PDA

View Full Version : Define "Celtic"



Beorn
09-02-2009, 04:06 PM
A lot of people rightfully or wrongfully claim a Celtic link, but how do people define Celtic? Is it a genetic claim? A cultural claim or a mixture of the two, or perhaps some other reason?

Lutiferre
09-02-2009, 04:50 PM
One might ask how meaningful it is to define Celticity genetically, when we know there have been ethnic groups that were Celts from the eastern parts of Germany to the western shores of Ireland.

Allenson
09-02-2009, 05:49 PM
I'm not sure that it can be done genetically as there is so much cross over when speaking of Y-chromosomes & mtDNA between the various indigenous ethnolinguistic groups of Europe. Meaning, there are Celts who are R1a, there are Slavs that are R1b, etc.

However, with the greater refinements in subclades that have been uncovered in the past few years, there are surely trends within R1b that are commonly found in the Celtic fringe of the Isles. But then again, are these people the descendents of central European Celts who migrated to the Isles with/after the spread of agriculture or are they the descendents of the earlier arriving Paleo/Mesolithic settlers of the Isles/Doggerland who were later Celticized? My bet is on the latter of these two.

Surely though, we can define a Celt from a linguistic standpoint.

Óttar
09-04-2009, 03:33 AM
I think Celticness could be defined linguistically, but Irish people speak English too it doesn't make them Germanic. The Gaels could have linguistically displaced an early group. There are music and dance styles shared by the Irish, Bretons, Gallegos, North Africans and possibly even central Asians, which I think is to be chalked up to extensive Atlantic trade routes historically. There are Irish legends of Greeks up in Ireland and it is said that Mil, the mythical Iberian ancestor who conquered Ireland and fathered the Milesians married a daughter of Pharaoh Nectanebo I. It is a myth yes, but in ancient times myth was considered part of history and people are too quick to dismiss their relevance.

Osweo
09-04-2009, 04:02 AM
There are Irish legends of Greeks up in Ireland and it is said that Mil, the mythical Iberian ancestor who conquered Ireland and fathered the Milesians married a daughter of Pharaoh Nectanebo I. It is a myth yes, but in ancient times myth was considered part of history and people are too quick to dismiss their relevance.
It is NOT a myth. In the sense of a traditional story attached to a particular ethnos with origins in the ethnogenesis of that people, anyway.

Milesius is pure and simple early pseudohistory, concocted by the educated Gaelic elite to round off rough edges on their genealogical and religious theories. It is exactly the same as Snorri Sturluson and Saxo Grammaticus attempting to tie in Norse legend with Classical mythohistory. The supposed founder's blatantly Latin name is enough to prove this.

Anyroad... Celtic. What are we defining it FOR? THat's the question. Most people seek to define it in order to sell tacky jewellery and fantasy novels. Rather beneath our notice, really, were it not for the fact that it's poisoning the minds of our compatriots with drivel which they have taken for historical 'truth'.

Celtic was an ethnocultural reality in the Iron Age. Since then, it's just a loose heritage matter, something shared by otherwise extremely different peoples. To pretend otherwise is just silly. Unless you've got some cheap trinkets or tee shirts to sell, that is...

Treffie
09-04-2009, 08:25 AM
It's a loaded question, Wat, but a good one :thumb001:

Personally, I don't accept an individual who can speak a Celtic language more Celtic than a native who lives in the same area. Due to pressures from other dominant languages, the Celtic languages have been pushed to the extreme and most are battling for survival - Welsh seems to be the only Celtic language that is relatively safe, so I don't think an individual's identity is diluted if they haven't had the opportunity to have been brought up through the medium of their native Celtic tongue. Having said all that though, being in possession of language skills is seen as more beneficial than not having any at all.

Ultimately, I think it boils down to identity and a sense of belonging. If one has an affinity towards their ancestry, the land, the language etc, then in my opinion they can consider themselves Celtic

Amarantine
09-11-2009, 06:44 AM
What is interesting for me, is preoccupation about Celtic culture. For you, who live in British Isles is quite normal, but a lot of people, from different sides of world are interested in Celtic culture, and what is amazing they even derived some similarities in legends, culture, languages with Celtic. I noticed that no one Ancient Tribe, never obtain this level of interesting, from common people to scientists, as Celts.

Barreldriver
09-14-2009, 08:36 PM
I'm not sure that it can be done genetically as there is so much cross over when speaking of Y-chromosomes & mtDNA between the various indigenous ethnolinguistic groups of Europe. Meaning, there are Celts who are R1a, there are Slavs that are R1b, etc.



Actually you can, because there are sublcades of these Haplogroups that are specific to certain regions and ethnic groups isolated therein. The presence of some of these haplogroups in odd places are attributed to military migratory patterns and traders.

For instance R1b-M222 is found exclusively in the British Isle's and among the descendants of the Scots-Irish abroad.

Then in my own case, my type of R1b is found exclusively among the British Celts.

Now my two cents is a combo system, this applies to all ethnic groups. It should be determined by anthropological traits, a combination of Genetics and physical taxonomy (biological anthropology), culture and customs (cultural anthropology, and language (linguistic anthropology). Now, it in my mind it is not necessarily all or nothing, but rather some combination of the three, it is obvious that he or she that falls under all three has the greatest link, but as long as a significant link is established and that person is willing to learn about or become involved in the three aspects and is significantly descended from the group in question they should be welcome.

I myself rely mostly on biological anthropology due to cultural disruption and enculturation. However, I am very willing to overcome the previous enculturation and am wiling to learn the language of those responsible for my biological origins.

Liffrea
09-14-2009, 09:54 PM
Originally Posted by Wat Tyler
Is it a genetic claim? A cultural claim or a mixture of the two, or perhaps some other reason?

It’s important to clarify “culture”, I don’t perceive culture as material in an archaeological sense of the word, what you are looking at there are trinkets, I think a culture is more Spenglerian, it’s an organism rooted within a world view that can be understood by it’s symbolism, by it’s mythos.

