PDA

View Full Version : Spread of R1b1a2a1a L11 Germanic Italo Celts in western Europe



Fire Haired
09-21-2013, 04:20 AM
http://coffeetimeromance.com/CoffeeThoughts/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/holoce77_late-iron-age-celts.jpg
The reason i am making this thread is to make the the idea or i guess theory known. That R1b1a2a1a L11 which takes up about 50% of western European Paternal lineages was spread with Germanic, and Italo Celtic languages. I dont get deep into the culture's because Wikipedia doesn't give enough info. But i tell what cultures most likely spread what and when. This is not a crazy idea i see that even FTDNA (FTDNA R1b page (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1b/default.aspx?section=results)) and Eupedia(Eupedia R1b page (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml)) says this is most likely what happened. And if it is true they are who brought red hair over 1% in most of west Europe and spread Gedorasian in west Europe. That means western Europeans owe alot of their ancestry not just paternal lines to the first Germanic Italo Celts to arrive about 5,000ybp. Like with Balto Slavic people( signature Y DNA R1a1a1b1 Z283) in eastern Europe this is like the ultimate western European ethnicity Germanic Italo Celtic(signature Y DNA R1b1a2a1a L11). Since i am so mixed with so many different countries Germanic Italo Celtic is the only think i can say i am about 100%.
What are Germanic Italo Celts????
The word is confusing because when people hear Germanic they think Germany or Scandinavia when they hear Italo they think Italy and when they hear Celtic they think Ireland or Scotland. Germanic Italo Celtic is a branch of the Indo European language (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIndo-European_languages&ei=GPkFUpX3KfLCyAH1y4DIAQ&usg=AFQjCNH4ljJrFaKQ6pkZqj9zDxCT_y1PXg). Or at least Germanic and Italo Celtic are branches that were spread by similar cultures and from the same R1b1a2a1a L11 source. It maye also be orignally R1b1a2a1 L51 but this is also found in Iran so i am not sure. From R1b1a2a1a L11 it breaks down into Germanic R1b1a2a1a1 S21 and Italo Cetic R1b1a2a1a2 S116 but there are also very rare Germanic subclades.

Fire Haired
09-21-2013, 04:21 AM
Origin of Germanic Italo Celts
Indo European languages would have probably begun around Ukraine, Russia, and north mid east 6,000-8,000ybp. Indo Iranian and Balto Slavic languages spread with R1a1a1b S224 and out of Russia and Ukraine which are the areas of Indo European homeland are according to the Kurgen hypothesis(Y DNA spread by Indo Europeans (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91971-Y-DNA-spread-by-Indo-Europeans-(R1a1a1-M417-R1b1a2a1-L51)-(R1b1a2a-L23-R1b1a1-M73-Etc-))). But Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11 grandfather R1b1a2a L23 is over 20% in Caucus, Anatolia and Iraq. It is also over 10% in alot of southeastern Europe. The mid east is the place were the oldest subclades of R1b originated like R1b1 P25. R1b itself may have originated there about 18,000ybp.

Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1 L11 fathers originated in the mid east and at some point came to Europe either southeast Europe or Russia and Ukraine. Eupedia thinks it came as its grandfather R1b1a P297 in the Neolithic age about 7,000-8,000ybp then formed into R1b1a2 M269 and R1b1a2a M73. Then R1b1a2 M269 migrated with Indo European languages from Ukraine down into southeast Europe about 6,000ybp forming into R1b1a2a L23. Then to western Europe forming into R1b1a2a1 L51 and R1b1a2a1a L11. I think it came out of the mid east as R1b1a2a L23 but then after that had the same migrations. FTDNA i read thinks R1b1a2a L23 came to southeast Europe from Anatolia about 7,000-8,000ybp in the early Neolithic then later spread to western Europe.

FTDNA says the age estimates of Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11 is about 6,500-5,000ybp so arriving in the late Neolithic. It would have mixed and conquered Bell Beaker culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FBeaker_ culture&ei=0ME8Uo3PIobtrQHy54CwDA&usg=AFQjCNGHE0meTJn8GI3H7bY1LYnItUwLmw&sig2=eVOh7ZeEt5_iNNizMesJCA&bvm=bv.52434380,d.aWM). two R1b samples from 4,600ybp remains in bell BEaker GErmanyd efintley shows Germanic Italo Celts had arrived and since 31 Neolithic Y DNA samples from west Europe dating anywhere from 7,000 to 4,735ybp not one had R1b. Totally backs up this idea of Germanic Italo Celtic origin of western European R1b1a2a1a L11 and it arriving in the late Neloithic then spreading mainly in the bronze age. They split into Italo Celtic(with some rare Germanic subclades) R1b1a2a1a2 S116 (FTDNA estimates 5,500-4,000ybp) while in central Europe most likley Unetice culture and Germanic R1b1a2a1a1 S21(FTDNA estimates 5,500-4,000ybp) while migrating north. Since they would have mixed with Bell Beaker culture this can explain why early Germanic Nordic rbonze age culture and early Italo Celtic cultures like Unietce and Urnfield technically are defined as descendants of Bell Beaker culture. And some Bell Beakr culture migrations when it became apart of the bronze age could be migrations of Germanic Italo Celts.



Migration map of R1b from Eupedia.


http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-migration-map.jpg

It is hard to say who exactlley geneticalley the people who were the first Germanic Italo Celtic speakers were. There has been a preview of a Scientific paper that will come out soon about DNA from 5,000 and 6,000 year old Yamna (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FYamna_c ulture&ei=e_wFUtfGPMHCywHA0oDwAQ&usg=AFQjCNHb6Rh3o3cAWFpKHCAPoWXk2Xd4rQ) suspected to be Indo European people in southern Ukraine and Russia. Only some info was released in June 2013 they said the mtDNA haplogroups (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHuman_m itochondrial_DNA_haplogroup&ei=oPwFUq7dCOSVygHPqIDADw&usg=AFQjCNGodTyGJApWvakdpGZh3rd10msH0Q)( Marker in Mitochondrial chromosome passed form mother to children) all had typical Caucasian (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCaucasi an_race&ei=uvwFUuCAHeLcyQGRpoC4Dw&usg=AFQjCNFe63PRnK6XAFd9spbPHi6VdfpMDg) groups so mid east and Europe with no Mongoloid (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMongolo id&ei=0vwFUpytGO6GyQGK-oDAAw&usg=AFQjCNGnBwTMR6TY59K_n8Ep_LwOnM4bBQ) groups. They had pale skin like modern euopeans and had the same phenotype as modern Europeans. Also that they had more brown eyes than most modern Europeans but around the same rate as people in that area today.

DNA from Indo Iranian Indo Europeans in central and eastern Asia some are 3,800 years old. Had mainly light hair and eyes and some mummies had red hair for info on their Y DNa and mtDNA hg's click on this() (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?90089-Where-did-proto-Indo-Iranian-speakers-ancestry-orignate).This shows that there were diff ethnic groups in Russia, Ukraine, north mid east area 6,000-8,000ybp who knows which one the proto Germanic Italo Celts were apart of or what mixes. Since there is a lot of evidence red hair in western Europe comes from the spread of Germanic Italo Celts that would mean they were European and probably more related to the type Indo Iranians came from. THeir common ancestry would be from pre Indo European speakers in Russia and Ukraine area.

Here you can see from the K12b aust.DNa test. That Gedrosian which is a off branch of west Asian is very popular around Iran, Pakistan, and north India. It seems to match the distribution of R1b1a2a L23(and descendants in Europe and mid east. From what I have read R1b is suppose to have originated around Iran and Pakistan. So that Gedrosian component stayed in heavily r1b people even when they migrated to west Europe. This shows probably what happened is a mid eastern R1b L23 people made there way to either Ukraine or southeast Europe some how got Indo Europen language maybe they already spoke it then they made their way to west Europe. They would have inter married with Europeans probably very heavily in Ukriane but stayed pure on the paternal side maybe because they conquered people groups in Ukraine and Russia.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Gedrosian-admixture.gif
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b.gif

Here is the R1b family tree it gives the people group or area it originated which helps.


http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-tree.gif

Fire Haired
09-21-2013, 04:21 AM
Italo Celts

Map of Italo Celtic R1b S11/P312 some very early italo Celtic speakers mixed with proto Germanic speakers while both were in central Europe. So there are also Germanic branchs of R1b S116 but they are pretty rare.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Celtic_Europe.gif

Like i said before the Italo Celts split from the Germans in modern day central Germany. Then migrated to central Europe starting Unetice culture about 4,500-4,300ybp they also formed into R1b S116/P312 during this time which is estimated to be about 5,500-4,000 years old by FTDNA.

bronze swords from Unetice culture

http://static.environmentalgraffiti.com/sites/default/files/images/swords-found-diskjpg.img_assist_custom-600x215.jpg


R1b1a2a1a2c L21 branch
http://www.tattooarchive.com/assets/images/tattoo_history_images/kelts_wm.jpg

Celtic R1b1a2a1a2c L21is estimated according to FTDNA to be about 5,500-4,000ybp and would have orignated around France. It most likely migrated from Tumulus culture, Unetice, or Bell Beaker culture during the bronze age in modern day France and conquered Britain and Ireland somewhere between 3,000-4,300ybp with Insular Celtic languages as the majority of their Y DNA. And some R1b1a2a1a2c L21 is stayed in western Europe. The book of invasions written by Irish monks in the 1000's ad. Say there were 7 major invasions of Ireland the last one was one by Irish ancestors who were Gealic Celts who conquered the Fir blog. This could be talking about Celtic conquering of Ireland about 3,000-4,000ybp. They say the those Celts they invaded are modern Irish ancestors. And there is alot of DNA evidence that moden Irish are mainly decended from those Celtic invaders(British ancestry almost all from Celtic and Germanic invaders (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92232-British-ancestry-almost-all-from-Celtic-and-Germanic-Conqueres))

Germanic tribes Angeals, Jutes, and Saxons and maybe others all coming from around Denmark, Netherlands, and northern Germany conquered southern and central Britain from 400-550ad. The western Roman empire was becoming weak and the Britons depended on Rome for military they had also lost alot of their identity. Many Insular Celts from Briton retreated into Britanny in western France which is why R1b1a2a1a2c L21 is so popular there. There were also invasions of Vikings from mainly around Denmark and south Scandinavia So all of these invasions lowered the percentages of R1b1a2a1a2c L21 in Britian and raised percentages of it in Scandinavia and Iceland.

Map of the distribution of R1b1a2a1a2c L21 before all the Germanic invasions in the late Roman period and middle ages R1b L21 would be as popular as it is in Ireland in all of Britain.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-L21.gif

Fire Haired
09-21-2013, 04:22 AM
R1b1a2a1a2a Df27 branch
http://ancientweb.org/images/explore/AWExploreBanner_Spain.jpg
R1b1a2a1a2a Df27 most likelyoriginated in France in the bronze age around 4,000ybp. It takes up the vast majority of R1b1a2a1a2 S116 in Iberia which is about 50-80% of the total Y DNA. So it would have been the main Y DNa haplogroup of the Celts that migrated to Iberia it is hard to say when they came. The Bell Beaker Culture most likely had slowly become Germanic Italo Celtic from 5,000-4,000ybp. The first time Iberia became apart of the bronze age was 3,500-4,000ybp which could be a sign of when the mainly R1b1a2a1a2a Df27 Celts arrived. Tumlus or Urnfield cultures around 3,000-3,600ybp could have also been when Celts migrated to IBeria. The only for sure time Celts were in Iberia was with Hallstat culture 2,700-2,500ybp.

