So Celts were North Europeans after all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peterski

It seems most dates are in BP (before present), not in BC. See Supplementary Table 3.

=========

Wait for SX18.

---

Main supp data page 7 says BC(I also see where it says BP later):

https://static-content.springer.com/...MOESM1_ESM.pdf

Looks like they made a mistake, I'm willing to guess BC is the accurate one, it has to be otherwise pure neolithic farmers survived up to 1500 BC in Switzerland, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharpFork

the iron age one is kinda East-European in G25(10% Eastern HG) and has R1a.

---

Could be a merchant who came from Biskupin. Or maybe from somewhere around Hungary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peterski

It seems most dates are in BP (before present), not in BC. See Supplementary Table 3.

=========

Wait for SX18.

---

No it's always BC, otherwise it doesn't make sense, they explitclty mention they have 1 early Iron Age sample and 1 Late iron age and Roman one.

Code:

---

Target: Viriato_scaled
Distance: 3.0897% / 0.03089746
29.0        St_Gallen
28.0        Aesch23_scaled
20.6        Constance
15.2        Aesch25
7.2        MX265_scaled

---

Code:

---

Distance to:        Viriato_scaled
0.04799128        St_Gallen:SX20
0.06301488        Constance:MX257
0.06347499        Constance:MX265
0.06347499        MX265_scaled
0.06634102        Constance:MX254_2
0.06669808        Constance:MX283
0.06784758        Constance:MX252
0.06835502        Constance:MX275
0.06875447        Constance:MX286
0.07497707        Basel_Landschaft:SNPRA63
0.07683257        Constance:MX288
0.08808025        Constance:MX279
0.09392052        Basel_Landschaft:SNPRA64
0.10264727        MX190_scaled
0.10312953        MX188_scaled
0.10791903        MX192_scaled
0.11179348        MX195_scaled
0.11460139        Aesch23_scaled
0.11539719        Alsace:SX32
0.12524452        MX212_scaled
0.14577873        Basel_Landschaft:Aesch25
0.14577873        Aesch25_scaled
0.16742646        Aesch23
0.17179223        MX212
0.17196938        MX265

---

Actually not a bad fit considering how old these are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vid Flumina

Rhaetian? It is dated 178BC-2AD from Wartau, on the border with Liechtenstein.

Spoiler!

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._CH_Helvet.png

Admixture proportions seem identical to Late Iron Age Prenestini sample R435

---

you see annency(annecy) in france and the "allobroger",the allobroges indeed is a gaulish tribe at the IV century BC

i'am from a bit up north(west from the lake) in burgandy,some major tribes like the burgonds or the vandals came from northen and goes southern by this side,indeed i advance a theory than the proto-germanic tribes from denmark goes southern east by this way until northern italian tyrol ,given later the proto-celtic tribes between -1500 to -400 BC and way before the roman empire
i had post something related about a crazy bitch afro-portuguese leftie harpie claiming than europe is not white ,forget the crazy bitch but i had demonstrated by A+B the presence of the "modern white man" since a while in this area

Ötzi 3350-3100 B.C. 2020+3350= -5370 BC(4 546 ± 15 years BP),found near the austrian border (92 m.) in northern italy ,in bolzano

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...useum_Wien.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...truktion_1.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96tzi but you couldn't considered Ötzi connected to the proto germanics/celts it's way to much previous and too far

i resume my "theory":
-the proto-germanic tribes core from denmark goes and gave the proto-celtic tribes later on an north east to south west axis from denmark to tyrol area
and followed way later by the Hallstatt/La Tene iron age (-1200/-400 approx.)
sorry if i take some liberties and some shortcuts but it's more a way of logic
the proto-germanic culture and tribes gave the proto-celtic culture and tribes ,who themsleves became the more or less united "modern" post-proto germano-celts tribes , gaving the embryos of the first forms of organized societies and states, whom,later, directly strongly influenced the proto-viking tribes,like this the loop is looped
to my eyes but i can be wrong you can't splitted the proto-germanic tribes of the proto-celtic tribes,I like to speak of the proto and of the germano-celts

look where is located the proto-germanic core map
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...s_ca._AD_1.png

the danish bronze age (-1800/-500 BC) core map
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Bronze_Age.png
burgonds,lombards,goths and the herulis are from scandinavia called scandza the matrix of the people at this era
(L'influence scandinave en Poméranie et dans le nord de la Pologne à partir de -1300 paraît même avoir été si forte que ces deux régions sont incluses dans la culture de l'âge du bronze danois )
the scandinavian influence in Pomerania in the northen Poland seems to be so strong starting by -1300 than these two areas are included in the danish bronze age culture
and by the same way it came to confirm what i was thinking than northern poland and germany is like the baltic states genetically influenced by the scandinavians,if you are pomeranians tell me if i'am wrong?