In that sense there is/was a “Celtic” culture, but never an ethnos, the Celts were largely defined by outside people’s who saw similarity, doubtless the various ethnicities within the Celtic organism saw this as well, just as the pre-Norman English understood their shared ancestral ties with the peoples across the North Sea back in their original homelands, however the English understood their differences enough to withstand the Danish invasions of the mid 9th century onwards, this wasn’t a visit from people of “one blood and bone” but seen as an outside invasion. Just as degrees of commonality of culture amongst West/Central European states hasn’t prevented them from war or even outright hatred.

But that’s the past can we even really speak of a “Celtic” or “Germanic” culture in any meaningful sense of the word today?( even though I tend to see the Celtic/Germanic as somewhat artificial I still put that in Meta-Ethnicity!!) Can we really claim that the Scots have more in common with the “Celtic” Irish and the Bretons than they do the English? Can the English really claim to be more akin to the Dutch or Danes or (Gods forbid!) the Germans than they can the Scots or even the Welsh?

Personally I think the shared heritage within the British Isles makes “Celtic” and “Germanic” redundant, we can speak of an English, Scottish, Welsh or Irish identity, we may even quibble over degrees of “Celtic” or “Germanic” input but I don’t think we can realistically go further, it’s certainly not genetic, there is no genetic divide of any significance in northern Europe, amongst the indigenous population, and personally I don’t find much of significance in R1b or I or R1a, they don’t mean a great deal, I’m R1b that must mean I’m a “Celt” at least according to those nice people at Oxford Ancestors who make a fair amount of cash out of such pronouncements, funny that because I would say I’m English and who has ever heard of a Celtic Englishman? Has there ever been such an animal? Well according to the folks at this site there may be a case for it:

http://www.anglo-celtic.org.uk/

I guess it’s perception, whilst I, and others, would debate over the realistic existence of a “Celtic Fringe” (certainly in Scotland’s case) that’s probably not going to mean a great deal to folks who do wish to consider themselves “Celtic”. It’s what people see themselves as, and whether they are accepted as such that counts, a Celtic Englishman wouldn’t get far in a Dublin bar, but a Celtic Irishman, well surely that’s just common sense?

Arne
01-18-2010, 09:31 AM
Acting in some Way as a Rebel..showing some freeminding Resistance Attitudes.. which divides you from other People..

For me it´s not only linguistical..
There are Signs of Culture but we all don´t know it where they gone.
So only the Irish are Celts ?
Blackhaired Celts ?
I have not much doubts about Celtic origin of them.

Maybe the Celts are a little more Temper.
Just a Suggestion from me.

Many Signs of their history are in South-Germany.
Can´t they be Celts because they didn´t speak galic ?
Much is lost and on the Continent were other terms.
Simply ignoring foreign german influences isn´t so easy.
If a pre-galic nearly language were spoken.

d3cimat3d
02-10-2010, 12:56 AM
http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa29/powerup927/CElts-1.jpg

Argyll
12-13-2011, 12:03 PM
They're a mixture of both. Celtic culture is, obviously, what it is. For the genetic part, there are at least three* sub-racial types that are seen as Celtic. Also, the Haplo-groups that occur in the traditionaly Celtic areas (most of Western Europe, most of that being the British Isles and parts of Spain, Flanders, France, and maybe Belguim) have the Celtic 'signature' haplo-groups.

*The three being Brunn, Keltic-Nordid, and North Atlantid.

Bobby Martnen
02-22-2018, 06:15 AM
Both.

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 06:18 AM
Celts are I2a2 and I2a1a people, now non-existent almost because of post 4th century invasions etc..

Bobby Martnen
02-22-2018, 06:39 AM
Celts are I2a2 and I2a1a people, now non-existent almost because of post 4th century invasions etc..

But most Irish are R1b...

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 06:51 AM
But most Irish are R1b...

Irish people are not Celtic lol... that's just a nationalism to give themselves some "Antiquity"

Irish people are R1 people just like other R1 people, they are Anglo-Saxons just like Saxons of England.

Celts and Saxons are completely unrelated people.

Celts are not Indo-Europeans.

Bobby Martnen
02-22-2018, 06:53 AM
Irish people are not Celtic lol... that's just a nationalism to give themselves some "Antiquity"

Irish people are R1 people just like other R1 people, they are Anglo-Saxons just like Saxons of England.

Celts and Saxons are completely unrelated people.

Celts are not Indo-Europeans.

Irish speak a Celtic language.

Grace O'Malley
02-22-2018, 10:33 AM
Celts are I2a2 and I2a1a people, now non-existent almost because of post 4th century invasions etc..

The Bell Beakers who the Celts developed from are all R1b and all Indo-European. The Celts only emerged approximately 2,000 years ago after the R1b and Steppe explosion so explain your theory? You've made other claims about Celts which are easy to disprove. Are you being trollish?

Grace O'Malley
02-22-2018, 10:39 AM
Irish people are not Celtic lol... that's just a nationalism to give themselves some "Antiquity"

Irish people are R1 people just like other R1 people, they are Anglo-Saxons just like Saxons of England.

Celts and Saxons are completely unrelated people.

Celts are not Indo-Europeans.

Source. Irish were in Ireland long before the Anglo-Saxon invasions of the 5th Century which mostly affected England anyway. The Irish at the time were creating the Dal Riata kingdom and doing some raiding themselves. They were called the Scoti by the Romans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoti

Have you done any research at all?

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 10:40 AM
The Bell Beakers who the Celts developed from are all R1b and all Indo-European. The Celts only emerged approximately 2,000 years ago after the R1b and Steppe explosion so explain your theory? You've made other claims about Celts which are easy to disprove. Are you being trollish?

No, I am not trolling.