Not all Iberians became total Celts. Some kept their native language but by the way R1b1a2a1a2a Df27 is dominate in all of Iberia today including non Indo European Basque speakers makes it seem like they were probably still conquered by Celts just not in language.

map of R1b1a2a1a2a Df27 subclades M153(marker of Basque and ancient Aquitaine speakers basque are the last left), SRY 267. These are only two subclades of R1b Df27 basically almost all R1b in Iberia is R1b Df27.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-DF27.gif

Fire Haired
09-21-2013, 04:23 AM
R1b1a2a1a2b S28/U152 branch

http://patricklavin.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/BronzeCelticWarrior.jpghttp://owlsmag.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/war_ef21.jpg
First of all what really surprised me when i first learned this. Is Gauls culture Hallstatt later La Tene goes back to the same father as Italic Villnoeavean(culture Rome was born in) called Urnfield culture in bronze age central Europe. They are also united by a very high amount of R1b1a2a1a2b ancient Romans saw Gauls as their oppiste it would be probably very hard for some to believe how connected they were. I have already explained when Germanic Italo Celts came and how proto Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a2 S116 most likley began in central Europe around 5,000-4,000ybp with Unetice culture R1b1a2a1a2b S28 is estimated according to FTDNA to be 3,500-5,000ybp in central Europe and most likely first spread with Urnfield culture. Celts made very strong migrations deep the most western areas of Europe forming into R1b1a2a1a2c L21 and R1b1a2a1a2 Df27. R1b1a2a1a2b S28 is kind of the eastern branch of Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a2 S116 it stayed in the areas it originated.

Unetice later gave way to Tumlus culture then Urnfield culture in central Europe. and it was very spread out. I dont know that much about the specific parts of their culture and how they spread if alot of it was just other people adopting their culture by trade or if it was conquest probably a mix. I cant really get a good enough idea from Wikpedia. So i am just giving the basic's.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/UrnfieldCulture.jpg/240px-UrnfieldCulture.jpg
Bronze sword and Armour from warrior burial 1,000bc(about 3,000ybp) Urnfield culture in northern Italy



[*=center]http://imageshack.us/a/img823/5298/villanov2.png


Urnfield you can see eon the map made migrations to Italy which was the migration of Italic languages and R1b1a2a1a2b S28 into Italy. Bronze age Urnfield culture in Italy later formed into Iron age Villnoeaven culture around 800bc. I don't know the whole history of the migration and conquest of Italy by Italic speakers in archaeology, Villnoeaven only took up a small part of central Italy. But i know that eventulley all of Italy even Sicily became Italic and i know this happened by around 600-800bc if u want to learn more click History of Italy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Italy) and History of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rome). Once again i am not an expert on the detailed culturally stuff. But i do know Italic tribes were very influenced by Greece. The oldest Italic writing is from a bronze plate from 800bc around the time of Villnoeaven culture and it was based on Greek alphabet. You can just see the Italic tribes and the non Italic Estrucans in Italy culture was extremely similar to Greeks and did not obviously show connection to their brother Hallstatt Celtic culture in central and western Europe.

I don't know the whole history of this but eventulley Romans conquered Italy of mainly other Italic;s, then also Celts, and Estrucans by 218bc(Roman conquest of Italy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_conquest_of_Italy)). And after that with Conquered almost the entire Celtic world and all land that borders the Mediterranean sea. They were the road that Christianity took to spread across the Mediterranean and become the official religion of the Roman empire in 380ad about 350 years after Jesus was crucified. Christianity also became the main religion for Celts in Ireland, Picts in modern Scotland, and eventulley all Germanic tribes and if it wasn't for the Roman empire Christianity would have a hard time getting to those areas. It completely changed culture in Europe and Rome did in alot of other ways. So i know Rome kind of created the western world or was extremely important. It is one of the most important and powerful civilizations or just people group in human history. click here History of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rome). This thread is really just about how, when, and what cultures spread Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11 so sorry if i don't give alot of info.

Bronze age Urnfield culture in central Europe formed into late bronze age and early iron age Celtic Hallstatt culture around 900bc. Which then spread very far in central and western Europe. Then Hallstatt culture formed into la Tene culture in central Europe around 450bc. Which later spread very far east and west. Hallstatt La Tene Gauls were also influenced by the Mediterranean world which Ceasar pointed out and said the less civilized Gauls were the bravest and hardest to conquer.

Map of the expansion of Hallstatt and La Tene Celtic cultures by Eupedia To learn more about them click on Hallstat culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallstatt_culture), La Tene culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_T%C3%A8ne_culture), and the Gauls (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauls).
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Hallstatt_La_Tene_map.gif

Summary of Deadliest warrior epiosde Celt vs Persian Immortal. The Celt is a La Tene Gaul they are kind of the most famous Celts the ones we have the most writting from Greeks and Romans describing them. They are the famous Celts who fought naked(they had technology for Armour just a sign of bravery), spiked their hair, well lots of Celts did that including Picts in Scotland. They Sacked Rome them and their ancestor culture Hallstatt conquered alot of the powerful Estrucan civilization and other parts of northern Italy conquered alot of the Balkans in eastern Europe and a bunch of other stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sii_BR-Y6FI&feature=player_detailpage#t=11
Bronze sword from Hallstatt culture in central Europe from 1,000bc about 3,000ybp. You can see it is very very very similar to the 3,000 year old bronze sword from Urnfield culture in northern Italy. So i think this is a style of sword that goes back about 3,300 years or more in Urnfield culture in central Europe.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/Lat%C3%A9nium-%C3%A9p%C3%A9es-bronze.jpg/220px-Lat%C3%A9nium-%C3%A9p%C3%A9es-bronze.jpg

Map of R1b1a2a1a2b S28 which most likely first spread with Urnfield culture father to Celtic Hallstatt and Italic Villnoeaven. You can see that it extends in the Balkans areas La Tene Gauls conquered in the 400-200'sbc and in central Turkey they were named Galatians by Greeks. It goes pretty deep into Germany and even Hungary because Urnfield and Hallstatt culture existed in those areas. Since Germanic tribes did not migrate deep into modern Germany until the Iron age and during the Roman empire before this R1b1a2a1a2b S28 would probably be more popular. It is also pretty deep in Britain which probably is because of contact with Hallstatt and La Tene Gauls.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif

R1b1a2a1a2d L238 and R1b1a2a1a2e Df19

These are Germanic branches of R1b1a2a1a2 S116. But are very rare. I could not find really any info on them just that L238 is Nordic and Df19 is Anglo Saxon or from around Netherlands and Denmark.

Fire Haired
09-21-2013, 04:23 AM
Germanics


http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSc1PrluiSb5VnR46IQkIdgRg3GR2Klc VFVA55jrB-JNAneRAi4 (http://www.theapricity.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=viking+history+channel&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=Q4HeHUAuQi6enM&tbnid=nsp4qZH3eAwOmM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.beyondhollywood.com%2Ffirst-promo-trailer-for-the-history-channels-new-scripted-show-vikings%2F&ei=IAoHUuvsFeHhygHa0YAw&bvm=bv.50500085,d.aWc&psig=AFQjCNG-AeIJ3VAFeoviwzc2O6QUR7ySTQ&ust=1376279237238750)

Map of Germanic R1b S21/U106
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S21.gif
Map of total Germanic Paternal lineages. While Germanic speakers migrated accroos central Europe 4,000-4,500ybp they mixed with the natives and got some I2a2 and I1a subclades. When they conquered south Scandnavia 3,500-4,000ybp they spread I2a2 and got alot of I1a2 and some R1a Z284. So during Iron age Germanic migrations they did not just spread R1b S21 they actulley probably spread more I1a and I2a2. This map combined all R1b S21/U106, I1 except subclades of Finnish origin, I2a2a M223, and R1a Z284. I think it is kind of un accruate because all of those haplogroups except R1b S21/U106 orignated in non Germanic speaking people that Germans later conquered and mixed with. So alot of I2a2a M223, non finnish I1, and R1a Z284 was not spread by Germans. R1a Z284 came from proto Balto Slavic speaking Corded ware culture thatsruled souther Scandnavia till Germans came 4,000-3,500ybp. Almost all non finnish I1 in Scandnavia was there before Germans and same with I1 in central Europe.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Germanic_Europe.gif


The proto Germanic speakers split from Italo Celtic speakers in Central Germany about 4,500ybp during this time forming into R1b1a2a1a1 S21 which is estimated according to FTDNA to be about 5,500-4,000 years old. ItMigrating north conquering Netherlands, northern Germany, Denmark, and southern Scandinavia from 4,000-3,500ybp. They began the Nordic bronze age culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FNordic_ Bronze_Age&ei=8xs9UofbCYTlqgGm-4C4AQ&usg=AFQjCNEWmRehGQZq-2JvzcKfoyaRC_TJvQ&sig2=xfMx7FQZTnnyG3gD0g-Dgw&bvm=bv.52434380,d.aWM) which lasted till 500bc. While Germanic speakers conquered central Europe they mixed with the natives and got some I2a2 and I1a subclades when they conquered south Scandinavia they spread I2a2 and got alot of I1a2 and some R1a Z284. So during Iron age Germanic migrations they did not just spread R1b S21 they also spread more I1a and I2a2

Map of Nordic Bronze age culture

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Nordic_Bronze_Age.png

It seems German speakers stayed in the areas they originated until around 700bc. There may have been some R1b1a2a1a1 S21 in central Germany before this. That could mean there were people who spoke a related language to German, spoke a Germanic language, or were R1b1a2a1a1 S21 people conquered by italo Celtic cultures. (Possibly R1b1a2a1a1 S21 from 3,000ybp German Urnfield culture (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29038-I2a2b-R1a-L664-and-R1b-S21-from-3-000ybp-German-Urnfield-culture)).

Here is a map that kind of shows the major Germanic migrations starting around 700-500bc.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UNNuKM7bubs/TaTQYyISgAI/AAAAAAAAAno/w9e3yl-wjmo/s400/germanic+expansion+map.PNG



map of Germans and their language family in 1AD. Blue North Germanic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Germanic_languages), Red North sea Germanic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Germanic), Orange Weser-Rhine Germanic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weser-Rhine_Germanic), Yellow Elbe Germanic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbe_Germanic), Green east Germanic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Germanic_languages)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Germanic_dialects_ca._AD_1.png/220px-Germanic_dialects_ca._AD_1.png

Starting around 200bc there were Germanic migration across the Baltic sea to Poland and they later spread acroos pretty much all of Europe not Ruled by Rome. The east Germanic tribes are Vandals and Goths. U can see R1b1a2a1a1 S21 is very spread out in eastern Europe and alot of the I1 M253 probably also was spread by east Germanic tribes. From about 400-550ad Angeals, Saxons, and Jutes conquered southern Britain which is why There are two Germanic languages in Britain English and Scots and why it is those areas with very high amount of R1b1a2a1a1 S21 and I1 M253. Also after Rome all of western Europe at one time or another was under a Germanic kingdom. Which is why R1b1a2a1a1 s21 is somewhat popular in northern Italy and goes pretty far south into Italy and why it is in eastern France. To learn more about Germanic peoples click on(Germanic peoples (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FGermani c_peoples&ei=qR09Uvv6M8rSqgHJ5ICwBw&usg=AFQjCNHSCnne-1y-3iNVBw8uyDDpwD8moA&sig2=8i8uGX5L-YNp9bq-jDoPCA&bvm=bv.52434380,d.aWM)).

