Page 12 of 35 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 346

Thread: Were Iron Age Celts North Italian-like?

  1. #111
    Registered Users
    Posts
    567
    Sex
    Location
    Western France
    Nationality
    French
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y13432

    France
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo View Post
    IIRC, these Iron 'French' sample are actually from Alsace and surrounds. That's not Gaul. That's Germani.

    The Romans drew their own reality over unknown people. But there were distinct tribal groups (Gaul, Belgae, Germani, Lepontii/Golasecca, Liguri, Celtiberos) to account the vast territories.
    They were from Marne/Picardy, Alsace and Languedoc-Roussillon (Southern France).

    Triangles down are from Southern France, Circles Alsace and Triangles Up from Marne.

    1.png

    2.png

    3.png
    Last edited by jstephan; 10-30-2020 at 10:12 PM.

  2. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to jstephan For This Useful Post:

     Alain (10-31-2020),  Bygdedweller (10-30-2020),  Echo (10-30-2020),  Hando (11-15-2020),  Jessie (10-31-2020),  JMcB (10-31-2020),  Johnny ola (10-30-2020),  Kellebel (10-31-2020),  Riverman (10-31-2020),  Ruderico (10-30-2020),  sktibo (10-30-2020),  vettor (10-31-2020)

  3. #112
    Moderator
    Posts
    7,127
    Sex
    Location
    Normandy
    Ethnicity
    northwesterner
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-BY3604-Z275
    mtDNA (M)
    H5a1

    Normandie Orkney Netherlands Friesland East Frisia Finland
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo View Post
    IIRC, these Iron 'French' sample are actually from Alsace and surrounds. That's not Gaul. That's Germani.

    The Romans drew their own reality over unknown people. But there were distinct tribal groups (Gaul, Belgae, Germani, Lepontii/Golasecca, Liguri, Celtiberos) to account the vast territories.
    You should revise your classics. Alsace was during the IA a plainly Gaulish region, populated by Sequanes and Mediomatrici. The first attempts (aborted) of Germanic invasions date from the last century before our era, and the installation of the Allamani does not really begin until three centuries later.
    En North alom, de North venom
    En North fum naiz, en North manom

    (Roman de Rou, Wace, 1160-1170)

  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to anglesqueville For This Useful Post:

     Hando (11-15-2020),  Helgenes50 (10-31-2020),  Jessie (10-31-2020),  JMcB (10-31-2020),  Kellebel (10-31-2020),  Riverman (10-31-2020),  Ruderico (10-30-2020),  vettor (10-31-2020)

  5. #113
    Registered Users
    Posts
    65
    Sex

    Yeah semantic difference I guess as I was talking about Germani Celts.

    Alsatian Celts (Triboquos) were called Germani by Roman scholars, but like many other tribes named Germani they were obviously Celts. The earliest Germani term was Celtic related and used for Celts in and east of the Rhine and was hijacked later to refer to actual invading ''Germanic'' tribesmen of the Jastorf culture initially from Northern Germany who were a different people.

    The semantic passing is obscure and confuses people but it seems Romans are responsible for it, but the locals too:
    The older concept of the Germani being local to the Rhine, and especially the west bank of the lower Rhine, remained common among Graeco-Roman writers for a longer time than the more theoretical and general concept of Caesar. Cassius Dio writing in Greek in the 3rd century, consistently called the right-bank Germani of Caesar, the Celts (Κελτοί) and their country Keltikḗ (Κελτική). Cassius contrasted them with the "Gauls" (Γαλάται) on the left bank of the Rhine, and described Caesar doing the same in a speech. He reported that the peoples on either side of the Rhine had long ago taken to using these contrasting names, treating it as a boundary, but "very anciently both peoples dwelling on either side of the river were called Celts". For Cassius Dio, the only Germani and the only Germania were west of the Rhine within the empire: "some of the Celts (Keltoí), whom we call Germans (Germanoí)", had "occupied all the Belgic territory [Belgikḗ] along the Rhine and caused it to be called Germany [Germanía]".
    On Gaul and Germani Celts.
    Last edited by Echo; 10-31-2020 at 04:14 AM.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Echo For This Useful Post:

     Hando (11-16-2020)

  7. #114
    Registered Users
    Posts
    65
    Sex

    I'm sure @Anglesqueville just randomly got confused by the term I used so I've set it down.
    Last edited by Echo; 10-31-2020 at 12:33 AM.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Echo For This Useful Post:

     anglesqueville (10-31-2020),  Hando (11-16-2020)

  9. #115
    Registered Users
    Posts
    7,578
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by sktibo View Post
    If they turn out to be heavily northwestern, like modern scottish/Irish people, that would be about as interesting as it could get....