Celtic people according to Greek mythology are related to Eastern Mediterranean people (J, I, E) so it's confusing to mix them with Indo-European haplogrups (R1a, R1b).

I can't separate Germanic People from Celtic (Those two are completely unrelated) However, people are still saying they all belonged to R1 haplogrup (which doesn't make any sense).

Also there was a Celtic migration to Western Balkans, and we have NO R1b whatsoever.

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 10:42 AM
Haplogroup I has zero ties with eastern mediterranean, they were WHG, so furthest apart from modern east meds as possible.

Slovenia and north-western Croatia have lot of celtic R1b (up to 20%), and these areas had historical celtic populations.

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 10:45 AM
I think Bosniensis deserves permaban, he doesn't want to learn after all sources and serious studies are presented to him, it leads me to conclusion he is malicious troll.

What's the point in pathological lying and spreaing misinformation you know is wrong, on puropse ?

:puke:

brennus dux gallorum
02-22-2018, 10:45 AM
Mostly linguocultural, with limited racial connections during historical times

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 10:48 AM
I think Bosniensis deserves permaban, he doesn't want to leran after all sources and seruous studies are presented to him, it leads me to conclusion he is malicious troll.

What's the point in pathological lying and spreaing misinformation you know is wrong, on puropse ?

:puke:

Screw you

I don't learn from people whom I don't trust.

Also Europeans should learn from US not the other way around.

Your inferiority complex makes you learn foreign history of balkans.

Only people from Balkans are qualified to write the history of Balkans.

Don't tell me what to write about... FEEL FREE to put me on ignore list.

I don't have inferiority complex like Croats.

I REJECT EVERYTHING WRITTEN BY NON-BALKAN HISTORIAN, cause they ignored our books, our historians, our educated people.

"PERMABAN"

Don't ever reply to my posts ever!

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 10:49 AM
^^^^
psychiatric case.

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 10:50 AM
Haplogroup I has zero ties with eastern mediterranean, they were WHG, so furthest apart from modern east meds as possible.

Slovenia and north-western Croatia have lot of celtic R1b (up to 20%), and these areas had historical celtic populations.

And were living in Greece!

20% of Ancient Greece were I2a P37

HOW ABOUT THAT?

https://i.imgur.com/UQsMGRx.gif

Grace O'Malley
02-22-2018, 10:52 AM
No, I am not trolling.

Celtic people according to Greek mythology are related to Eastern Mediterranean people (J, I, E) so it's confusing to mix them with Indo-European haplogrups (R1a, R1b).

I can't separate Germanic People from Celtic (Those two are completely unrelated) However, people are still saying they all belonged to R1 haplogrup (which doesn't make any sense).

Also there was a Celtic migration to Western Balkans, and we have NO R1b whatsoever.

OK I'm glad you're not trolling then. The Celts grew out of cultures like Unetice and Urnfield. These people were proto-Celtic. Celtic language is Indo-European and split off from Italic and was in contact with Proto-Germanic because Proto-Germanic has Celtic loan words. I doubt Greek mythology has anything to say about Celts because they only emerged about 2,000 years ago and the Greeks and Romans definitely looked on them as very foreign. This is all easily researched and I would like to see some of your sources as they are obviously not correct.

Even this Wiki article tells you who the Celts were.

If the Greeks thought the Celts were one of them then why this?

The first recorded use of the name of Celts—as Κελτοί—to refer to an ethnic group was by Hecataeus of Miletus, the Greek geographer, in 517 BC,[12] when writing about a people living near Massilia (modern Marseille).[13] In the fifth century BC, Herodotus referred to Keltoi living around the head of the Danube and also in the far west of Europe.[14] The etymology of the term Keltoi is unclear. Possible roots include Indo-European *kʲel 'to hide' (present also in Old Irish ceilid), IE *kʲel 'to heat' or *kel 'to impel'.[15] Several authors have supposed it to be Celtic in origin, while others view it as a name coined by Greeks. Linguist Patrizia De Bernardo Stempel falls in the latter group, and suggests the meaning "the tall ones".[16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts

There are plenty of Greek and Roman sources and they viewed the Celts as barbarians.

The Celtic languages form a branch of the larger Indo-European family. By the time speakers of Celtic languages entered history around 400 BC, they were already split into several language groups, and spread over much of Western continental Europe, the Iberian Peninsula, Ireland and Britain. The Greek historian Ephorus of Cyme in Asia Minor, writing in the 4th century BC, believed that the Celts came from the islands off the mouth of the Rhine and were "driven from their homes by the frequency of wars and the violent rising of the sea".

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 10:52 AM
And were living in Greece!

20% of Ancient Greece were I2a P37

HOW ABOUT THAT?

https://i.imgur.com/UQsMGRx.gif

Nothing to do with Celts.

I2a P37 is 15 000 years old.

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 10:55 AM
Nothing to do with Celts.

I2a P37 is 15 000 years old.

Oh Really?

Go find the map of Europe 2000 B.C. and check which was the major Haplogroup in UK, France and SPAIN = I2 P37

CONFIRMED!

It's just they got butchered by Germanic Invaders, according to your logic... Modern Europe doesn't have a single German in France, Italy, UK

WHO Destroyed Roman Empire?

CELTS?

I don't think so!

Aspar
02-22-2018, 10:57 AM
And were living in Greece!

20% of Ancient Greece were I2a P37

HOW ABOUT THAT?

https://i.imgur.com/UQsMGRx.gif

That's not true, I2a1b is very low in that graph you have shown.
Most of I2a1b in the Balkans came with the Slavs, that's a fact.
And I2a1b Dinaric is too young, with a TMRCA of 2200 years, to be native to the balkans.

Haplogroup I2a1b-L621
This branch is found overwhelmingly in Slavic countries. Its maximum frequencies are observed among the Dinaric Slavs (Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, Serbs, Montenegrins and Macedonians) as well as in Bulgaria, Romania, Moldavia, western Ukraine and Belarus. It is also common to a lower extent in Albania, Greece, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, and south-western Russia. I2-L621 (L147.2+) is also known as as I2a-Din (for Dinaric).