Fire Haired
09-21-2013, 04:25 AM
This shows all R1b in Europe. I am talking specifically about Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11. Which would show much more of a connection with distribution of red hair areas with 1% or more.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b.gifhttp://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/red_hair_map_europe.jpg
I have been thinking this for a few months did the R1b1a2a1a Germanic Italo Celts who arrived in west Europe 5,000ybp spread red hair. I described how i think Germanic Italo Celtic spread acroos western Europe and when on my thread Germanic Italo Celts. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?93100-Germanic-Italo-Celts) I didn't do it perfectly i did not explain the different cultures and stuff like that. Or go into detail about about the people. But i gave a basic idea of how and when they spread and in what cultures which FTDNA R1b page says the same(click here (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1b/default.aspx?section=results)). Some criticized me for being to romantic or Patriotic about them and saying their connected with red hair i was just trying to make it exciting and i am not being biased about this. I defintley don't think they are the original source of red hair. U can see in my thread Origin of red hair (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91491-Origin-and-ancient-History-of-red-hair). Red hair exists in Samartians who have no traces of European in globe13 test. Also red hair exists in Urlaic Udmurts in volga Russia at 10-15% as high or hogher than anywhere in western Europe. Also red hair was pretty popular in proto Indo iranian speakers in northern Russia (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?90089-Where-did-proto-Indo-Iranian-speakers-ancestry-orignate). Red hair exists throughout Europe but is extremely rare i think it originated in the mid east 60,000-80,000ybp but first went over 1% in Russia 12,000-20,000ybp.

If it is true red hair was brought over 1% in west Europe by Germanic Italo Celts this would mean a huge portion of western Europeans ancestry is from proto Germanic Italo Celtic speakers. Heavily red haired people like in the British isles might mainly descend from Germanic Italo Celts not native western Europeans. The dissertation of red hair maps that show only areas with 1% or more almost perfectly matches the map of R1b in Europe but really comes from subclade R1b1a2a1a L11. It seriously borders the R1b1a2a1a L11 Germanic Italo Celtic world and the rest of Europe. There is 1-3% in areas of Poland which had alot of Gothic and Vandal settlement and Germanic R1b1a2a1a1 S21. also southern Croatia which had alot of Italo Celtic Urnfield settlement and a pretty good amount of Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a2 S116.

I am for sure that red hair was brought up over 1% n Scandinavia by the spread of Germanic speakers who migrated out of central Europe and arrived in southern southern Scandinavia 4,000ybp and started Nordic bronze age culture. Here is how i know the connection with the distribution of pre Celtic pre Germanic I2a2 in Scandinavia which matches the distributions of Germanic R1b1a2a1a1 s21 and red hair at 1% or more.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S21.gifhttp://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/red_hair_map_europe.jpghttp://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif

To me it is pretty obvious Germanic speakers spread red hair to Scandinavia or at least raised it to 1% or more. Why couldn't Italo Celts done the same in western Europe. The Gedorsian in K12b test shows total connection with R1b in Europe which is almost all under R1b1a2a L23. The British isles in western Europe has the highest they also have the highest R1b1a2a1a L11 and red hair so maybe most ancestry from proto Germanic Italo Celts i made that argument in this thread(British almost all ancestry from Celtic and Germanic invaders (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92232-British-ancestry-almost-all-from-Celtic-and-Germanic-Conqueres)). Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11 grandfather R1b1a2a L23 would have come out of the north mid east or at least its great great grandfather or whatever at some point 6,000-10,00ybp it arrived in southeast Europe or southern Russia. So the high amount of red hair would be from the maternal side and Europeans in one of those areas they inter married with i wonder if somehow deep mtDNa subclades cane trace it.

Since red hair is so much under the borders of heavily R1b1a2a1a L1 and Germanic Italo Celtic speaking areas it is obvious to me there is no way this is from the Neolithic western Europeans. The borders and everything is just to much evidence for me i cant really think of any other explanations than Germanic Italo Celts. Click he (http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2013/04/hundreds-of-prehistoric-scandinavian.html)re this project excepts to get pigmentation genes from Bronze age Corded ware people in central and northern Europe from about 3,000bc(5,000ybp). I except no red hair all brown and blonde like people in Poland and most in Baltic area today. But if they get Pigmentation from Bell beaker people or another people in central Europe from 5,000ybp like the R1b samples from Bell Beaker. I except at least some red hair it might prove this idea. I except that if they test for it they might find from 100 Y DNA samples a almost only R1b1a2a1a L11 people with over 10 having red hair maybe 20. and the surrounding non R1b1a2a1a L11 people will have all Brown and blonde which would be huge evidence for this i guess theory. The proto Germanic Italo Celtic speakers i think had around 20% red hair.

rms2
09-21-2013, 10:13 PM
That's a lot to digest. I would recommend next time scaffolding the information a little, posting a small, easily digestible portion and then awaiting a response before posting more. I won't read book-length stuff on these forums, not unless it's posted by some author I already know I really enjoy. I doubt I'm alone in that sentiment. I don't mean to be insulting. I have to watch the length of my own posts, as well.

I can't even attempt to address all you have posted above. I will say, however, that I think it is a fundamental error to conflate the Italo-Celtic and Germanic subfamilies of Indo-European. Even the idea that Italic and Celtic stem from the same parent dialect is controversial, but I don't know of anyone who draws all three branches from a single parent this side of PIE itself.

I also think that you, as a modern man, belong to some subclade well downstream of L11; you just haven't tested positive for the intervening SNPs yet. When you eventually do, they will tell their own story.

Fire Haired
09-22-2013, 12:26 AM
I also think that you, as a modern man, belong to some subclade well downstream of L11; you just haven't tested positive for the intervening SNPs yet. When you eventually do, they will tell their own story

Geno 2.0 tests for Germanic? R1b1a2a1a1 S21/U106, Italo Gaulish(Urnfield culture?) R1b1a2a1a2b S28/U152, and Celtic R1b1a2a1a2c L21. Our direct male line all we know goes back to Scotland or England L21 and S21 take up almost all of Britain's R1b. So I know we have something very very very very very rare I think probably R1b1a2a1a2a Df27. Because I but our haplotype into one of those predictors and every time R1b North/South was most likely. Later I found out the predictor was out of date and now R1b North/South is under R1b1a2a1a2a Df27 which is over 50% in Iberia, over 20% in most of France, and 1-5% in British isles. I am hoping for R1b1a2a1a L11* because that is the original Germanic Italo Celtic form probably what those 4,600ybp Bell Beaker R1b samples. Or had. Or proto Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a2 S116/P312*.

Fire Haired
09-22-2013, 12:42 AM
I remember u saying something about some think Bell Beaker began around the black sea. But since 22 y DNA sample from Terrills southwest France not one had R1b and it is around 70-80% there today shows the Celts had not arrived. Age estimates shows R1b1a2a1a L11 arriving central Europe at the earliest 6,000-5,000ybp. Then the subclades u see today Italo Gaulish?? R1b1a2a1a2b S28.U152 would have expanded starting only 4,000-3,500ybp perfect timing for the begging of Urnfield culture the father of Italic Villnoeaven and Celtic Hallstat. Age estimates say that R1b1a2a1a L11 subclades first really expanded and became popular in the bronze age. Perfectly matches up with most likley early Germanic Nordic bronze age culture and early Italo Celtic Unetice culture.

palamede
09-22-2013, 07:59 AM
[I]Origin of Germanic Italo Celts

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Gedrosian-admixture.gif
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b.gif

Here is the R1b family tree it gives the people group or area it originated which helps.



2 maps not acceptable for different reasons :

The first one was linked to Dieneske's obsession about Indo-european wave come from South-West Asia. This Gedrosan composant is probably illegitimate and should be severed in 2 independant components at least : one spred from Indus Valley to South West Asia (linked to Indian Valley (or Harappa) Culture) and the other come from East Europe (real IE expansion), spred in several directions to West of Europe and South Central Asia

The second one is wrong for Central France and south France. For Provence in South East France, they don't respect the results of Study of Myres et al giving

Region____________________NB_____R-M269__R_U152___U152/M269__N U152
France East________________25_____60,0%____16,0%____26,7% ______4____Myres____possible
France____________________16_____43,8%____18,8%___ _42,9%______ 3 Myres_____ a lot too weak
France West_______________14_____57,1%____21,4%____37,5%_ ______3___Myres
France____________________43_____60,5%____20,9%___ _34,5%_______9___Cruciani____possible : same M269 frequency in Belgium, but there is more hg I in Belgium probably.
Bouches du Rhone (at mouth)_207_____67,6%____16,9%____25,0%______35__ Myres
Var (coastal, E of Rhone)______68_____66,2% ____19,1%____28,9%______13 __Myres
Vaucluse (upstream Rhone)____61_____60,7%____14,8%____24,4%_______9__ _Myres
Alpes de Haute Provence______31_____80,6%____12,9%____16,0%______ _4___Myres
France South_______________38______60,5%____10,5%____17,4 %______4____Myres

France Ille-et-Vilaine 82 80.5% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Haute-Garonne 57 78.9% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Loire-Atlantique 48 77.1% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Finistère 75 76.0% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]_____________82% in a study of Brest University with 100% inland and non_R1b hgs in coastal areas.
France Basques 61 75.4% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Vendée 50 68.0% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Baie de Somme 43 62.8% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]

You can say Maciano (Eupedia writer) his frequencies for Central France are not fiable because based with 2 bad studies which did not removed immigrates of 20th and 21th centuries , he suppressed all the messages (not only the mine ones) which are doubtful about the veracity of his maps for France specially for J1 and E1b1b and maybe excess of J2 .
1) Paris Forensic Institute is completely wrong while Lyon (66%) and Strasburg (67%) Forencic Institute gave possible results.

2) Ramos-Luis study was wrong to do this study with the National Blood Institute blocked by the ambiguous laws and agressive lobbying of leftish trade unions and leagues. Results in Paris contain 21,5% hg E including 11% of sub-saharian sub-hgs of E. Studies in other centers are also dubious except Britanny where immigration started very recently due to a long-time tradition of best natality in long-time faithful catholic lands.

We can say the frequencies of Y-haplogroups are still unknown in the three quarters of France. and probably the present and historical frequencies will remain unknown for a long time. For the present time, the law forbids to measure, for historical time, the informal power will continue to forbid or to sabotage.

