PDA

View Full Version : DF41 Haplotype Clusters and Geography



rms2
03-23-2014, 12:46 PM
Taking a look at the map feature at the R-DF41 and Subclades Project, here is how the DF41 haplotype clusters and subclades line up.

Haplotype Clusters

41-1013: the northern half of Ireland

41-1123: Wales and SW England (the one in SW England appears to have a Welsh surname, however)

41-1410: northern half of Ireland

41-1426: Scotland and the northern half of Ireland (with Scots surnames)

41-9919: Scotland, Isle of Man, and the northern half of Ireland

Subclades

L563: Isle of Man

L745: Scotland, northern England

At first glance, the obvious propensity of DF41 for Scotland, Man, and the northern half of Ireland suggests a Gaelic correlation. The odd factor is cluster 41-1123, which appears to be Welsh.

Comments?

Dubhthach
03-23-2014, 04:58 PM
"Insular Celtic" might be a better description. There's definelty a clustering around the Irish sea, some of which may tie in with the Gall-Ghaeil and Viking era. We have to remember that before the Gall-Ghaeil arrived in Galloway it was probably "Brythonic" speaking (in reality a language/dialect close to "Old-Welsh"). Likewise there's some argument that Isle of Man was only Gaelicised with the arrival of the Vikings.

Sometimes I think there's an interesting parallel with DF23 (and it's major subclade M222). We see for example DF23+, M222- in the South-West of Britain. M222 itself probably arose in Northern Britain, it then exploded in density in Ireland. It wouldn't surprise me if there's something similiar going on with DF41. Movement northward within Britain before arriving in Ireland (where it didn't do much -- my cluster aside ;) ).

Generally the archaelogists talk about somewhat of an Iron age darkage in Ireland. Drop in archaelogical finds etc, with the appearance of contact/influence coming into the North-East via Northern Britain from about 200BC onwards.

from perspective of language, the situation 2,200 years ago wasn't particularly different. Both "Goidelic" and "Brythonic" are often termed "Insular Celtic", at this stage there wouldn't been a huge difference between them, alot of linguistic changes (multiple sound changes etc.) probably arose during period 0-400AD. Brythonic after all been influenced by Latin (due to Roman occupation) this helping to shape "Old Welsh". I like to sometimes to think that the differences as been somewhat like difference between say Modern German and Modern Dutch. Not unsurmountable, and fairly easy to adapt between with some effort.

-Paul
(DF41+)

rms2
03-23-2014, 10:15 PM
Well, DF41 definitely appears to be a clade of the western portion of the Isles. Thus far there are no real eastern exemplars, except one 41-1426, an otherwise Scottish cluster, whose mdka was born in the London metro area, a magnet for immigrants.

"Insular Celtic" is not much resolution, and thus not very satisfying, since that moniker can be applied to all of insular L21.

razyn
03-23-2014, 10:23 PM
"Insular Celtic" is not much resolution, and thus not very satisfying, since that moniker can be applied to all of insular L21.

Only by people who persist in thinking that people ~ 5000 years ago were "Celts."

Dubhthach
03-23-2014, 10:48 PM
Well, DF41 definitely appears to be a clade of the western portion of the Isles. Thus far there are no real eastern exemplars, except one 41-1426, an otherwise Scottish cluster, whose mdka was born in the London metro area, a magnet for immigrants.

"Insular Celtic" is not much resolution, and thus not very satisfying, since that moniker can be applied to all of insular L21.

Given the age of DF41 you aren't really going to get any further resolution. For example the concept of a "Gael" is really one of the post-christianisation of Ireland. The word Gael itself is actually a borrowing from welsh into Irish!

Dubhthach
03-23-2014, 10:51 PM
Only by people who persist in thinking that people ~ 5000 years ago were "Celts."

IF they spoke "Proto-Celtic" then they were Celtic speakers, simples, though it's debatable if the deletion of Proto-Indo-European *p occurred so early. I'm more inclined to think Proto-Celtic arose during the mid to late Bronze age. The deletion of *p is one of key features of Proto-Celtic that sets it apart from Proto-Italic (and other Indo-European branches).

Of course it's somewhat academic given that DF41 isn't probably any older then 2-2,500 years ago. If it arose in the Isles then at that timeframe it would have arisen in a population that spoke variously dialects of "Insular Celtic".

rms2
03-23-2014, 11:18 PM
Only by people who persist in thinking that people ~ 5000 years ago were "Celts."

Notice I said the moniker "Insular Celtic" could be applied to all of insular L21. Are you arguing that L21 was already in the Isles ~5000 years ago? If so, are you arguing that nothing has happened since, and that there were no insular Celts who were L21+?