The high concentration of I2a1b-L621 in north-east Romania, Moldova and central Ukraine reminds of the maximum spread of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (4800-3000 BCE). No Y-DNA sample from this culture has been tested to date, but as it evolved as an offshoot from the Starčevo–Kőrös–Criş culture, it is likely that I2a was one of its main paternal lineages, and a founder effect could have increased considerably its frequency. The Cucuteni-Trypillian culture was the most advanced Neolithic culture in Europe before the Indo-European invasions in the Bronze Age and seems to have had intensive contacts with the Steppe culture before the expansion of Yamna to the Balkans and Central Europe (see histories of R1a and R1b). From 3500 BCE, at the onset of the Yamna period in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, the Cucuteni-Trypillian people started expanding east into the steppe of what is now western Ukraine, leaving their towns (the largest in the world at the time), and adopting an increasingly nomadic lifestyle like their Yamna neighbours. It can easily be imagined that Cucuteni-Trypillian people became assimilated by the Yamna neighbours and that they spread as a minority lineage alongside haplogroups R1a and R1b as they advanced toward the Baltic with the Corded Ware expansion. Alternatively, I2-L621 lineages could have lived in relative isolation from the mainstream Proto-Indo-European society somewhere around Ukraine, Poland or Belarus, then as the centuries and millennia passed, would have blended with the predominantly R1a populations around them. The resulting amalgam would have become the ancestors of the Proto-Slavs.

Nowadays, I2a1 is five to ten times more common than G2a in Southeast Europe, while during the Neolithic period G2a was approximately four times more common. What can explain this complete reversal? At one point in history, I2a1 lineages seem to have benefited from being on the winning side. Apart from a minor boost from (hypothetically) joining Yamna's westward expansion to Europe, the principal determining event that allowed I2a1b-L621 to become a major Eastern European lineage was probably the Slavic migrations from the 6th to the 9th century CE. Most modern Eastern Europeans belonging to I2a1b fit into the L147.2 (aka CTS10228, CTS2180 or Y3111) subclade, which is thought to have arisen 5,600 years ago (just before the Yamna period and the Trypillian expansion into the steppe), but has a TMRCA of only 2,300 years according to Yfull. The minority of I2a1b-L621 individuals negative for L147.2 are all found around eastern Poland, Belarus and western Ukraine, suggesting that this is where this lineage survived since the Chalcolithic. The I2a1b-L147.2 subclade seems to have expanded very fast from 1900 years ago, which is concordant with the timing of the Slavic ethnogenesis, considering that it takes a few centuries before one man can have enough male descendants to start having an impact at the scale of a population. This I2-L147.2 ancestor would have such an impact on the burgeoning Early Slavic population, still small 2,300 years ago, but booming.

After the Germanic tribes living in eastern Germany and Poland, like the Goths, the Vandals and the Burgundians, invaded the Roman Empire, the Slavs living further east filled the vacuum. Following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in 476, the Slavs moved in the Dinaric Alps and the Balkans. By the 9th century, the Slavs occupied all modern Slavic-speaking territories, apart from the eastern Balkans under the control of the Turkic-speaking Bulgars.

Nowadays northern Slavic countries have between 9% (Poland, Czech republic) and 21% (Ukraine) of I2a-L621, while southern Slavs have between 20% (Bulgaria) and 50% (Bosnia). The higher percentage of I2a-Din in the south is probably just due to another founder effect due to the fact that the South Slavs originated in western Ukraine, where the ratio of I2a to R1a was higher. Virtually all Dinaric I2a falls under the L147.2 branch, and the majority to the S17250 ramification, who descend from a common patrilinear ancestor who lived only 1,800 years ago.

Haplogroup I2a1b-L161.1
Commonly known in genetic genealogy circles as I2-M423-Isles, L161.1 is found at highest frequencies in western Ireland (5-10%) and the Scottish Highlands (1-5%), but is also found at low frequencies (> 1%) throughout Central and Western Europe, from Latvia, Lithuania and Belarus to the British Isles, and from Scandinavia to north-western Spain. It has also been found in Albania, northern Greece, Bulgaria and Romania.

The oldest known I2a1b-L161.1 individuals are the 8,000 year-old Loschbour man from Mesolithic Luxembourg, and a 7,800 year-old man from Motala in southern Sweden. I2a1b-L161.1 was probably scattered over most of Europe during the late Glacial and immediate postglacial periods, and in all likelihood integrated Neolithic society like all other Mesolithic lineages. I2a1b-L161.1 was very possibly one of the main Neolithic lineages in the British Isles during the Megalithic period, and would therefore have been among the men who built Stonehenge, Knowth, Newgrange and other great Megalithic sites. Its low frequency today and its confinement to the north-western and south-eastern fringes of Europe is indubitably the result of the numerous waves of Indo-European migrations over the last 5,000 years. The Proto-Celtic haplogroup R1b-L21 is now known to have arrived in Ireland around 2000 BCE (see Cassidy et al. 2015), only a few centuries after R1b first arrived in Central Europe. The transition was rapid, with R1b tribes overwhelming the Neolithic population of the British Isles in only a few centuries and pushing them further west and north, where L161.1 survives today.

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 10:58 AM
That's not true, I2a1b is very low in that graph you have shown.
Most of I2a1b in the Balkans came with the Slavs, that's a fact.
And I2a1b Dinaric is too young, with a TMRCA of 2200 years, to be native to the balkans.

Haplogroup I2a1b-L621
This branch is found overwhelmingly in Slavic countries. Its maximum frequencies are observed among the Dinaric Slavs (Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, Serbs, Montenegrins and Macedonians) as well as in Bulgaria, Romania, Moldavia, western Ukraine and Belarus. It is also common to a lower extent in Albania, Greece, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, and south-western Russia. I2-L621 (L147.2+) is also known as as I2a-Din (for Dinaric).