Webb
09-22-2013, 04:05 PM
2 maps not acceptable for different reasons :

The first one was linked to Dieneske's obsession about Indo-european wave come from South-West Asia. This Gedrosan composant is probably illegitimate and should be severed in 2 independant components at least : one spred from Indus Valley to South West Asia (linked to Indian Valley (or Harappa) Culture) and the other come from East Europe (real IE expansion), spred in several directions to West of Europe and South Central Asia

The second one is wrong for Central France and south France. For Provence in South East France, they don't respect the results of Study of Myres et al giving

Region____________________NB_____R-M269__R_U152___U152/M269__N U152
France East________________25_____60,0%____16,0%____26,7% ______4____Myres____possible
France____________________16_____43,8%____18,8%___ _42,9%______ 3 Myres_____ a lot too weak
France West_______________14_____57,1%____21,4%____37,5%_ ______3___Myres
France____________________43_____60,5%____20,9%___ _34,5%_______9___Cruciani____possible : same M269 frequency in Belgium, but there is more hg I in Belgium probably.
Bouches du Rhone (at mouth)_207_____67,6%____16,9%____25,0%______35__ Myres
Var (coastal, E of Rhone)______68_____66,2% ____19,1%____28,9%______13 __Myres
Vaucluse (upstream Rhone)____61_____60,7%____14,8%____24,4%_______9__ _Myres
Alpes de Haute Provence______31_____80,6%____12,9%____16,0%______ _4___Myres
France South_______________38______60,5%____10,5%____17,4 %______4____Myres

France Ille-et-Vilaine 82 80.5% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Haute-Garonne 57 78.9% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Loire-Atlantique 48 77.1% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Finistère 75 76.0% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]_____________82% in a study of Brest University with 100% inland and non_R1b hgs in coastal areas.
France Basques 61 75.4% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Vendée 50 68.0% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]
France Baie de Somme 43 62.8% Balaresque et al. (2009)[8]

You can say Maciano (Eupedia writer) his frequencies for Central France are not fiable because based with 2 bad studies which did not removed immigrates of 20th and 21th centuries , he suppressed all the messages (not only the mine ones) which are doubtful about the veracity of his maps for France specially for J1 and E1b1b and maybe excess of J2 .
1) Paris Forensic Institute is completely wrong while Lyon (66%) and Strasburg (67%) Forencic Institute gave possible results.

2) Ramos-Luis study was wrong to do this study with the National Blood Institute blocked by the ambiguous laws and agressive lobbying of leftish trade unions and leagues. Results in Paris contain 21,5% hg E including 11% of sub-saharian sub-hgs of E. Studies in other centers are also dubious except Britanny where immigration started very recently due to a long-time tradition of best natality in long-time faithful catholic lands.

We can say the frequencies of Y-haplogroups are still unknown in the three quarters of France. and probably the present and historical frequencies will remain unknown for a long time. For the present time, the law forbids to measure, for historical time, the informal power will continue to forbid or to sabotage.

It is a shame because extensive testing in France would probably unlock a wealth of genetic information pertinent to the various P312 clades.

Fire Haired
09-22-2013, 05:31 PM
Palamede I think you have good points even Maciamo has said France is very very under sampled for Y DNa and it is against the law to take one like from FTDNA, Geno 2.0, ancestry.com, etc. He even says on his Y DNA maps page that the percentages in France are the most problematic. Honestly I trust Maciamo everything he says is not assumptions or anything and he is honest about making mistakes. It would make sense Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a2 S116/P312 would be much more popular in France than what Maciamo's maps say. Since France was a huge part of the ancient Celtic world u know with the Gauls France and central Europe were the center of Hallstat then la Tene cultures. Celts quickly made migrations out of central Europe deep into France probably 4,000ybp forming into R1b1a2a1a2c L21 and R1b1a2a1a2a Df27 France was were the mainly R1b1a2a1a2c L21 Celts in the British isles came from and where the mainly R1b1a2a1a2a Df27 Celts in Iberia came from.

I am kind of surprised how popular J1 and E1b1b are in France mainly central France about as popular in in Italy, Iberia, and southeast Europe. I was thinking somehow that may be connected with why dark hair is as popular in central France as those areas since J1 and E1b1b originally were not European. But same with Germanic Italo Celtic R1b L11 grandfather R1b L23. E1b1b V13 deifntley spread in Europe during the Neloithic age there is a 7,000ybp Neloithic sample in north Spain to prove it was there. and other E1b1b M73 which is its father may have spread too. and some J1 also may have spread in Neolithic so the J1 and Eb1b in central France may be pre Celtic. I was also thinking since aust dna has shown a huge amount of mid eastern inter marriage in Italy and southeast Europe(mainly Greece) came probably in the Greco Roman age and brought a lot of mid eastern and southeast European R1b branches like R1b1a2a L23 and also a lot of E1b1b, J2, and J1 since all those haplogroups are more popular in Italy than Sardine and those people aust dna results are almost identical to Neloithic euro samples. Maybe that's were the J1 and E1b1b in central France is from I don't know or maybe there are not enough samples to get a accurate percentage.

TigerMW
09-24-2013, 11:03 AM
What are Germanic Italo Celts????
The word is confusing because when people hear Germanic they think Germany or Scandinavia when they hear Italo they think Italy and when they hear Celtic they think Ireland or Scotland. Germanic Italo Celtic is a branch of the Indo European language (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIndo-European_languages&ei=GPkFUpX3KfLCyAH1y4DIAQ&usg=AFQjCNH4ljJrFaKQ6pkZqj9zDxCT_y1PXg). Or at least Germanic and Italo Celtic are branches that were spread by similar cultures and from the same R1b1a2a1a L11 source. It maye also be orignally R1b1a2a1 L51 but this is also found in Iran so i am not sure. From R1b1a2a1a L11 it breaks down into Germanic R1b1a2a1a1 S21 and Italo Cetic R1b1a2a1a2 S116 but there are also very rare Germanic subclades.



I don't thing the term coined "Germanic Italo Celt" is particularly useful for some of the reasons that RMS cited.

You are obviously an avid reader which is fantastic. I applaud you. Please consider reading Jean Manco's new book. You can read about it over at http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?755-Ancestral-Journeys-The-Peopling-of-Europe-from-the-First-Venturers-to-the-Vikings You can order it on-line at Amazon.com.

I would not say Jean's story is in total disagreement with Maciamo Hays'. Jean has just done a very good job of methodically researching and assembling her perspective. One part of her approach I appreciate is that even though she does not gloss over sometimes cruel realities she does a good job of not tinting or coloring her communications.

Fire Haired
09-24-2013, 10:05 PM
I don't thing the term coined "Germanic Italo Celt" is particularly useful for some of the reasons that RMS cited.

You are obviously an avid reader which is fantastic. I applaud you. Please consider reading Jean Manco's new book. You can read about it over at http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?755-Ancestral-Journeys-The-Peopling-of-Europe-from-the-First-Venturers-to-the-Vikings You can order it on-line at Amazon.com.

I would not say Jean's story is in total disagreement with Maciamo Hays'. Jean has just done a very good job of methodically researching and assembling her perspective. One part of her approach I appreciate is that even though she does not gloss over sometimes cruel realities she does a good job of not tinting or coloring her communications.
Actulley I never read and I have always hated reading since I could read. That is why I hate English class I uselly don't read the books I just get an idea from listing to people in class in clip notes which works out. And for me the term Italo Celtic was hard to understand at first and deifntley Germanic Italo Celtic. I did not know what Celtic was till a few years ago I thought it just mean Scottish and Irish people I barley knew what GErmanic tribes were either.

rms2
09-25-2013, 12:24 AM
Actulley I never read and I have always hated reading since I could read. That is why I hate English class I uselly don't read the books I just get an idea from listing to people in class in clip notes which works out . . .

Great Caesar's ghost! :behindsofa:

Man, you need to get over that. Better learn to like reading somehow. You'll be much better off, believe me.

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 01:18 AM
I don't like people making books that take 5 years to write or whatever, and for sure if your doing the entire history of a continent. So many new things are found every year my opinion has changed a lot in the last few months the book will go out of date pretty soon. A book I don't think is the best way to spread idea's or learn more while reading the book someone might change their opinion. I understand I have to learn to read for school and it will help in other things too like grammar.

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 01:35 AM
I saw her introduction and I already dis agree. Sure Europeans have a lot of ancestry from Near eastern farmers that spread 9,000-6,000ybp but for sure mainly descend from Pre Neolithic Europeans. The farmers probably introduced mtDNA T(mainly T2 then T2b, J, K(mainly K1), maybe X2, possibly I, and W, and then defintley some H and U subclades. Y DNA G2a, E1b1b V13, possibly some J1, J2, and T. Aust dna samples have shown vast majority in globe13 majority the group they call med with significant minorities North Euro(from hunter gather inter marriage), southwest Asian, and west Asian. Med is the main one and is very popular in Europe. North Euro is the only for sure to have been in Europe before farming and overall is a little more popular than med and is 80% in Finnish and Suomi, over 65% in people east of Germany and north of Romania and about 60% in central Europe and British isles.

Who would think the majority of Europeans ancestry is from brown skinned mid eastern farmers who spread only 9,000-6,000ybp. When u have people in northern Scandinavia a area that did not begin to farm till the bronze age 5,000-4,000ybp and in some areas of Scandinavia there were hunter gathers just 4,000ybp. Neolithic Y DNa hapogroups are extremely rare in Scandinavia basically only found n southern Sweden and Norway. I cant explain it all but I have heard many times how Finnish and Sami are closest relatives to Mesolithic hunter gather samples. They look no different than for example Germans or French obviously the over all paleness of Europeans not just skin color is pre Neolithic so the majority of their ancestry.

Also it is true Europeans closest relatives are mid easterns and north Africans but that has nothing to do with the spread of farming. Just they are in the same family group called Caucasians maybe there is another name. She is write that the exact genetics of areas of Europe have changed like crazy in the last even 5,000 years a huge reason is Indo European migrations but a lot of those Indo European speakers migrating were Europeans so mainly not non European mix. It is pretty cool that she wraps it all in a book and I bet it is very accurate. If anything a TV documentary would be better history channel does that for world history but most is simplified BS.

TigerMW
09-25-2013, 01:50 AM
I saw her introduction and I already dis agree.
...
Please, let's take one issue at a time. Please cite/quote something Jean said and tell us why you disagree.

You've already posted prolifically on your views. That's great. If you disagree with somebody please be specific and take it one at a time so we can follow along.


It is pretty cool that she wraps it all in a book and I bet it is very accurate. If anything a TV documentary would be better history channel does that for world history but most is simplified BS.

You lost me a bit. I think you are saying she is accurate but that you disagree. Please rewrite what you meant about TV. Does that have anything to do with Jean's book?

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 02:10 AM
In recent years scientific advances have released a mass of data, turning cherished ideas upside down. The idea of migration in prehistory, so long out of favor, is back on the agenda

She gives an idea the genetic history of Europe is unexpected and very recent like Neolithic when u cant say for sure. And I already showing the evidence I have it is not.


Ancient DNA links Europe to its nearest neighbors. It is not a new idea that farming was brought from the Near East, but genetics now reveal an unexpectedly complex process in which farmers arrived not in one wave, but several. Even more unexpected is the evidence that the European gene pool was stirred vigorously many times after farming had reached most of Europe.