    I suppose it would mean that the Romans did leave a major genetic impact..
    I've always thought the idea that the Romans made no or very little genetic impact is extremely hard to believe. Maybe is some very peripheral areas of the empire. But in general its hard to believe an empire that existed for many centuries, founded towns, garrisons, colonies of army veterans etc and did not evacuate its citizens at the fall of the empire (in contrast to for example in British India) would not have left a significant genetic impact. When you look at Roman Britain for example, there were some tribes where archaeology and historical sources do suggest that were barely Romanised. The Domnonii of SW England for example lacks villas etc and I think at least on tribe in Wales was left self regulating and its generally thought that the tribes of southern Scotland had some sort of friendly buffer status. But much lowland (southern and eastern) England was Romanised and this is also very similar to the part which was conquered by the Anglo-Saxons c. 400-600AD. I strongly suspect that that large area had a Latin speaking very Romanised population who had centuries earlier were disarmed and become reliant on the Roman army and therefore relatively easy prey to the Anglo-Saxons. The areas that resisted longest and where Celtic languages survived the longest were the same - southern Scotland, the upland part of north of England, Cumbria, Wales, SW England. So, IMO we may have had two populations that were not genetically identical by the time the Anglo-Saxons arrived - one in the south and east of England which would have surely had significant non-local Roman imperial ancestry and Scotland, northern England, Wales and SW England which probably had only minor non-local ancestry (though former garrison areas may have left localised hotspots). One interesting linguistic model suggests that the Latin elite fled lowland England westwards (leaving the peasants behind) and mixed there with main Celtic block in the west of the island and this created the roots of what became post-Roman Brythonic/Welsh etc.

  10. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Alain (10-31-2020),  Aroon1916 (11-02-2020),  Echo (10-31-2020),  Hando (11-16-2020),  Helgenes50 (10-31-2020),  jadegreg (11-16-2020),  Jessie (10-31-2020),  JMcB (10-31-2020),  jstephan (10-30-2020),  Riverman (10-31-2020),  Ruderico (10-31-2020),  sktibo (10-31-2020)

  11. #116
    Silver Class Member
    Posts
    4,643
    Sex
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-Z198 (DF27)
    mtDNA (M)
    T2B-T152C

    England Scotland Poland Germany Canada Quebec Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    But much lowland (southern and eastern) England was Romanised and this is also very similar to the part which was conquered by the Anglo-Saxons c. 400-600AD. I strongly suspect that that large area had a Latin speaking very Romanised population who had centuries earlier were disarmed and become reliant on the Roman army and therefore relatively easy prey to the Anglo-Saxons.
    That's the theory I believe. I'd find it hard to believe Latin didn't take over in England in the heavily Romanized areas. IIRC I've read that Welsh has a lot of Latin vocabulary from the Roman occupation of England?

  12. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to sktibo For This Useful Post:

     Alain (10-31-2020),  Aroon1916 (11-02-2020),  Hando (11-16-2020),  jadegreg (11-16-2020),  Jessie (10-31-2020),  JMcB (10-31-2020),  jstephan (10-31-2020),  Riverman (10-31-2020)

  13. #117
    Registered Users
    Posts
    486
    Sex
    Location
    Australia
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Australian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-M222
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a10
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-U106
    mtDNA (P)
    H1bz

    Australia Mercia Ireland Leinster
    With 125k Roman soldiers, families and dependents, and an urban population of 240k, in Roman Britain that had an estimated 3.6 million at the end of the 4th Century, it's hard to imagine the Roman genetic contribution being numerically significant, taking into account that the collapse that would have disproportionately affected urbanites/non-locals, and the later Anglo-Saxon and Viking invasions would largely decrease whatever Roman legacy further.

    At the same time, it could only take a small Roman/Med influence to noticeably shift NW Europeans away from each other. Nevertheless the Celtic vs Germanic PCA shows that Iron Age Britons were already somewhat Southern shifted towards Gaul, which says that the Celtic influence in Britain was not from people that were British/Irish like.

  14. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Molfish For This Useful Post:

     Alain (10-31-2020),  Aroon1916 (11-02-2020),  Echo (10-31-2020),  Hando (11-16-2020),  Helves (10-31-2020),  Jessie (10-31-2020),  JMcB (10-31-2020),  jstephan (10-31-2020),  Kellebel (10-31-2020),  Michał (10-31-2020),  Riverman (10-31-2020),  Ruderico (10-31-2020),  sktibo (10-31-2020)

  15. #118
    Silver Class Member
    Posts
    4,643
    Sex
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-Z198 (DF27)
    mtDNA (M)
    T2B-T152C

    England Scotland Poland Germany Canada Quebec Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Molfish View Post
    With 125k Roman soldiers, families and dependents, and an urban population of 240k, in Roman Britain that had an estimated 3.6 million at the end of the 4th Century, it's hard to imagine the Roman genetic contribution being numerically significant, taking into account that the collapse that would have disproportionately affected urbanites/non-locals, and the later Anglo-Saxon and Viking invasions would largely decrease whatever Roman legacy further.