The high concentration of I2a1b-L621 in north-east Romania, Moldova and central Ukraine reminds of the maximum spread of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (4800-3000 BCE). No Y-DNA sample from this culture has been tested to date, but as it evolved as an offshoot from the Starčevo–Kőrös–Criş culture, it is likely that I2a was one of its main paternal lineages, and a founder effect could have increased considerably its frequency. The Cucuteni-Trypillian culture was the most advanced Neolithic culture in Europe before the Indo-European invasions in the Bronze Age and seems to have had intensive contacts with the Steppe culture before the expansion of Yamna to the Balkans and Central Europe (see histories of R1a and R1b). From 3500 BCE, at the onset of the Yamna period in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, the Cucuteni-Trypillian people started expanding east into the steppe of what is now western Ukraine, leaving their towns (the largest in the world at the time), and adopting an increasingly nomadic lifestyle like their Yamna neighbours. It can easily be imagined that Cucuteni-Trypillian people became assimilated by the Yamna neighbours and that they spread as a minority lineage alongside haplogroups R1a and R1b as they advanced toward the Baltic with the Corded Ware expansion. Alternatively, I2-L621 lineages could have lived in relative isolation from the mainstream Proto-Indo-European society somewhere around Ukraine, Poland or Belarus, then as the centuries and millennia passed, would have blended with the predominantly R1a populations around them. The resulting amalgam would have become the ancestors of the Proto-Slavs.

Nowadays, I2a1 is five to ten times more common than G2a in Southeast Europe, while during the Neolithic period G2a was approximately four times more common. What can explain this complete reversal? At one point in history, I2a1 lineages seem to have benefited from being on the winning side. Apart from a minor boost from (hypothetically) joining Yamna's westward expansion to Europe, the principal determining event that allowed I2a1b-L621 to become a major Eastern European lineage was probably the Slavic migrations from the 6th to the 9th century CE. Most modern Eastern Europeans belonging to I2a1b fit into the L147.2 (aka CTS10228, CTS2180 or Y3111) subclade, which is thought to have arisen 5,600 years ago (just before the Yamna period and the Trypillian expansion into the steppe), but has a TMRCA of only 2,300 years according to Yfull. The minority of I2a1b-L621 individuals negative for L147.2 are all found around eastern Poland, Belarus and western Ukraine, suggesting that this is where this lineage survived since the Chalcolithic. The I2a1b-L147.2 subclade seems to have expanded very fast from 1900 years ago, which is concordant with the timing of the Slavic ethnogenesis, considering that it takes a few centuries before one man can have enough male descendants to start having an impact at the scale of a population. This I2-L147.2 ancestor would have such an impact on the burgeoning Early Slavic population, still small 2,300 years ago, but booming.

After the Germanic tribes living in eastern Germany and Poland, like the Goths, the Vandals and the Burgundians, invaded the Roman Empire, the Slavs living further east filled the vacuum. Following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in 476, the Slavs moved in the Dinaric Alps and the Balkans. By the 9th century, the Slavs occupied all modern Slavic-speaking territories, apart from the eastern Balkans under the control of the Turkic-speaking Bulgars.

Nowadays northern Slavic countries have between 9% (Poland, Czech republic) and 21% (Ukraine) of I2a-L621, while southern Slavs have between 20% (Bulgaria) and 50% (Bosnia). The higher percentage of I2a-Din in the south is probably just due to another founder effect due to the fact that the South Slavs originated in western Ukraine, where the ratio of I2a to R1a was higher. Virtually all Dinaric I2a falls under the L147.2 branch, and the majority to the S17250 ramification, who descend from a common patrilinear ancestor who lived only 1,800 years ago.

Haplogroup I2a1b-L161.1
Commonly known in genetic genealogy circles as I2-M423-Isles, L161.1 is found at highest frequencies in western Ireland (5-10%) and the Scottish Highlands (1-5%), but is also found at low frequencies (> 1%) throughout Central and Western Europe, from Latvia, Lithuania and Belarus to the British Isles, and from Scandinavia to north-western Spain. It has also been found in Albania, northern Greece, Bulgaria and Romania.

The oldest known I2a1b-L161.1 individuals are the 8,000 year-old Loschbour man from Mesolithic Luxembourg, and a 7,800 year-old man from Motala in southern Sweden. I2a1b-L161.1 was probably scattered over most of Europe during the late Glacial and immediate postglacial periods, and in all likelihood integrated Neolithic society like all other Mesolithic lineages. I2a1b-L161.1 was very possibly one of the main Neolithic lineages in the British Isles during the Megalithic period, and would therefore have been among the men who built Stonehenge, Knowth, Newgrange and other great Megalithic sites. Its low frequency today and its confinement to the north-western and south-eastern fringes of Europe is indubitably the result of the numerous waves of Indo-European migrations over the last 5,000 years. The Proto-Celtic haplogroup R1b-L21 is now known to have arrived in Ireland around 2000 BCE (see Cassidy et al. 2015), only a few centuries after R1b first arrived in Central Europe. The transition was rapid, with R1b tribes overwhelming the Neolithic population of the British Isles in only a few centuries and pushing them further west and north, where L161.1 survives today.

I2 that went North and Eastern Europe went the FROM? BALKANS!

They are the same people who stayed on Balkans, even if they CAME to Balkans in 7th century they came HOME.

Aspar
02-22-2018, 11:02 AM
I2 that went North and Eastern Europe went the FROM? BALKANS!

They are the same people who stayed on Balkans, even if they CAME to Balkans in 7th century they came HOME.

Yeah, but that's not I2a1b Dinaric, which mutated later on.
Your argument is invalid, because than we will get to the argument "what is older?", the egg or the chicken.
With that argument, we are all Africans, get it??