I think she is overrating the Neolithic which I have seen people do way to much. Genetic evidence has showed a continuity in y DNA of Neolithic farmers acroos western Europe from either 7,000 or 5,000ybp not a sign of multiple migrations. If anything it was one genetic family of farmers that spread I showed why I think that in my last post.


Climate change played a part in this upheaval, but so did new inventions such as the plough and wheeled vehicles. Genetic and linguistic clues also enhance our understanding of the upheavals of the Migration Period, the wanderings of steppe nomads, and the adventures of the Vikings.

This part I basically agree with the spread of Indo Europeans. two major ones Balto Slavs with Corded ware culture starting about 5,000ybp and R1a1a1b1 Z283 is one of the most obvious. Then Germanic Italo Celts with R1b1a2a1a L11 but I think there is a possibility Indo European languages began in the north mid east and then spread to the steppes really Russia and Ukraine people can understand the area more if u say that.

I am against her writing a book about this because the genetic part is what changes the most and her book could go out of date in the next few years.


You lost me a bit. I think you are saying she is accurate but that you disagree. Please rewrite what you meant about TV. Does that have anything to do with Jean's book?

I think what she is saying is somewhat accurate. And about the TV thing everything is more awesome on TV a history channel doc on this or something would be pretty cool. And with TV doc's they are forgotten after a few years then u can make updated doc's. But history channels Story of all of us was full of simplified BS!!! Since they want to make money more than be accurate maybe making serious history doc's on TV wont work.

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 03:15 AM
I have to admit the theory i so strongly believed in about the Germanic Italo Celtic origin of R1b1a2a1a L11 in western Europe(click here (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1350-Spread-of-R1b1a2a1a-L11-Germanic-Italo-Celts-in-western-Europe)). Does not show constancy with non Celtic languages in eastern Iberia were R1b P312 is still around 60% and then in western France were Aquitaine language family the one Basque is in was spoken and R1b P312 is around 70-80%, Then Etruscans and other non Indo Europeans in pre Roman northern Italy were R1b S28 is over 40%. Does not connect but the Germanic italo Celtic theory still makes perfect sense. Not everyone has to adopt their language and the age estimates for the spread of R1b1a2a1a L11 subclades still fit with Germanic Italo Celts. and what about the British isles never strongly under Urnfield or Hallstat culture which both were considered the first Celts for a while but why do they speak a Celtic language maybe because they have 80% R1b L21 brother to Hallstat and Italic R1b S28.

I cant see how literally right before Germanic and Italo Celtic languages began to spread with the begging of Unetcie culture about 4,3000ybp and Nordic bronze age culture 3,500-4,000ybp. r1b1a2a1a L11 subclades rapidly spread acroos western Europe and the age estimates for certain subclades spread like r1b S28 is to young for Bell Beaker culture. Then maybe u can say Germanic Italo Celtic speakers adopted the R1b L11 then spread it but wouldn't it make more sense they had it in the first place. I am still considering other theory's since figuring out history of people and migrations over 100's of years is extremely complicated there is almost never a simple answer.

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 03:29 AM
I think people need to understand there is a pretty easy answer to R1b L11 being so dominate in western Europe including in Basque. Look at England and lowlands of Scotland both have Germanic languages English and Scots. The area the Angeal, Saxons, and Jute tribes invaded Britain from in 400-600ad was around modern day Netherlands and Jutes from Denmark. Where R1b S21 is about 30-40% in England and lowlands of Scotland it is 20-30%. I1 is about 15% in the Netherlands and Germany and 40% in Denmark it is 15% in lowlands of Scotland and England but is partly due to Vikings. Same reason why red hair is 10-15% in Ireland, highlands of Scotland, Wales, and Cornwall and 5-10% in England and lowlands of Scotland just like Netherlands and why fair is is more popular in England and Scotland than Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, and northern Scotland. The reason why Germanic Y DNa and blood is so high in Germanic speaking areas of Britian is because they conquered. '


Same reason why Celtic R1b P312(60% L21) is 80% in areas of the British isles that still have Celtic languages. and why R1b P312 overall is 80% in western coast of France. and why R1b S28 is around 40% in northern Italy, Why R1a1a1b1 Z283 is 60% in parts of Poland and about 30-60% in eastern Europe. Why Indo Iranian R1a1a1b2 Z93 is about 30% in the Indus valley. Why Germanic R1b S21 is 20-30% in southern Sweden and Norway. Conquest is the best answer for the spread of R1b1a2a1a L11 in western Europe, Who better to conquer than Indo Europeans with wicked chariots and bronze swords. The Indo Iranians conquered almost all of central asia, Pakistan, northern India., Iran, areas of Iraq and Syria, Antolian speakers conquered Anatolia. The Myceans conquered Greece.

Germanic Italo Celts since their Indo Europeans in my opinion are the best possible people to do that conquering. How do u think they spread their language the same way Germans did to Britain, the same way Myceans did to Greece, the same way Indo Iranians did to India and with this they spread their Y DNa which could only be R1b1a2a1a L11.

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 04:38 AM
It seems like R1b L11 was born in west Europe and so were its sons R1b P312 and R1b U106. R1b S116 obvisdouly is very western European with far western branches Df27 and L21 and central European branch S28. When looking at age estimates of L21 it probably spread in western was major in spreading to the British isles over 3,000 years ago I would guess 3,500-4,500ybp. While S28 spread with Italic languages and Urnfield culture in Italy 3,200-3,000ybp and its son Celtic Hallstat in central Europe spread it even more throughout Europe. Celtic languages are older though that Urnfield or Hallstat. Because were does the Insular Celtic language family in the British isles come from it cant be Urnfield or Hallstat. Probably the migration of their brother R1b L21 3,500-4,500ybp same with Celtic languages in Iberia with Df27 and small minority L21.

Then R1b S21 I think is with out a doubt connected with Germanic languages and Nordic bronze age culture. It probably migrated north maybe starting 4,000ybp developed proto Germanic language. Then Germanic languages spread like crazy in the Iron age and of course Britain 400-600ad were it is 20-30% in Germanic speaking areas English and Scots not Wales, Ireland, Highlands of Scotland, or Cornwall. I know now they speak English but that's because they were conquered by the English but their blood is still almost only from the Celtic British and they they still have their Celtic languages.

Maciamo map of R1b migration to me so far makes the most sense. Except I dis agree that R1b P297 came out of the Near east to Russia then formed into R1b M269 and R1b M73 I think it formed into M73. But m269 is Near eastern and so is L23. I think L23 was migrated out of the Near east then to southeast Europe then to western Europe by then as R1b L51 and L11.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-migration-map.jpg

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 04:44 AM
Also I and other including Maciamo have made the argument that red hair was spread or at least raised above 1% in western Europe by the spread of R1b1a2a1a Germanic Italo Celts. Which would show genetic relation ship with Italo Celts and Germanic's and besides R1b l11 is evidence their languages migrated together. I give my reasons here (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1350-Spread-of-R1b1a2a1a-L11-Germanic-Italo-Celts-in-western-Europe) scroll down the Germanic Italo Celtic stuff its on the bottom. This would also mean since at somepoint either R1b1a P297, R1b1a2 M269, or R1b1a2a L23 had to migrate out of the mid east to Europe this would mean the red hair if it is for real is from Europeans they inter married with while migrating to west Europe. I know there can be other explanations but I think it could be liget.

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 04:56 AM
Basque R1b has a lot to do with my idea of Germanic Italo Celtic spread so it is totally the right topic. Origin of Basque language is probably really hard to figure out with no relatives and no culture to say it spread from. If it doesn't show connections with non Indo European Iberian languages and since Aquitenne language which Is in the same family as Basque used to be spoken mainly on the west coast of France it probably may not be in the same family as Iberian. Maybe it is in a family from pre Celtic France who knows were it came from before that. Since Y DNa from farmers in Europe from 7,000ybp are mainly G2a and farmers in Europe from 5,000ybp. Thee does not seem to be any major migrations maybe just the spread of the idea of copper and other things. So maybe it goes back to the Neolithic and who the farmers could have adopted hunter gathers language so even before that.

TigerMW
09-25-2013, 05:27 AM
She gives an idea the genetic history of Europe is unexpected and very recent like Neolithic when u cant say for sure. And I already showing the evidence I have it is not.
If you really read her book she is only stating a fact that there are many long held notions of very limited migrations so you must misunderstand her. It's easy to take things out of context if you haven't done the reading. I highly recommend you read the book so you can criticize accurately. It's quite hard to do if you really feel as you've stated earlier.
Actulley I never read and I have always hated reading since I could read. That is why I hate English class I uselly don't read the books I just get an idea from listing to people in class in clip notes which works out . . .


I think she is overrating the Neolithic which I have seen people do way to much. Genetic evidence has showed a continuity in y DNA of Neolithic farmers acroos western Europe from either 7,000 or 5,000ybp not a sign of multiple migrations. If anything it was one genetic family of farmers that spread I showed why I think that in my last post.
Please rewrite this. I get lost when you say things like "If anything it was one genetic family of farmers that spread I showed why I think in my last post". I'm not sure what it is the farmers spread. No one's grammar is perfect, but your postings are quite hard to understand sometimes. I believe a moderator has already asked you to check your grammar and spelling. Consider this a second warning.

Fire Haired
09-25-2013, 05:38 AM
What I mean is Gok4 a 5,000 year old farmer from southern Sweden had very similar aust dna results to Otzie 5,300 year old farmer from alps Sweden. y DNA G2a is dominate in multiple sites from acroos western Europe ranging from 7,000 and 5,000 years old. globe13 test the farmers were dominated by Med and brought with them a minority of west Asian and southwest Asian all they spread acroos Europe. Looking at Ancient DNA it seems they were all very related and it does not seem like it was multiple waves of the spread of farming in Europe. So we can break down Genetics' of the farmer family that spread acroos Europe and how modern Europeans descend from them. I will think about reading the book if it is at a public library there is a huge one by my house.

TigerMW
09-25-2013, 05:21 PM
It looks like you are doing some reading after all.

What I mean is Gok4 a 5,000 year old farmer from southern Sweden had very similar aust dna results to Otzie 5,300 year old farmer from alps Sweden. y DNA G2a is dominate in multiple sites from acroos western Europe ranging from 7,000 and 5,000 years old. globe13 test the farmers were dominated by Med and brought with them a minority of west Asian and southwest Asian all they spread acroos Europe. Looking at Ancient DNA it seems they were all very related and it does not seem like it was multiple waves of the spread of farming in Europe. So we can break down Genetics' of the farmer family that spread acroos Europe and how modern Europeans descend from them.
We are all related at some time but that may be 200-300 thousand years ago.

There are at least two archaeologically attested to very significant farming advances through Europe, the Linear Pottery, and the Impressed Wares. They covered vastly different geographies over a good 1000 year time frame. You might read Jean's book where she discusses some the potential haplogroups associated with each.

Ozti apparently ate grain but I don't know that Otzi was really a farmer, Wikipedia cites,
"They believed that the body was of a recently deceased mountaineer"


I will think about reading the book if it is at a public library there is a huge one by my house.
Good thinking! That will get you far.