seen from our recent modern era with the actual germany and poland states
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._pomerania.png



end of the danish bronze age -750 BC
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...0BC-1AD%29.png

and the halstatt/la téne core map
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._in_Europe.pnghttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-Celts.svg.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XenophobicPrussian

Main supp data page 7 says BC(I also see where it says BP later):

https://static-content.springer.com/...MOESM1_ESM.pdf

Looks like they made a mistake, I'm willing to guess BC is the accurate one, it has to be otherwise pure neolithic farmers survived up to 1500 BC in Switzerland, lol.

---

Remarkably, we identified several female individuals without any detectable steppe-related ancestry up to 1000 years after this ancestry arrives in the region, with the most recent woman without such ancestry dating to 2213–2031 calBCE. This suggests a high level of genetic structure in this region at the beginning of the Bronze Age with potential parallel societies living in close proximity to each other.

Of course BP is the mistake and should be BC. Otherwise oldest samples would be much younger than Middle Neolithic, which is age of oldest samples in suplemental.

Look at first pages of it. I compared it with first table. https://static-content.springer.com/...MOESM1_ESM.pdf

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


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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XenophobicPrussian

Do you have SX18?

---

Possible Rhaetian SX18:

Code:

---

SX18_scaled,0.126344,0.152329,0.048271,-0.00646,0.051394,-0.007251,0.0047,-0.000692,0.016362,0.035354,0.002598,0.016485,-0.016055,-0.006055,0.001629,0.000663,0.006128,0.00266,0.003897,-0.006628,0.006364,0.006183,-0.011709,-0.006145,0.000958

SX18,0.0111,0.015,0.0128,-0.002,0.0167,-0.0026,0.002,-0.0003,0.008,0.0194,0.0016,0.011,-0.0108,-0.0044,0.0012,0.0005,0.0047,0.0021,0.0031,-0.0053,0.0051,0.005,-0.0095,-0.0051,0.0008

---

One more sample MX191:

Code:

---

MX191_scaled,0.121791,0.116786,0.058831,0.072352,0.02462,0.029284,0.00282,0.003923,0.001636,-0.01877,-0.005846,-0.001499,-0.006244,-0.019405,0.019951,0.015646,-0.001695,0.007348,0.001508,0.005378,0.001622,0.009027,0.001849,0.009158,-0.007185

MX191,0.0107,0.0115,0.0156,0.0224,0.008,0.0105,0.0012,0.0017,0.0008,-0.0103,-0.0036,-0.001,-0.0042,-0.0141,0.0147,0.0118,-0.0013,0.0058,0.0012,0.0043,0.0013,0.0073,0.0015,0.0076,-0.006

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XenophobicPrussian

See, thing is, Celts aren't going to be like those northern French ones either. They're too northern, would still need way too much Roman to get modern Swiss from N. French+Scandinavian+Roman. Even if we say La Tene/Hallstatt period Celts still formed a cline from N. Iberians to N. French by 500 BC+, that still means the average is around SW/South/Central French, which is what I've been saying after I made that thread about the Lech samples(originally was saying Basque-like of course, which is still close enough regardless).

The dates say it all, SX20(closest to Spanish_Barcelona): 1693-1609 BC is the youngest sample on there(excluding MX265, the eastern one), most the closest to Calais_French ones are older than 2000 BC(not that they didn't exist later, 1 out of 6 middle 1000s BC Lech_MBA clustered around N. French/Belgium rather than Iberians/SW French like the rest and one 1800 BC one from this paper is Britanny like). If we take SharpFork's word for it on SX18, the only other Iron Age sample in this paper(200 BC+) and go by the steppe/farmer/WHG ratio it has, fits right with what northern Iberians have, around 30% steppe, 15% WHG(although I haven't been able to find anything about this sample in supp data), and the other one closest to Croats.

I was right all along. :)

---

Is this that unlikely?

https://i.imgur.com/SdRmuq4.png

Even if you the historical samples with lower steppe there is a strong preference for Italic. You can test that yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharpFork

https://i.imgur.com/SdRmuq4.png

---

For Swiss Italians you got a rather bad fit though.

BTW, Swiss Romansh is what I would like to see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canton...sons#Languages