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 11:02 AM
Oh Really?

Go find the map of Europe 2000 B.C. and check which was the major Haplogroup in UK, France and SPAIN = I2 P37

CONFIRMED!

It's just they got butchered by Germanic Invaders, according to your logic... Modern Europe doesn't have a single German in France, Italy, UK

WHO Destroyed Roman Empire?

CELTS?

I don't think so!

I2a is from pre-Celtic neolithic Britain (original WHG lineage that was absorbed by farmers), Bell Beakers (Celts) came from continental Europe and almost completely replaced native Britons in bronze age, in south-western Europe such as Iberian peninsula they made lesser impact, because it had more numerous neolithic population. And even there they left lot of DNA.

Germanic tribes settled in England, France and Italy, but they were far lesser in numbers, especially in north of Italy and that is why their languages were lost (absorbed by locals) but they left DNA in both haplogroups and austosomal.

North of France and east of England had stronger Germanic impact, that's why England isn't Celtic speaking today and in part of northern France Germanic languages survived until relatively recent.


Modern Europe doesn't have a single German in France, Italy, UK
:picard1: you wish...
https://pre00.deviantart.net/89d5/th/pre/f/2016/325/c/4/germanic_y_dna_combined_haplogroups_by_arminius187 1-d8fztsi.png

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 11:05 AM
I2a is from pre-Celtic neolithic Britain (original WHG lineage that was absorbed by farmers), Bell Beakers (Celts) came from continental Europe and almost completely replaced native Britons in bronze age, in south-western Europe such as Iberian penunsula they made lesser impact, because it has more numerous neolithic population. And even there they left lot of DNA.

Germanic tribes settled in England, France and Italy, but they were far lesser in numbers, especially in north of Italy and that is why their languages were lost (absorbed by locals)m but they ledt DNA in both haplogroups and austosomal.

North of France and east of England had stronger Germanic impact, that's why Engliand isn't Celtic speaking today and in part of northern France Germanic languages survived until relatively recent.


:picard1: you wish...
https://pre00.deviantart.net/89d5/th/pre/f/2016/325/c/4/germanic_y_dna_combined_haplogroups_by_arminius187 1-d8fztsi.png

Ok tell me this:

1. How do we identify:

a) FRANKS
b) LOMBARDS
c) NORMANS
d) SAXONS
e) VANDALS
f) GOTHS

They are mortal enemies of EUROPE and Roman Empire, people who Destroyed HELLENIC CULTURE in Western Europe, they
are not from HERE obviously, nor friends of Rome, Constantinople and everything that was Europe in 3rd century.

They DID NOT live in Gaul, Spain, Italy, and UK.

How do we identify them TODAY? Tell me their haplogroups and clades.....

YOU CAN'T BECAUSE ALL ARE THEIRS! Natives are exterminated like rats!

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 11:07 AM
They are the same people who stayed on Balkans, even if they CAME to Balkans in 7th century they came HOME.

Entire Europa was their home they were not limited to Balkans.

And we don't even know where I2 exactly emerged, it could have easily been western Europe, rather than south-eastern Europe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravettian

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 11:09 AM
Entire Europa was their home they were not limited to Balkans.

And we don't even know where I2 exactly emerged, it could have eaasily been western Europe, rather than south-eastern Europe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravettian

We do know, you don't obviously.

I was part of IJ Haplogroup and it came from Syria then split into I and J (mutation of IJ) then I emerged on NW part of Anatolia, J on the southern and Central Anatolia.
J populated Greece, I North of Greece.

J1 Haplogroup split into different direction just like I1

FTDNA Graphs says I2 emerged in Bosnia and Serbia then went to other parts of europe.

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 11:12 AM
How do we identify them TODAY? Tell me their haplogroups and clades.....
YOU CAN'T BECAUSE ALL ARE THEIRS! Natives are exterminated like rats!

Than don't be lazy and reasearch a bit. We already have studies on Anglo-Saxons in Britain (bit small in samples but still) and latest released paper about Langobards in Italy and Panonnia.

Langobards were mostly R1b U106 and I2a2 M223 which are both considered Germanic haplogroups, and few Anglo-Saxons in Britain had I1 (also Germanic).

Ofcourse they didn't exterminate natives, that's just moronic thaing to say.

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 11:13 AM
We do know, you don't obviously.

I was part of IJ Haplogroup and it came from Syria then split into I and J (mutation of IJ) then I emerged on NW part of Anatolia, J on the southern and Central Anatolia.
J populated Greece, I North of Greece.

J1 Haplogroup split into different direction just like I1

FTDNA Graphs says I2 emerged in Bosnia and Serbia then went to other parts of europe.

:lol:

studies, reasarch papers on that ?

You need to post it here.

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 11:16 AM
Than don't be lazy and reasearch a bit. We already have studies on Anglo-Saxons in Britain (bit small in samples but still) and latest released paper about Langobards in Italy and Panonnia.

Langobards were mostly R1b U16 and I2a2 M223 which are both considered Germanic haplogroups, and few Anglo-Saxons in Britain had I1 (also Germanic).

Ofcourse they didn't exterminate natives, that's just moronic thaing to say.

moronic you say?

How many reports from Constantinople have you read? Oh I forgot.. Schools ignore those reports "for unknown reason they accept only Frankish reports"

You say Langobards were R1b, then you say Romans were R1b... interesting, but Roman historians say:

"Those people are not of our kin, they are barbarians who live beyond Europe"

You see... something is terribly wrong... R1b came from direction of URAL mountians while IJ Haplogroup came from Syria > Anatolia > Balkans & Italy > Gaul

You see.. Completely different people... UNRELATED!

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 11:17 AM
moronic you say?