I still don't get why you have problems with a quote. What does the farming and Otzi have to do with your disagreement with Jean?

In recent years scientific advances have released a mass of data, turning cherished ideas upside down. The idea of migration in prehistory, so long out of favor, is back on the agenda

TigerMW
09-26-2013, 12:33 AM
Mikwww were the heck do u guys get all of this info I know u don't get it from Wikpedia. I have no idea what to say since I cant find any thing on this. I think there defintley was a non Corded ware people but Indo European so maybe had similar cultural traits and were proto Germanic Italo Celts with R1b L11 migrating towards western Europe around 3,000bc. Does it seem like copper was not brought to Europe from the Near east like farming. Sometimes I think people assume everything that is advanced originally came form the Near east which gets annoying because u cant just assume that.

I'm reposting this over here as it is off topic in the "deeper Bell Beaker" thread and the grammar is bad so it likely will draw things off track to unravel. There is also a focus on the "Germanic Italo Celts" which is what this particular thread is about.

If you think someone is assuming something unfairly please be specific AND concise and describe what and why.

TigerMW
09-26-2013, 01:11 AM
You cant just throw my posts were ever u want. THE GERMANIC ITALO CELTS ARE EXTREMLY IMPORTNAT TO BELL BEAKER AND R1B L11. So what if my grammar isn't perfect it shouldn't offend anyone just deal with it and listen to my point that is what's important. And can you please answer the question I asked.

This was devoid of content for the other thread so I'm quoting it here. What's the question?
I didn't see a question mark in your prior post and some times your sentences and questions run together so it's hard to tell sometimes.

TigerMW
09-26-2013, 02:31 AM
This was devoid of content for the other thread so I'm quoting it here. What's the question?
I didn't see a question mark in your prior post and some times your sentences and questions run together so it's hard to tell sometimes.

Fair Haired, why didn't you ask your question over here on this thread which is more your primary theme?

It's hard to get some of those folks to post much on this forum because they are busy doing real research. We need to be respectful of their time, do our own homework and try to be concise and clear in our communications. We don't want people to leave and go to another forum because this one is wasting their time.

If you want to espouse your theories, that's fine but I actually have a duty to try to keep things moving moving and on track in the R1b section of this forum. If you've been warned. Please stay on track and be specific to the topic. Please also use a spellchecker or something to clean up your grammar and punctuation. Try using some paragraphs. I actually do read your posts but sometimes it becomes a challenge.

Again, if you want to espouse your primary theory, do it here.

Fire Haired
09-26-2013, 02:43 AM
Fair Haired, why didn't you ask your question over here on this thread which is more your primary theme?

It's hard to get some of those folks to post much on this forum because they are busy doing real research. We need to be respectful of their time, do our own homework and try to be concise and clear in our communications. We don't want people to leave and go to another forum because this one is wasting their time.

If you want to espouse your theories, that's fine but I actually have a duty to try to keep things moving moving and on track in the R1b section of this forum.

I am not trying to get people to post on this forum. I will do my own research I started learning about this DNA and pre historic stuff 6 months ago and it is still kind of new. So I am constantly learning new things and correcting myself. Me asking questions wont slow down your thread that much your the only one replaying to me. I think even though I really am just learning about the specific's of these cultures the copper age stuff like that I don't know that much at all. The basic idea though about Germanic Italo Celts I think is true and will be shown to be true later on deifntley with ancient DNA testing. Sorry if I don't write about the exact same topic I will try to keep track of what u guys are saying and stay on subject. I understand that you are trying to get opinions and figure important stuff out and want to focus on that.

I don't think this thread would be wasting people's time. I am horrible at describing the cultures and historical parts but the basic idea is probably true.

TigerMW
09-26-2013, 03:56 AM
I am not trying to get people to post on this forum. I will do my own research I started learning about this DNA and pre historic stuff 6 months ago and it is still kind of new. So I am constantly learning new things and correcting myself. Me asking questions wont slow down your thread that much your the only one replaying to me. I think even though I really am just learning about the specific's of these cultures the copper age stuff like that I don't know that much at all. The basic idea though about Germanic Italo Celts I think is true and will be shown to be true later on deifntley with ancient DNA testing. Sorry if I don't write about the exact same topic I will try to keep track of what u guys are saying and stay on subject. I understand that you are trying to get opinions and figure important stuff out and want to focus on that.

I don't think this thread would be wasting people's time. I am horrible at describing the cultures and historical parts but the basic idea is probably true.

You may not be trying to get people to post on this forum, but most of the people are on here to do research, exchange ideas, brainstorm and speculate and challenge various alternatives.

It is important for you to be on the right forum that fits both your needs, your style and as well as one where your posts will not distract from what others are trying to accomplish. Essentially, you are a guest. There are people who donate money and time to make this whole forum operate. There are other people who volunteer their money and time to do research that they freely share with all of us.

I'm asking you to be considerate. Without them, this forum becomes useless and we all lose. Here are some of the pertinent terms of service that you should be aware of.


"3.6 A reasonable degree of grammatical coherency and punctuation on public postings is mandatory

3.7 Tangents from thread topics are an organic feature of discussion and are to be expected, but threads should remain reasonably on-topic. The administration/moderation may split, delete, merge, or create new threads without notice should a need for such maintenance arise."

The way this works is the moderators have a duty to monitor and implement these terms and others. You may not agree with one or more moderators, but that is just the way it is. It is the moderators' role to make judgements regarding this things. I'm just trying to say my judgement, as well as others, is involved.

Civil discourse can not be regulated strictly, however. Smooth and beneficial conversation depends on goodwill and and sincere intentions. That doesn't mean that people have to always like each other, but rather must respect reach other, the forum as a system, and the topics themselves.

Sorry for the diversion. Let's get back to the topic.

Fire Haired
09-27-2013, 01:41 AM
Having recently read the Willigen and Muller paper that came up with the out of Iberia evidence, I wouldnt be so sure. It is possible that this would be overturned if someone ever repeats this with a less ridiculously small and regionally skewed sample of short life material radiocarbon dates. There were bordering on no samples accepted for large swathes of Europe and it was almost inevitable that the result would come out the way it did. So, given the dismissal of most of the samples from large chunks of Europe I do not think there is any real validity in the maps based on dates from short life samples - the map that particularly highlights Iberia. I do not think its valid.

I think that although there are also problems with creating a map that includes non short life samples, I think it is more useful as it at least samples the whole of Europe. Sure there are problems with old wood effect but I dont think this should be exaggerated. I think burning massive centuries old trunks other than in major structures that were built with them is not going to have been that common and I think the aging effect on dates of old wood effect may be often in the decades rather than multiple centuries.

So, using just the later map all I think that seems to come out consistently is that the beakers north of a line from Budapest to Portugal are a little younger and those south of the line are older. I seriously think we may be jumping through hoops based on what is a flawed paper. The paper really should have simply concluded that there is not a sufficient sample of reliable dates to say any more than a sort of south to north difference is implied. It should not have been seized on as a conclusive paper indicating an Iberian origin. To be honest, the very nature of early beakers makes an Iberian origin very unlikely as their are far better prototypes in central and Eastern Europe.

There is also a lack of any real explanation of the contexts of the selected short life samples other than 'bone' 'hazlenut' etc. No explanation of the context makes them pretty impossible to evaluate and is especially worrying in an area like Iberia where collective burial and all sorts of messing up of contexts is possible. Its a very badly written paper full of errors in terms of presentation too, mislabeling the crucial maps having multiple conclusions that do not quite match etc. There is also no discussion of context, diet isotope evidence etc which means a potential source of artificial aging of the dates is not looked at.

Certainly if ever a paper needed redone based on a much better database of safe samples this is it. I just fear that the paper has created a problem in matching beaker with a haplogroup east-west phylogeny that may not exist. Italy for instance is as old as Iberia on the map Muller and Van Willigen produced based on all the older beaker radiocarbon dates - the only map which really covers that area.

Would we be sweating so many keyboard hours if beaker originated in north Italy? I doubt it as L11 and L51 are present there or nearby in the Alps. There are better links to the Balkans and to the north Alpine area and central Europe for precursors of the beaker. There are interesting echoes of both beaker behaviour and the 'classic' beaker cranio of central and north-west Europe there. There is easy access to all the beaker areas from north Italy and easy access to the zones of the main subclades by passes and by sea. More importantly Italy is well connected with the Balkans, an area that was featuring steppe intrusion from perhaps several centuries before 4000BC. Its far closer to the higher areas of L23 and M269 in SE Europe. It had a precocious pre-beaker copper age etc etc.

The spread of R1b1a2a1a1 L11 in western Europe deifntley did not originate in Iberia like u said it would have been east-west. I have wondered whats up with the R1b1a2a L23 in southeastern Europe were did it come from it could possibly show a source for the spread of R1b1a2a1a L11 in western Europe. There is also a lot of J1 and J2 in southeastern Europe and they are very close to Anatolia which has 20-30% R1b1a2a L23 so I think random inter marriage for what ever reason throughout history could also be why. Southeast Europe and Anatolia also share subclade R1b1a2a2 Z2103 which is not ancestral to R1b1a2a1a L11 in western Europe so that could mean Z2103 and L23 came to southeast Europe together and maybe have nothing to do with R1b1a2a1a in western Europe.

Eupedia map of R1b L23(ht35) it includes all R1b L23*, R1b L11*, R1b L51*, and R1b Z2103. click to enlarge. I wish he would include more than just Europe and small borders of the Near east and Africa to Europe. You can see it gets popular east of what this map shows.
700

Fire Haired
09-27-2013, 03:06 AM
Like I showed a few posts ago Otzie 3,300bc Copper age man in the alps shows constancy with Neolithic western Europeans. 22 Y DNA samples in Trellies southwester France 20 G2a and four I2a1a M26 also shows constancy with Neolithic western Europeans. I am not sure if copper had spread to southwestern France by 3,000bc. So no traces of the R1b1a2a1 L51 people who spread in western Europe. But two R1b samples dating to 2,600-2,500bc in Kromsdorf central Germany defintley is. looking at ancient DNA it seems they were not in the alps in 3,300bc or southwestern France in 3,000ybp but defintley in central German Bell Beaker in 2,600-2,500bc. I don't believe R1b1a2a L51 arrived in central Europe before 3,000bc.

Spread of Bell Beaker seems to old for the spread of R1b1a2a1a L11 subclades U106 and P312. Defintley for Bell Beaker in Iberia 2,500-2,900bc and if Bell Beaker began and spread from Iberia there is no way it is the source of the spread of R1b in western Europe. No matter where Bell Beaker began it was to spread out to long ago to be the original source of R1b1a2a1a L11 in western Europe. I think Bell Beaker picked up R1b from invading proto Germanic Italo Celts around 3,000bc originally from the Ukraine, south east Europe, or Anatolia. Then its subclades P312 began to spread west and U106 north from 2,000-2,500bc. But then P312 subclade U152 I believe first spread with Urnfield culture (1,300-750bc) so very late(Urnfield culture spread of U152 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1356-Urnfield-culture-and-spread-of-Italo-Gaulish-R1b-U152-S28)) and brought Italic languages to Italy and is also the father to Celtic Hallstat and grandfather of Celtic La Tene Culture who both spread U152 even further.