My own opinion, in which I do persist, is that L21 arrived in the Isles during the Copper or Bronze Age with the Beaker Folk and that they did indeed speak an early form of Celtic.

razyn
03-24-2014, 12:58 AM
There is a lot of hooey out there about L21, the Celtic haplogroup. I'm pleased to see that rms2 only persists in the Insular part of it. But I have an opinion about the rest; it's right up there with DF27, the Iberian haplogroup, and U106, the Germanic haplogroup.

Look at that anachronistic ethnic, religious and national stuff; but also look at the calendar, the archaeological record, and the phylogeny closer to the tree trunk. At some level we're all talking about ourselves, in a non-Indo-European language, and the Isles are under an ice sheet. It's possible to make distinctions that aren't helpful.

alan
03-24-2014, 02:58 AM
I do get the impression from L21 subclades that most do indeed belong to the period where common insular celtic was spoken in both islands, the P-shift had not yet spread etc. I am a very strong believer that the P shift is insignificant in the isles and merely an aerial fashion added to insular Celtic in Britain. Everything about Gaelic and Welsh shows that they were far far more like each other than either was to continental Celtic. The similarities of both the Gaelic and British Celtic languages is deep and structural while the difference of the P-shift in Welsh is a petty areal thing. I have seen various estimates but my belief is that Irish and British languages were identical insular Celtic as late as perhaps 500BC and that the P-shift in British is a late change.

rms2
03-24-2014, 08:05 AM
There is a lot of hooey out there about L21, the Celtic haplogroup. I'm pleased to see that rms2 only persists in the Insular part of it. But I have an opinion about the rest; it's right up there with DF27, the Iberian haplogroup, and U106, the Germanic haplogroup.

Look at that anachronistic ethnic, religious and national stuff; but also look at the calendar, the archaeological record, and the phylogeny closer to the tree trunk. At some level we're all talking about ourselves, in a non-Indo-European language, and the Isles are under an ice sheet. It's possible to make distinctions that aren't helpful.

I'm not exactly sure what point it is you're trying to make, unless it is the old one that haplogroups are older than many historical ethnic, tribal, and language groups, etc. Honestly, what difference does that make? Haplogroups and their subclades still have distributions that indicate, perhaps imperfectly, where their bearers were at certain times, and we know, within reason, what languages, cultures, tribal affiliations, etc., were current then in those areas.

My own view is that P312 was predominantly Indo-European from its nativity onward. Wish I had more time right now.

In my view L21 is one of the Celtic haplogroups, not the only one.

alan
03-24-2014, 09:51 AM
I think some people have a problem in understanding that there was not a moment when Celtic appeared. There was just a gradual accumulation of sound shifts that took the same people from PIE to west IE Celto-Italic to Celtic but they were the same people before and after those shifts. I think old style books that sort of show and advent of Celts out of the Alps fresh sprung in the Iron Age have created a Holywood idea of the Celts that is hard to shift. I think the problem is early accounts of the Celts relates to the exceptional events where there was an upheaval and they intruded into the non-Celtic world c. 500BC onwards. However, this was an exceptional phase and tells us nothing about how long and over how great an area Celtic had been evolving and incubating. It is clear to me that these spectacular intrusions were symptoms of problems in Celtic society caused by the collapse of the Hallstatt D system and the beginning of the end for the Celts in Europe.

Dubhthach
03-24-2014, 09:57 AM
It is worth cautioning though that there probably existed a Sprachbund between Ireland and "British speaking" Britain during the first two centuries of Christianity in Ireland. The early church was missionary and "British" (eg. Brythonic) in nature. Thence the widespread borrowing into Irish from Welsh, including latin words that had been first borrowed into Welsh before going to Ireland.

A good example of this of course is the word: Clann (one's children)

Planta (Latin) -> Plant (Welsh) -> Cland (Old Irish) -> Clann (Modern Irish/Scottish Gaidhlig) -> Clan (english)

It's quite possible that some of the "innovations" found in "Insular Celtic" (both Brythonic and Goidelic) are due to such a Sprachbund. Two possible examples been "Initial mutations" and "Verb Subject Object" ordering.

VSO is easier to explain, for example:
Cheannaigh mé feoil sa siopa [cheannaigh = verb, mé = subject, feoil = object]
(Bought I meat in the shop)
Whereas English is SVO (Subject Verb Object)
I bought meat in the shop [I = subject, bought = verb, meat = object]

"Old Irish" shows a distinct seperation form the "Archaic Irish" of Ogham stones, "Archaic Irish" shows alot of similarities to Gaulish (other then Q -> P). There is some debate that "archaic Irish" was a "priestly language" that retain archaism not present in the spoken language anymore by the 5th century. So the rapid shift in the 200 years when "Old Irish" appears as a written standard was potentially not due to rapid language change but from a shift to a new literary standard promulgated by a newly Christian elite. The leaders of the church having been drawn from the nobility (St. Colmcille been a great-great-grandson of Niall for example).