How many reports from Constantinople have you read? Oh I forgot.. Schools ignore those reports "for unknown reason they accept only Frankish reports"

You say Langobards were R1b, then you say Romans were R1b... interesting, but Roman historians say:

"Those people are not of our kin, they are barbarians who live beyond Europe"

You see... something is terribly wrong... R1b came from direction of URAL mountians while IJ Haplogroup came from Syria > Anatolia > Balkans & Italy > Gaul

You see.. Completely different people... UNRELATED!

Ok. No sense to argue with you :thumb001:

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 11:21 AM
:lol:

studies, reasarch papers on that

You need to post it here.

FTDNA

Steppe Horse barbarian (FRANKS; SAXONS, HUNGARIANS etc.. R1 people)

https://lundiak.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/r1-distribution-map.jpg

Romans:

https://lundiak.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/i_haplogroup_migration_map.png


Romans 2000 B.C (CELTS present)

http://www.abroadintheyard.com/wp-content/uploads/Europe-c-2000-BC-2k-jpg.jpg

Last Celtic Kingdom before destruction in 480 A.D (Ruler Syragius)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Reame_di_Siagrio_%28486%29.png/800px-Reame_di_Siagrio_%28486%29.png

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 11:27 AM
FTDNA maps aren't very good.

R1 comes from Altai for example, and here starting place is marked somewhere in south of Russia. And so on.

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 11:31 AM
FTDNA maps aren't very good.

R1 comes from Altai for example, and here starting place is marked somewhere in south of Russia. And so on.

Well I can understand you ignore my opinion, but you can't ignore opinion of people who work for YEARS 24/7 on DNA research.

I believe it's Altaic but they narrowed it to Kazakhstan so they don't have to draw entire MAP.

You wouldn't believe how much I have read on this subject, and of course I know that I am right... others deny cause .. Politics, Interests.

Europe has fallen to to those people from Altaic Mountains, you have seen yourself few days ago that Hungarians descended from Turks (as well as most of Russians)

also it makes this video TRUE!!


https://youtu.be/8a0ODTqPXkk

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 11:34 AM
Well I can understand you ignore my opinion, but you can't ignore opinion of people who work for YEARS 24/7 on DNA research.

I believe it's Altaic but they narrowed it to Kazakhstan so they don't have to draw entire MAP.

You wouldn't believe how much I have read on this subject, and of course I know that I am right... others deny cause .. Politics, Interests.

Europe has fallen to to those people from Altaic Mountains, you have seen yourself few days ago that Hungarians descended from Turks (as well as most of Russians)

I is native European. It came from west asia/middle east very far ago, but most likely I mutated in Europe.

Where did I2 mutate we don't know. It isn't even important. But what we know for sure, is that it was in Scandinavia before I1 , as serious reasearch papers stated.

Oldest I1 was found in neolithic Hungary, and this maps show different picture.

Bosniensis
02-22-2018, 11:39 AM
I is native European. It came from west asia/middle east very far ago, but most likely I mutated in Europe.

Where did I2 mutate we don't know. It isn't even important. But what we know for sure, is that it was in Scandinavia before I1 , as serious reasearch papers stated.

Oldest I1 was found in neolithic Hungary, and this maps show different picture.

I mutated this way:

When I Came to Balkans one group stayed others continued Traveling, then they went to Central Europe (one group stayed) other continued.

They are the same people it's just they mutated because they developed in separated multiple groups.

All I2 people are the same I2 people who lived among the different groups hence different mutations occurred.

Stearsolina
02-22-2018, 11:41 AM
I mutated this way:

When I Came to Balkans one group stayed others continued Traveling, then they went to Central Europe (one group stayed) other continued.

They are the same people it's just they mutated because they developed in separated multiple groups.

All I2 people are the same I2 people who lived among the different groups hence different mutations occurred.

blablablabla

Norb
03-14-2020, 05:47 PM
bump

Joso
03-14-2020, 05:51 PM
The Boston Celtics is a basketball franchise affiliated with the National Basketball Association and located in the city of Boston, Massachusetts. Founded on June 6, 1946, it is one of the only teams that has remained since it was created.

Creoda
03-14-2020, 06:06 PM
I can't, beyond language.

The only people who can claim to be Celtic today are Insular Celts and Bretons, but I'm uncomfortable calling them Celtic alone when their genetic Celtic-ness is debatable and most of them don't speak a Celtic language.

Daco Celtic
03-14-2020, 06:22 PM
It's a language, a culture, and a NBA basketball team.

https://i.imgur.com/L8yhVjR.png

Hajimurad
03-14-2020, 06:41 PM
Celtics were a different tribal peoples, speaking a languages belonging to one branch of IE family. They were roughly divided into:
1) Celts of Iberia (Galicians, Asturians, Cantabrians, Lusitanians etc) who mixed with Iberians and spoke Q-Celtic language.
2)Belgae (North-Eastern France and Britain). Spoke P-Celtic. Brythons could be a part of Belgae judging from tribal names and P-Celtic languages (Welsh and Breton).
3) Gauls (Most of France, North Italy, South Germany and Galatia). P-Celtic.
4)Gaels (Irish and Scots) mixed with Iberian-like aborigines of Britain and speak Q-Celtic.

Grace O'Malley
03-22-2020, 12:36 AM
Celtics were a different tribal peoples, speaking a languages belonging to one branch of IE family. They were roughly divided into:
1) Celts of Iberia (Galicians, Asturians, Cantabrians, Lusitanians etc) who mixed with Iberians and spoke Q-Celtic language.
2)Belgae (North-Eastern France and Britain). Spoke P-Celtic. Brythons could be a part of Belgae judging from tribal names and P-Celtic languages (Welsh and Breton).
3) Gauls (Most of France, North Italy, South Germany and Galatia). P-Celtic.
4)Gaels (Irish and Scots) mixed with Iberian-like aborigines of Britain and speak Q-Celtic.