I think P312 subclade L21 would have originated in central Europe around 4,500ybp(FTDNA says age estimates 4,000-5,500ybp) but where it originated is just a guess. I think it migrated to the British isles around 3,000-4,500ybp with Celtic languages. It would have been a major invasion since overall P312 takes up 80% of Irish y DNA and would have been that way for all of Britain before Germanic invasions 400-600ad. Also I think they nearly killed off the natives even more than Germanic tribes did to England and lowlands of Scotland.(British ancestry almost all from Celtic and Germanic invaders (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92232-British-ancestry-almost-all-from-Celtic-and-Germanic-Conqueres)). P312 I believe would have made a major migration into France about 4,500ybp splitting into Df27 and L21 who then conquered all the land west of Germany. But since the ancient Iberians in eastern Iberia did not speak a Celtic languages and were seen as separate from Celts in Iberia why does that area of Iberia today have majority P312 subclade Df27. Celts adopting native language or just inter marriage can be explanations.

TigerMW
09-27-2013, 03:44 AM
The following quote is the first of three from another thread, but as the posting sequence evolved it got away from the other thread's flow of being a "deeper" look at Bell Beaker so I moved it here where it really belongs, in the R1b L11 Germanic-Italo-Celtic theory spread.

In proper sequence, this quote from Fire Haired fits right before replies #34 and #35.

BTW, Fire Haired. I really appreciate the huge leap forward in clarity of communications. Thank you.


Otzie who was killed in alps Italy in 3,300bc. He had a copper axe so his people were in the copper age. His Y DNA G2a2a2 L91 shows a constancy with pre copper age European farmers. Three Y DNA samples from LBK (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLinear_ Pottery_culture&ei=j9VEUpCAKrOl2AWzt4C4CA&usg=AFQjCNE3wbYFfyJwW8VTxfWFlWJ9FM8zvQ)in Derenburg Meerenstieg II Germany (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=Derenburg+Meerenstieg+II+Germany&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x47a57521508420bd:0xd11a2972d3947804,Meeren stieg+2,+D-38895+Derenburg,+Germany&gl=us&ei=87pEUrj-E4S22AXc5YDACA&ved=0CCsQ8gEwAA) 5,347bc F(XG,H,I,J,K), 5,000BC G2a3 L30 and F(G,H,I,J,K), Epicardiel (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCardium _Pottery&ei=6tdEUpOCOKfb2QWh9IGwCA&usg=AFQjCNG1QBEz7n5yvtaITmy1f8rg6WgkyA) culture Catalonia Spain (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=catalonia+spain&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x12a45bdc8530f5f3:0x100fae021a3c850,Catalon ia,+Spain&gl=us&ei=rNVEUvLEB6b12wXp-4GQDw&ved=0CKoBELYD)G2a P15=3, E1b1b V13=1. Also Otzie's austomal DNA results were very similar to Gok4 a farmer from southern Swedan dating to 3,000BC.
697698699

I am pretty sure southern Sweden 5,000 years ago was not in the Copper age so Gok4 defintley was Neolithic. I am not sure what Aust test it is that has Gedorasian which has a obvious connection with R1b in Europe(almost all under subclade R1b1a2a L23). If Otzie does not he and the spread of copper in the the alps around 3,500-3,000BC has nothing to do with the spread of R1b1a2a1 L51 and R1b1a2a1a L11 into western Europe and it seems Otzie is totally the same Genetically as Neolithic Europeans at least western. I am not saying everyone in western Europe at that time was Otzie like but the people who spread the farming I think were I hope that makes sense. What makes Otzie and Gok4 different from modern Europeans except Sardine. Is modern Europeans have more hunter gather like aust DNa results meaning for globe13 more North Euro and for K12b and K7b more Atlantic Baltic. I also read in this article(click here (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/04/first-look-at-dna-of-neolithic.html)) that the hunter gathers who had vast majority north Euro and Atlantic Baltic were out of modern variation. This is so confusing modern Europeans obviously have Neolithic and pre Neolithic blood but it seems that neither the farmers or hunter gathers fit into any modern European groups except maybe Soumi and Finnish in Scandinavia with hunter gathers and Sardine on a island west of Italy with farmers.

I would assume that since central and northern Scandinavia from what Maciamo says did not begin to farm till the bronze age. Also Y DNA most likely spread in Europe with farming G2a, E1b1b V13, possibly some J1, J2, and T are very very very very rare in Scandinavia and only exist in far southern Scandinavia mainly Sweden and Norway not Finland which could be because of the first farmers in Scandinavia Funnelbeaker culture. Finnish and Soumi like I said if anyone are the closest relatives to hunter gather samples. They look no different than other Europeans if anything they are the palest. So since 40% of English have yellow hair and almost 0% Syrian or Iraqi people do wouldn't it make sense Europeans get those traits from pre Neolithic Europeans and Finnish actulley have majority yellow hair. If Europeans had so much farmer blood why are they so pale unlike people who first brought farming to Europe.

Mikwww I hope I was not off topic. I think it was important to show how Otzie was most similar to Neolithic Europeans and is not evidence R1b1a2a1 L51 or R1b1a2a1a L11 was coming through the alps during that time. I know barely anything about the different cultures and how and when the copper spread but maybe it was just the spread of an idea and almost no genetics'.

Fire Haired
09-27-2013, 10:01 PM
For Fire Haired - my approach has been described as "The Revenge of the Hunter-gatherers". :)


Hunter-gatherers entered Europe c. 4600 year ago. They carried mtDNA U and Y-DNA equally ancient and almost unknown today: F and IJ.



Who knows when the exact date was and in my opinion there were probably multiple migrations from the Near east but by people who were very related. Also Y DNA C(became C6 in Europe) might be another one. And for their mtDNA U5 seems to have the oldest age in Europe and its subclades U5b and U5a both originated in Europe U5 also probably did. 37,985 year old mtDNA sample in European Russia had U2. Three 31,155 year old mtDNA samples from Czech Republic two had U5 and one U8. Caucasians from the Near east probably arrived in Europe over 50,000 years ago. The reason I think that is 42,000 year old half man half lion statue in southern Germany, two 42,000 year old flutes in southern Germany, 41,500-44,200 year old Human jaw in Cornwall, England, and 43,000-45,000 year old baby teeth from Italy. Also according to Macimao on Eupedia.com click here (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25546-25-000-year-old-Russian-Cro-Magnons-might-have-been-hg-H17)two 25,000 year old mtDNA samples from European Russia had H17 or H27. The link tells why he thinks that also Maju click here (http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/p/ancient-mtdna-maps-of-europe.html)says the same. H1 and H3 subclades most likely originated in southwestern Europe around 15,000 years ago. It is hard to say exactly how long each H subclade has been in Europe but the two most popular ones H1 and H3 lineage has been in Europe for maybe 30,000 years. mtDNA V also probably originated in southwestern Europe around 15,000ybp meaning its mother HV would have also arrived in Europe maybe 25,000-30,000ybp or more there also may have been some RO, JT, and N.

The Ice Age reduced the European population to a handful in southern refuges.
I agree but I am sure many people lived in central Europe but I don't know the specifics of how possible it would be to survive in for example Hungary.

As the ice receded southern people fanned out to repopulate the north around 10,000 years ago. They carried mtDNA U5, U4 and U2. The Y-DNA was perhaps I* and haplogroups rare or non-existent today, plus R1 in a niche at the extreme SE of Europe close to the Urals, from a shelter on the south of the Caspian Sea.
I think that defintley happened for H1, H3, V, and U5b1 out of Iberia. Here are some papers on it http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3376494/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182122/ And the last glacial maximum is suppose to have lasted from 26,500-19,000ybp so I think the migrations were over 10,000ybp. There were also some from Iberia to northwest Africa click here (http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013378). More evidence is two 12,000 year old mtDNA V samples from Mooroco and the rest had mainly H or RO and R(maybe H). I don't think it is good to simplify what happened so long ago it is deifntley much more complicated.

Waves of farmers entered Europe mainly after 6,200 BC, overcoming hunter-gatherers over most of Europe. They brought a new range of haplogroups from the Near East, including most of the mtDNA groups common in Europe today and Y-DNA G, E and probably J. Some local hunter-gathers in SE Europe (around the Danube?) carrying I2 turned farmer in contact with the new arrivals, so some I2 spread with the farmers. R1b probably entered SE Europe towards the end of this phase, with dairy farming. It is not the predominant Neolithic signature in Europe (so far it has not been found at all in Neolithic DNA) and is rare in other places settled by farmers from the Near East, such as Pakistan and the Caucasus.
I defintley think the farmers are major in modern European ancestry. Looking at Otzie and Gok4 aust dna these farmers had majority in globe13 med over 59% North Euro(hunter gather inter marriage) around 15-25%, southwest Asian 7-15%, and west Asian 5-10%. For Y DNA they spread I would say G2a, E1b1b V13, and deifntley some J1,J2, and T. The Y DNA and aust DNA we have of farmers is all from central and western Europe. I2a1b representing western Europe and I2a1a representing western Europe at some point they had a common ancestor. Maybe I2a1 was in eastern Europe 9,000ybp and then spread with the farming to western Europe and formed into I2a1a and in eastern Europe into I2a1b. I also think they may just be from the hunter gathers of eastern and western Europe. Just because there is no R1b in Pakistian or other areas farmers settled does not mean it could have spread to southeast Europe in the late Neolithic. There are only 31 Y DNA samples from the Neloithic I guess Otzie is copper age but still and all of them are from central and western Europe not south eastern Europe. I would think R1b1a2a L23(with some older subclades) and coming from Antolia or through the Caucus then Russia then Ukraine then southeast Europe. It could be were R1b1a2a1 L51 took off from to western Europe.

Some hunter-gatherers living along the rivers of the forest-steppe north of the Black and Caspian seas turned farmer in contact with the new arrivals c. 5000 BC. These were the Dnieper-Donets people. We have ancient DNA from them. It shows them as a mixture of hunter-gatherer (U5, U2e etc) and farmers, plus a bit of Asian that arrived with pottery. They were followed by the Sredni Stog culture, which had acquired copper-working and herding from the Cucuteni culture adjacent to their west (possibly R1b) and influences from around the Urals (possibly R1a). We can guess from later events that they spoke an ancestor of Proto-Indo-European.
There is also two H and two T samples from Dnieper Donets culture and there deifntley was some H in pre Neolithic Europeans there is Paleo and Mesolithic mtDNa H to proof that. I think Mongoloid is a better word than east Asian since not all live in eastern asia. There is also Mongoliod C1 in mtDNA from 6,700-7,400bc pre pottery Neolithic Syria and two sub sahran African L2a1's. I don't think it means that much for Syria but for Ukriane since it in eastern Europe that makes sense and migration of Mongoliod N1c1 into northeastern Europe about 8,000ybp with Kunda culture might be connected and I am sure what you said could be the source. R1a1a M17 most likely originated around Ukraine about 8,000 years ago ( origins of R1a1a in or near Europe (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2011/11/origins-of-r1a1a1-in-or-near-europe-aka.html)). Maybe the same for R1a. I think those people may have spoke ancestral language to proto Indo European. The R1b1a2a L23 is much more popular in Antolia, Caucus, and Iraq than southeastern Europe. I think that could mean those areas might some how be involved with the R1b maybe through Maykop culture (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMaykop_ culture&ei=sP1FUqeICKeo2gWj_YCABQ&usg=AFQjCNEJiEUXAfp0f05JY0204jjHYg-qoA) I don't know. At some point either R1b1a P297, R1b1a2 M269, and R1b1a2a L23 had to of migrated to Russia or southeast Europe out of the mid east.

