had a bigger impact than Medieval Anglo-Saxon migrations - traditionally seen as the foundation point of English history.

Prof Reich said his team currently had three working hypotheses to explain the result. While the Beakers replaced around 90% of the ancestry in Britain, it's possible that a pocket (or pockets) of Neolithic farmers held out in isolation somewhere for hundreds of years.

During the Iron Age (which began around 3,000 years ago), they mixed back in with the general population, diluting the Beakers' genetic background with a type of ancestry that's now stronger around the Mediterranean than in Northern or Central Europe.

Alternatively, the genetic data may be hinting at a separate migration from continental Europe during the Iron Age - perhaps one that brought Celtic languages into Britain.

The third possibility is that scholars have simply underestimated the genetic impact of the Roman occupation, which lasted in Britain from AD 43 until 410. Roman settlers from the Italian peninsula would have traced a large proportion of their ancestry to Neolithic farmers like those that inhabited Britain before the arrival of the Beaker people."

^^^
This is something that I noticed long before David Reich noticed it: :)

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?191105-South-English-have-much-of-Mediterranean-ancestry-that-is-neither-Celtic-nor-Germanic&p=5762343&viewfull=1#post5762343

Modern South-East English are more southern-shifted than both Insular Celts and than Early Anglo-Saxons:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?191105-South-English-have-much-of-Mediterranean-ancestry-that-is-neither-Celtic-nor-Germanic


Rise 150 is my top match but Rathlin is 2nd.

RISE150 was north of the Sudetes and 1885-1693 BC, Hallstatt (DA111, DA112) was south of the Sudetes and 850-700 BC (one thousand years later). Proto-Celtic ethnogenesis according to linguists was ca. 3200 years ago (or around 1200 BC), so DA111 and DA112 are too young to be Proto-Celts:

Kit number - F999948

https://i.imgur.com/mI06mIY.png

RISE150 is slightly too old to be Proto-Celtic, but maybe populations genetically like RISE150 persisted until 3200 years ago?

[Smaug]

you don't think the British Bell beakers are a germanic population smaug?

Exactly. Bell-Beakers were not Germanic, they were a pre-Germanic population.

[Bellbeaking]

Exactly. Bell-Beakers were not Germanic, they were a pre-Germanic population.


This is true, I think British Isles is their own thing, they are closer to continental Germanics than any continental Celtics however

[celticdragongod]

This is true, I think British Isles is their own thing, they are closer to continental Germanics than any continental Celtics however

This may mean that over time the continental Celtics mixed with Slavs and other groups.

[Figaro]

Having some Germanic admixture doesn't make a whole people "fake celts"...but yes, I suppose the idea that Iron Age celts didn't contribute a terribly high amount (or as much as may be assumed) to the isles is more relevant here. I see some good answers in this thread, no need to repeat.

On a mostly related note, One of my best friends was recently assigned R-L2 as a paternal haplo (his paternal lineage is German, likely Bavarian). Can it be assumed that north and westward expansions of this were mostly from a La Tene' heritage?

[Bellbeaking]

This may mean that over time the continental Celtics mixed with Slavs and other groups.

It is possible: but from wikipedia DNA history of the British Isles:

Possible influence of Celtic Migrations

Little is know about the introduction of Celtic languages to the British Isles, though an increase in Mediterranean/Neolithic DNA into South England during the Iron age suggest that a more southern shifted population than that of the Rhine Beakers was introduced. Celtic Speakers associated with what is now South Germany and France may have been carriers of more Neolithic DNA than the British Beakers who show more affinity with populations in what is now Scandinavia, North Germany and the Netherlands. It is also likely that Roman input into the Gene pool of south England has been underestimated. [9]

It is likely Celts came in as an invasion and the Irish are not really celts in any Genetic sense. They many be nordwestbloc-ish people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock

[Peterski]

Late Bronze Age Caledonians were very much like modern Insular Celts:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?279182-Late-Bronze-Age-Caledonians

Early Bronze Age (Pre-Norse) Orcadians were already "Germanic-like":

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?279176-Bronze-Age-Orkney-Islanders

Ancient Orcadians were similar to Danes long before any Viking raids there.

Today they are more Norwegian-shifted, since Norwegian Vikings settled there.

[Bellbeaking]

This may mean that over time the continental Celtics mixed with Slavs and other groups.

are you concerned you are not a real celt, just a proto north indo european larping as one?

(that much cooler than being a celt anyway)

[Bosniensis]

Celts and Germanics are like Chinese and Arabs different.