Gaels grew out of the Bell Beaker culture. The neolithic population of Ireland and Britain was virtually non existent. Remember to differentiate the R1b clades. Irish R1b is predominantly L21 which is Bell Beaker and from what I can see looking at the different autosomals L21 obviously took a different route from the Steppe than either U152 and DF27. Also the Q / P Celtic divide is not thought to be important because the Insular Celtic languages of Goidelic and Brittonic have such shared practices that many believe that those languages evolved together in the islands. This is known as the Insular Celtic hypothesis.

It's still a bit of a mystery about whether the Celts were a uniform people and also how much Celtic movement occurred in places like the Isles. It does appear obvious that Celtic languages are older than just the Hallstatt and La Tene civilisations. Basically the Celts are still quite a mystery unlike the Germanics who are much more clear cut. I'm really getting impatient waiting for some of these crucial dna papers to come out. One from France is supposed to be coming out this month but no sign of it yet. :confused:

Samnium
03-22-2020, 12:42 AM
Celtic is mostly a linguistical/cultural thing, now of course there's a genetical link that bind all "Celtic" nations between them but it's pretty "weak" (in the sense that Celtic nations from the north are very close genetically to Germanic/Nordic populations that are not necessarily all in the "Celtic" area of influence).

Dick
03-22-2020, 12:46 AM
Anyone know What the Picts called themselves? Some evidence suggests that they were descendants of pre-Celtic British aborigines but some linguistic evidence suggests they spoke a Celtic language.

Kamal900
03-22-2020, 12:47 AM
Celtic is mostly a linguistical/cultural thing, now of course there's a genetical link that bind all "Celtic" nations between them but it's pretty "weak" (in the sense that Celtic nations from the north are very close genetically to Germanic/Nordic populations that are not necessarily all in the "Celtic" area of influence).

Well, the Insular Celts like Scots and the Irish are mostly Celtisized Brits who trace 90% of their genetic ancestry from the Bell Beaker culture which came from the Corded Ware culture of Central Europe rather than from the Hallstatt culture of Western Europe which is why they're genetically much more closer to Germanic peoples of Central and Northern Europe.

Kamal900
03-22-2020, 12:48 AM
Anyone know What the Picts called themselves? Some evidence suggests that they were descendants of pre-Celtic British aborigines but some linguistic evidence suggests they spoke a Celtic language.

They spoke a Brittonic Celtic language similar to Welsh, Breton and Cornish languages today. So, yeah, they were essentially a Celtic people who together with the Irish Gaels formed the Scottish nation and people.

Samnium
03-22-2020, 12:50 AM
Well, the Insular Celts like Scots and the Irish are mostly Celtisized Brits who trace 90% of their genetic ancestry from the Bell Beaker culture which came from the Corded Ware culture of Central Europe rather than from the Hallstatt culture of Western Europe which is why they're genetically much more closer to Germanic peoples of Central and Northern Europe.

Yeah I know that they are mostly Bell Beakers.

That's why lumping very different groups on a "genetical" Celtic label is meaningless.

Kamal900
03-22-2020, 12:53 AM
Yeah I know that they are mostly Bell Beakers.

That's why lumping very different groups on a "genetical" Celtic label is meaningless.

Yeah, but it's mostly an ethno-linguistic label rather than racial or genetics really. Pretty much all of the continental Celts got extinct since they got mixed and assimilated by the Romans, Germanic and Slavic peoples. Only the insular Celts remain which also includes the people of Brittany in France where their ancestors migrated from Britain in the 5th century AD to France due to the Anglo-Saxon migrations to the island.

Grace O'Malley
03-22-2020, 01:18 AM
There are obviously different practices also. Druidism appears to be a Northwestern practice and is said to have originated in the Isles where people came to study it. There appears to be long standing connections between NW France and Britain going back to the Iron Age and most likely earlier. Druidism was practiced by the Gauls and Insular Celts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druid

Imagine being one of these ancient people at Newgrange during the Winter solstice when the whole inner passage chamber was lit by the sun. That would have seemed like some very special magic.

https://www.boynevalleytours.com/images/newgrange-solstice.jpg
https://www.irishcentral.com/uploads/article-v2/2019/12/136387/cropped_Newgrange.jpg?t=1576253103
https://www.meathchronicle.ie/cache/250h2f4196c13c79b65ffd87e269d7d05bd0.jpg

Samnium
03-22-2020, 01:21 AM
There are obviously different practices also. Druidism appears to be a Northwestern practice and is said to have originated in the Isles where people came to study it. There appears to be long standing connections between NW France and Britain going back to the Iron Age and most likely earlier. Druidism was practiced by the Gauls and Insular Celts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druid

Imagine being one of these ancient people at Newgrange during the Winter solstice when the whole inner passage chamber was lit by the sun. That would have seemed like some very special magic.


Druids are also the reason why we don't have anything written from Gauls (pretty much, except some artifacts or some objects with some words), fascinating practice though.

Grace O'Malley
03-22-2020, 01:52 AM
Speaking of Druids one of the prominent druids in Irish mythology was Cathbad the chief Druid at the house of Conchobar Mac Nessa, King of Ulster. Druids had the gifts of prophecy, magic, wizardry and learning. The main story that I remember Cathbad from was Deirdre of the Sorrows. Before Deirdre was born Cathbad prophesied that she would grow up to be very beautiful but would cause much blood shed. Anyway its like an Irish Romeo and Juliet.

Deirdre was said to have green-irises stormy eyes and blond hair eye blinding and the colouring of her lover Naoise was hair as black as a raven, skin as white as snow, and cheeks as red as blood.

https://bardmythologies.com/deirdre-of-the-sorrows/

Dick
03-22-2020, 03:14 AM
They spoke a Brittonic Celtic language similar to Welsh, Breton and Cornish languages today. So, yeah, they were essentially a Celtic people who together with the Irish Gaels formed the Scottish nation and people.

The Romans called them Picts probably due to their tattoos but what did they call themselves?