The descendants of Sredni Stog and Cucuteni invented the wheel and wheeled vehicles and tamed the horse. They adopted a semi-nomadic life-style on the steppe and spoke Proto-Indo-European.
I pretty much agree but isn't the oldest representation of a whelled vehicle from Funnel beaker culture?

The Indo-Europeans fanned out from the steppe in stages. Migrations around 3000 BC went up the rivers which flow through the steppe to the Black and Caspian Seas. These seem to have spread the dialects which eventually developed into Celtic, Illyrian, Italic and (much later) Germanic. Those who remained on the Middle Dnieper developed a later IE dialect, which eventually became Proto-Balto-Slavic. The Indo-Europeans spread it seems R1a and R1b (with some other haplogroups including I2), together with a mixture of mtDNA haplogroups from hunter-gatherer and farmer. Their descendants became predominant in Europe.



Celtic and Italic languages form their own branch Italo Celtic right? And because of the connection with R1b1a2a1a L11 in Germanic and Italo Celts I think they go back to Germanic Italo Celts and are not connected to Illyrians. Also Proto Balto Slavic I think comes from R1a1a1b1 Z283 Corded ware culture and their brother branch is Indo Iranian R1a1a1b2 Z93 coming out of maybe Abashevo culture. Urnfield culture (1,300-700bc) I think spread R1b1a2a1a2b S28 to Italy and Italic languages. In central Europe it also developed into Celtic Hallstat culture and Hallstat then later La Tene helped spread R1b S28. But the earliest Celtic migrations went deep into western Europe 3,500-4,500ybo with R1b1a2a1a2 P312 developing into R1b1a2a1a2a df27 and R1b1a2a1a2c L21 conquering all land west of Germany including the British isles. No way is Urnfield or Hallstat culture the first Celts neither were very strong in the British isles and same with R1b S28. Now that we know that R1b S28 brother R1b L21 is dominate in the British isles would have been 80% in all of Britain and Ireland before Germanic invasions 400-600ad. It would make sense it also brought Insular Celtic language Brythonic and Gealic.

Fire Haired
09-27-2013, 11:21 PM
Here is a R1b migration map by Maciamo Hay of Eupedia click to enlarge.
708

I agree more with Maciamo U152 and Italian languages would have arrived in Italy only about 3,000 years ago from central European Urnfield culture. If you look at the distribution of R1b U152 it totally matches Urnfield culture then later Celtic Hallstat and La Tene culture and of course spread of Italian tribes. The age estimate of U152 according to FTDNA is 3,500-5,000ybp. R1b Df27 and R1b L21 I think were very early Celtic migrations out of central Europe 3,500-4,500ybp. R1b Df27 probably went with as a minority with Celtic migrations to Britain and Ireland same with r1b L21 in Iberia.

In my opinion there is no doubt Germanic Italo Celts are responsible for the spread of R1b1a2a1a L11 in western Europe. Look at the Balto Slavs with Corded ware culture and R1a1a1b1 Z283 and how quickly they spread. The Indo Iranians with R1a1a1b2 Z93 in asia. It totally makes sense it was a Indo European group that spread R1b l11 so quickly. Jutes, Angeals, and Saxons invaded and conquered southern Britain from 400-600ad right Jean? Look at modern English and lowlander and eastern Scottish(Germanic languages Scots) Germanic R1b S21 is about 20-30% in the Netherlands and Denmark around the area they originate it is 30-40% also I1 which would have been brought over is 15% some is from Vikings. When a people conquers another people a lot of times they replace a good amount of the native Y DNA because of war. That is also why R1a1a1b2 Z93 is so popular in Asia Indo Iranians conquered many areas like Indus valley were it is about 30%. Same reason why R1a1a1b1 Z283 is about 30-60% in most of eastern Europe. So wouldn't it make sense a war like Indo European people spread R1b1a2a1a L11 in western Europe.


Also just looking at modern Frequencies of R1b L23 I would think Anatolia or Caucus would be the source not south east Europe at least originally. Otzie from alps Italy 3,300bc show's no evidence of a change from Neolithic to copper age central Europe and no sign of arrival of R1b1a2a1 L51. 22 Y DNA sample in southwestern France from 3,000bc where today r1b P312 is about 80%. 20 had G2a and two had I2a1a M26 no sign of R1b L11 or whatever subclade. Two R1b samples from 2,500-2,600bc in Bell Beaker central Germany does show their arrival but that doesn't mean that's the first place they landed. I think R1b1a2a1a L11 arrived in central Europe no earlier than 3,000bc.

Fire Haired
09-27-2013, 11:25 PM
That map makes a lot of sense to me. I have thought for a long time that U106 was associated with Corded Ware rather than Beaker and only arrived in western Europe with the Germans beginning in about 700 BC. Of course, there is no proof of that yet, since the couple of Corded Ware sites that have yielded y-dna haven't turned up any U106 (or R1b of any other kind either).

I totally dis agree I think Nordic bronze age culture technically descended of Bell Beaker is early German speakers. R1b S21(and all other R1b), I2a2 P214, and red hair in Scandinavia have basically the same distribution all I think brought there by Nordic bronze age culture and proto Germanic languages. red hair may have existed in Scandinavia before that but never at 1%.

Fire Haired
09-27-2013, 11:31 PM
Wait Rocca are you really saying that U106 came to Britain before Germanic tribes Jutes, Angeals, and Saxons. Their obviously the source I have even seen deep subclade only found in Britain, Frisia(speak very related language to English), and Netherlands.

Fire Haired
09-27-2013, 11:33 PM
Thanks, Jean.

I'm not intending to draw you into a detailed discussion, but for the rest of us, I find the U106 branch on the east side of the Carpathians most interesting. I don't know how U106 got to northern Europe, but Jean's speculations on U106 align with David Anthony's Pre-Germanic IE people movements. The corollary to that is that L51 and L11 were already present back there on the east side of the Carpathians. I'm quite fine with that, but I certainly don't have the answers. I would be fine with U106 leaking north from the west side of the Carpathians as well. I see there is a question mark by the U106.



As this pertains to the Bell Beaker folks, U106 may been left out.

Mikwww Germanic tribes Vandals and Goths dominated eastern Europe during the Roman empire their deifntley the source. Also since U106 is probably the Germanic branch of R1b l11 while P312 the Italo Celtic branch it makes total sense it exist in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark all Germanic speakers and have been for probably 3,500-4,000 years(Nordic bronze age culture) at least southern area where it is most popular. I was looking at Nordic bronze age burails. They had some similarities with Hallstat Celtic Hoch Chieftain burial from 500bc in southern Germany. Jean picture of the guy on the chariot on the cover of her book is from Hoch Chiefs bronze couch. Hoch chief and the Barrow's from Borum Eshøj in Denmark dating about 1,351bc.

They were all buried in Kurgens. They had a comb by their head the same style of Comb. gold Neck and wrist rings, most had a dagger/sword at the chest, brooches,, they were buried with a pillow on a couch/bed whatever u want to call it.

parasar
09-28-2013, 02:43 AM
It is obvious the Bell Beaker R1b is either R1b1a2a1 L51 or R1b1a2a1a1 L11 no doubt it is connected with modern western European R1b. Shows in my opinon the arrival of Germanic Italo Celts.

It is a real cultural grouping or have you tried to match your L11 to your "90-99% Germanic Italo Cel" ethnicity?

rms2
09-28-2013, 02:00 PM
Of course, there were no "Germanic Italo Celts", unless by that one means Celts or Italians who learned to speak a Germanic language and adopted Germanic culture. Germanic and Italo-Celtic (the latter being a controversial category) are mutually exclusive branches of the Indo-European family of languages.

I think what that poster meant was "Germans and Italo-Celts", indicating that L11 had a hand in both groups, leaving out, of course, Balts and Slavs, Illyrians, Greeks, and whomever else.

Fire Haired
09-28-2013, 02:09 PM
Of course, there were no "Germanic Italo Celts", unless by that one means Celts or Italians who learned to speak a Germanic language and adopted Germanic culture. Germanic and Italo-Celtic (the latter being a controversial category) are mutually exclusive branches of the Indo-European family of languages.

I think what that poster meant was "Germans and Italo-Celts", indicating that L11 had a hand in both groups, leaving out, of course, Balts and Slavs, Illyrians, Greeks, and whomever else.

To say Italo Celtic doesn't branch with any other existing or extinct language is crazy. Think about it proto Indo European probably was spoke about 7,000-8,00ybp and you think it did start to branch off till 4,000ybp. Look at southern accents and northern accents in America language changes extremely quickly in just a generation a lot can change. So there deifntley is a chance Germanic and Italo Celtic languages go back to a common ancestor Germanic Italo Celtic. It seems everyone has been calling me crazy with the Germanic Italo Celtic stuff them spreading R1b1a2a1a L11 and that I am nuts when I say they are connected with spreading red hair in western Europe at least over 1%. I would bet $100,000,0000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 0,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000

I am right and that the more we learn and the more ancient DNA we get the more it will prove this theory correct.

Fire Haired
09-28-2013, 02:13 PM
I think what that poster meant was "Germans and Italo-Celts", indicating that L11 had a hand in both groups, leaving out, of course, Balts and Slavs, Illyrians, Greeks, and whomever else.

Yes R1b U106 son of L11 is obviously the signature of Germanic languages same with P312 for Italo Celtic they trace back to Germanic Italo Celtic L11 father. Balto Slav language comes from Corded ware culture and their signature R1a1a1b1 283 for Indo Iranians R1a1a1b2 Z93. Why do I need to include Illyrians and Greeks? Your probably thinking it is dumb to connect Y DNA with language families once you see the evidence in ancient DNA and modern y DNA it is isn't at all. I think it is possible Balto Slavic and Indo Iranian languages who go back to Yamna culture and father R1a1a1b S224 might form their own branch.

rms2
09-28-2013, 02:23 PM
. . . Why do I need to include Illyrians and Greeks? . . .

Because L11 is not absent among those Indo-European groups.

Fire Haired
09-28-2013, 04:42 PM
Because L11 is not absent among those Indo-European groups.
Sure there is offshoots of U106 in eastern Europe because of east Germanic tribes Vandals and Goths. And there is some R1b S28 in Croatia because Urnfield culture and it goes out to the Balkans and central Turkey because of the Galatians. Besides that it is totally western Germanic Italo Celtic.

rms2
09-28-2013, 05:35 PM
There is L11 in the Balkans, including Greece, that is neither U106 nor U152 nor even P312.