Leaving aside that, I do feel that in context of Britain that "Gaulish influence" was probably most heavily felt in South of what is now England. If you look at a map of the "coin minting" tribes, these are generally regarded as been intrusive from Gaul in the period 300-100BC.

It would make sense if for example the "Q->P" shift spread into Britain as a "fashion" during the Iron age while Ireland was mostly cut off from outside influence.

rossa
03-24-2014, 04:37 PM
It is worth cautioning though that there probably existed a Sprachbund between Ireland and "British speaking" Britain during the first two centuries of Christianity in Ireland. The early church was missionary and "British" (eg. Brythonic) in nature. Thence the widespread borrowing into Irish from Welsh, including latin words that had been first borrowed into Welsh before going to Ireland.

A good example of this of course is the word: Clann (one's children)

Planta (Latin) -> Plant (Welsh) -> Cland (Old Irish) -> Clann (Modern Irish/Scottish Gaidhlig) -> Clan (english)

It's quite possible that some of the "innovations" found in "Insular Celtic" (both Brythonic and Goidelic) are due to such a Sprachbund. Two possible examples been "Initial mutations" and "Verb Subject Object" ordering.

VSO is easier to explain, for example:
Cheannaigh mé feoil sa siopa [cheannaigh = verb, mé = subject, feoil = object]
(Bought I meat in the shop)
Whereas English is SVO (Subject Verb Object)
I bought meat in the shop [I = subject, bought = verb, meat = object]

"Old Irish" shows a distinct seperation form the "Archaic Irish" of Ogham stones, "Archaic Irish" shows alot of similarities to Gaulish (other then Q -> P). There is some debate that "archaic Irish" was a "priestly language" that retain archaism not present in the spoken language anymore by the 5th century. So the rapid shift in the 200 years when "Old Irish" appears as a written standard was potentially not due to rapid language change but from a shift to a new literary standard promulgated by a newly Christian elite. The leaders of the church having been drawn from the nobility (St. Colmcille been a great-great-grandson of Niall for example).

Leaving aside that, I do feel that in context of Britain that "Gaulish influence" was probably most heavily felt in South of what is now England. If you look at a map of the "coin minting" tribes, these are generally regarded as been intrusive from Gaul in the period 300-100BC.

It would make sense if for example the "Q->P" shift spread into Britain as a "fashion" during the Iron age while Ireland was mostly cut off from outside influence.

Do you think this influence was part of "normal" interaction or a forced movement due to Roman expansion?

Dubhthach
03-24-2014, 05:13 PM
Do you think this influence was part of "normal" interaction or a forced movement due to Roman expansion?

Well Caesar talks about Gaulish movement into Southern Britain but that was in period 200 years or so before he went on his blood-thirsty war path. It would make sense of course given the narrowness of the channel that there were heavy ties between tribes on either side of it during this period.

rms2
03-24-2014, 11:40 PM
Well, back to the original topic. One thing that is noticeable about DF41/CTS6581 is that there is a dearth of positive results from England. Scotland, Ireland, the Isle of Man, and Wales are fairly well represented, but there isn't much DF41 in England, apparently. Given the fact that England's population is much larger than any of those other places, this seems pretty remarkable.

Dubhthach
03-25-2014, 12:17 PM
Well, back to the original topic. One thing that is noticeable about DF41/CTS6581 is that there is a dearth of positive results from England. Scotland, Ireland, the Isle of Man, and Wales are fairly well represented, but there isn't much DF41 in England, apparently. Given the fact that England's population is much larger than any of those other places, this seems pretty remarkable.

It is worth pointing out though that the modern population ratio's are really a result of the post-famine era. In 1841 for example Ireland's population was half the population of Britain (as an singularity), whereas now the population of island is only 1/10th of that of Britain's. Proportionally the population within England has exploded since then. "Heart of Empire" and all that stuff.

Historically going back since the early middle ages it's generally been the case that the Ireland had 35-50% of population of Britain.

rms2
03-26-2014, 09:41 PM
It is worth pointing out though that the modern population ratio's are really a result of the post-famine era. In 1841 for example Ireland's population was half the population of Britain (as an singularity), whereas now the population of island is only 1/10th of that of Britain's. Proportionally the population within England has exploded since then. "Heart of Empire" and all that stuff.

Historically going back since the early middle ages it's generally been the case that the Ireland had 35-50% of population of Britain.

Be that as it may, one would expect some more DF41+ results from modern England, given its greater current population . . . unless, of course, DF41 was never all that common there. It certainly appears thus far to be a subclade of the "Celtic Fringe".