    At the same time, it could only take a small Roman/Med influence to noticeably shift NW Europeans away from each other. Nevertheless the Celtic vs Germanic PCA shows that Iron Age Britons were already somewhat Southern shifted towards Gaul, which says that the Celtic influence in Britain was not from people that were British/Irish like.
    The plot position for the 3 Iron Age Britons on the C vs G is really interesting, on the edge of the modern Celtic cluster
    newplot.png

    The PCAs (fig 4.6) in Cassidy's thesis plot Iron Age Britons on a plot that includes the modern British and Irish clusters, which appears to position the IA Britons from England just below the modern SW Scotland / NI cluster in PC 2 and 4, and in with the modern Scots on PC 2 and 6:
    cassiyfig4.6arrows.jpg

    Figure 4.6. PCA of haplotypic similarity of ancient and modern individuals from Britain and Ireland.
    Modern individuals are coloured by geographical region (labelled in panel B ), based on fineSTRUCTURE
    clustering assignments from Byrne et al. (submitted) Ancient individuals are outlined in black and coloured
    following the same geographical key. Six continental ancient samples are also included in grey. A) plots PC1 and
    PC3, which segregate the modern populations of Orkney and Wales from the remained of the dataset. A magnified
    image of ancient individuals is also shown. B ) plots PC2 and PC6, which provide the most accurate geographical
    representation of the two islands. C) plots PC2 and PC4, the latter of which serves to distinguish Chalcolithic and
    Bronze Age samples from the remainder of the dataset.

  16. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to sktibo For This Useful Post:

     Echo (10-31-2020),  Hando (11-16-2020),  Jessie (10-31-2020),  JMcB (10-31-2020),  jstephan (10-31-2020),  Molfish (10-31-2020),  Ruderico (10-31-2020)

  17. #119
    Registered Users
    Posts
    486
    Sex
    Location
    Australia
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Australian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-M222
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a10
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-U106
    mtDNA (P)
    H1bz

    Australia Mercia Ireland Leinster
    Quote Originally Posted by sktibo View Post
    The plot position for the 3 Iron Age Britons on the C vs G is really interesting, on the edge of the modern Celtic cluster
    newplot.png

    The PCAs (fig 4.6) in Cassidy's thesis plot Iron Age Britons on a plot that includes the modern British and Irish clusters, which appears to position the IA Britons from England just below the modern SW Scotland / NI cluster in PC 2 and 4, and in with the modern Scots on PC 2 and 6:
    cassiyfig4.6arrows.jpg
    England_Roman is also slightly shifted towards Hallstatt/France (despite the largely Germanic sample), away from the Insular cluster - best represented by the Irish.


  18. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Molfish For This Useful Post:

     Alain (10-31-2020),  Cascio (10-31-2020),  Hando (11-16-2020),  jadegreg (11-16-2020),  Jessie (10-31-2020),  JMcB (10-31-2020),  jstephan (10-31-2020),  sktibo (10-31-2020)

  19. #120
    Registered Users
    Posts
    921
    Sex
    Location
    UK
    Ethnicity
    Tuscan Italian
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152+Z36+
    mtDNA (M)
    U6a7a

    United Kingdom Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by Molfish View Post
    With 125k Roman soldiers, families and dependents, and an urban population of 240k, in Roman Britain that had an estimated 3.6 million at the end of the 4th Century, it's hard to imagine the Roman genetic contribution being numerically significant, taking into account that the collapse that would have disproportionately affected urbanites/non-locals, and the later Anglo-Saxon and Viking invasions would largely decrease whatever Roman legacy further.

    At the same time, it could only take a small Roman/Med influence to noticeably shift NW Europeans away from each other. Nevertheless the Celtic vs Germanic PCA shows that Iron Age Britons were already somewhat Southern shifted towards Gaul, which says that the Celtic influence in Britain was not from people that were British/Irish like.
    Is typically Italian R-Z56 at all common in the most Romanized parts of SE Britain?

    Surely we should be looking at Romanized people from all over the Empire settling in Britain,especially in the SE.

  20. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cascio For This Useful Post:

     Alain (10-31-2020),  Hando (11-16-2020),  jstephan (10-31-2020)

Page 12 of 35 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Looking for North Italian kits
    By Inimer in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 10-05-2020, 11:13 AM
  2. Replies: 97
    Last Post: 07-19-2019, 04:32 PM
  3. North Italian VS Spanish Admix
    By Nino90 in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 12-03-2018, 07:59 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-26-2017, 07:37 AM
  5. The Celts - Blood, Iron and Sacrifice.
    By JohnHowellsTyrfro in forum Western
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 11-01-2015, 07:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •