Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Celt - No such thing !!!
#31
Quote:Can there be a differenciation between arrivals in 5th & 10th Century?

What are the other 47% ?

No, it's just modern population but Northumbria wasn't as heavily influenced by Scandinavians as was Yorkshire.

The rest are seen as 'indigenous britons'.

This study is rather old in genetic terms and one of the main assumptions of the model, that the indigenous population are similar to the Basques, is rather suspect thesedays. However, the Peoples of the British Isles Project are sampling northumbria in their study and results we be out late 2008/early 2009.

best
Harry Amphlett
Harry Amphlett
Reply
#32
Quote:This study is rather old in genetic terms and one of the main assumptions of the model, that the indigenous population are similar to the Basques, is rather suspect thesedays

Is R1b no longer attributed to an Iberian refugium?
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
Reply
#33
Quote:Is R1b no longer attributed to an Iberian refugium?

The hypothesis fell out of favour with some geneticists a few years ago.

The hypothesis as described by Jim Wilson was based on 3 assumptions, none of them anything to do with yDNA. They were based on linguistics, the Rh blood group and the assumption that the mtDNA lineages of the Basques went back to the paleolithic.

In 2005, Santos Alonso stated that this hypothesis had entered genetic studies as a circular argument and investigated the yDNA to see if this was true; "There is a trend to consider the gene pool of the Basques as a 'living fossil' of the earliest modern humans that colonized Europe."

His conclusion in this yDNA study was:

"At least some lineages of Y chromosome in modern Basques originated and have been evolving since pre-Neolithic times. However, the strong genetic drift experienced by the Basques does not allow us to consider Basques either the only or the best representatives of the ancestral European gene pool. Contrary to previous suggestions, we do not observe any particular link between Basques and Celtic populations beyond that provided by the Paleolithic ancestry common to European populations, nor we find evidence supporting Basques as the focus of major population expansions."

In 2006, Ana M González' study stated that:

"It is customary, in population genetics studies, to consider Basques as the direct descendants of the Paleolithic Europeans. However, until now there has been no irrefutable genetic proof to support this supposition. Even studies based on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), an ideal molecule for constructing datable maternal genealogies, have failed to achieve this."


Izagirre found:

"The absence of haplogroup V in the prehistoric samples analyzed conflicts with the hypothesis proposed by Torroni et al., in which haplogroup V is considered as an mtDNA marker for a major Paleolithic population expansion from southwestern Europe, occurring approximately 10,000-15,000 years before the present (YBP).".

In addition, those paleolithic markers which were found, eg. U8a, were in low frequencies:

Studying the cemetary at Aldaieta, Alzualde found:
"The variability of the mtDNA haplogroups of the historical population of Aldaieta falls within the range of the present-day populations of Europe's Atlantic fringe, whereas the prehistoric populations of the Basque Country display clear differentiation in relation to all others. Consequently, we suggest that between 5,0001,500 YBP approximately, there may have been gene flow amongst the western European populations that homogenised mtDNA lineages."

In other words, one of the 3 assumptions, the mtDNA argument is by no means secure and no yDNA has been found to support the hypothesis. Indeed, according to Cinnioglu, R1b entered Anatolia during the paleolithic and dispersed from there. The most recent mtDNA study in France, Pennarun E et al. states:
"The French Basques’ mtDNA pool shares some common cardinal features with that of the Spanish Basques, represented in the high prevalence of haplogroup H. However, the French Basques do show a number of distinct features, most notably expressed in the much higher frequency of haplogroups linked with the Neolithic diffusion in Europe."

The best that can be said about the 'out of iberia' hypothesis is that it is suspect. Some people are beginning to suggest that R1b ushered in the centum indoeuropean languages and R1a the satem indo european languages. I think this may be just a coincidence however.

best
Harry Amphlett
Harry Amphlett
Reply
#34
Quote:The hypothesis fell out of favour with some geneticists a few years ago.

Just as long as I have been out of the R1b literature.

Quote:The best that can be said about the 'out of iberia' hypothesis is that it is suspect. Some people are beginning to suggest that R1b ushered in the centum indoeuropean languages and R1a the satem indo european languages. I think this may be just a coincidence however.

Yea, I wouldn't bet the farm on that. It would mean almost total replacement in some western areas and a cline against the direction of spread. I have no problem with R1B being a wave from the East that occurred after the LGM rather than a refuge population, but it surely must have predated agriculture to find favorable demographics for replacement.

Its unlikely that the proto-indoeuropeans can be traced by any single marker. Something like a population that is heavy in J2 variants and I in the balkans or perhaps J2 variants and R1a1 in the caucuses or makes more sense to me. But then I am J2A1K, so I'm biased.
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
Reply
#35
Are you guys saying (in Genetican) that Oppenheimers acertion that the pre-Roman inhabitants of the British Isles (i.e. Wales & Ireland in particular) could not be "Celts" as they had Basque DNA and were consequently ethnically pre-Celtic ... is not proven?
Conal Moran

Do or do not, there is no try!
Yoda
Reply
#36
Quote:Are you guys saying (in Genetican) that Oppenheimers acertion that the pre-Roman inhabitants of the British Isles (i.e. Wales & Ireland in particular) could not be "Celts" as they had Basque DNA and were consequently ethnically pre-Celtic ... is not proven?

Sort of, yes. Some lines do go back to the paleolithic, but not all. As far as those that don't are concerned, we don't have any data as to where they did come from or how many there were.

It's hard to comment on Oppenheimer's work because he uses his own system of markers which are not used by peer science. He hasn't published either his methods or how his gene clusters are defined. To find out, one has to use one of the companies who do the 'Oppenheimer Test'. They will test you for standard markers and then tell you which of Oppenheimer's clans you belong to.

The peer science has always made it clear that the 'Basque hypothesis' was unproven. Jim Wilson stated this very clearly. Subsequent studies such as Weale's or Capelli's have always referred to this stating that Wilson 'suggests' or Wilson 'argues'.

If the Basques are not 100% paleolithic and have experienced introgression either during or after the neolithic, then some of the similarities between the Basques and insular Celts may not be because one came from the other, but because they both came from somewhere else. Alzualde above claims that this could have been between 3000 BC and 500 AD.

There is a good article in the Journal of Genetic Genealogists which explains the situation in reasonably plain english at:

http://www.jogg.info/22/Coffman.htm

best
Harry Amphlett
Harry Amphlett
Reply
#37
Thanks Harry
Conal Moran

Do or do not, there is no try!
Yoda
Reply
#38
Quote:The Norse words in Northumbrian dialects (including Geordie, Pitmatic and Mackam) are merely loan words; the Northumbrian dialects are closer to English than most other English dialects. Actually, Northumberland has less Norse cultural traits than the Hebrides, ...
Are you sure?
Driving through Northumberland yesterday, I was struck by the number of Norse placenames: e.g. Crosby, Wallby, ...
posted by Duncan B Campbell
https://ninth-legion.blogspot.com/
Reply
#39
Quote:I am curretly on the trail of the Brigantes as they are noted as the only Tribe with lands in both England and Ireland. There are also mentions of Brigantii in the Austrian Alps and also in Spain. If these are linked that would be very intersting Confusedhock:


The thing about the name being pretty common as it means "mountain" was already answered.

I was born and grew up in the region in the Austrian alps where the Brigantii or Brixentes like a roman inscription also calls them lived.

They are part of the Vindelici and got their name after their main settlement Brigantium/Brigantion (modern Bregenz) which is situated on a mountain slope between Lake Constanz and the Pfaender mountain. The settlement was founded around 1500BCE and was the strongest oppidum in the eastern lake Constanz area.

(btw the museum there is small but has some really nice objects like one of the Coolus helmets from Schaan, many celtic and roman swords and a nice treasure of Roman coins and jewelery which was found in a former swamp nearby.)

here the wiki article:

i knooow it's wiki but hey at least it's in english Wink
RESTITVTOR LIBERTATIS ET ROMANAE RELIGIONIS

DEDITICIVS MINERVAE ET MVSARVM

[Micha F.]
Reply
#40
Quote:
Quote:He made that assertion some years ago that the idea of 'celt' was invented in the 17th century, and never used in the ancient world
Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quorum unum incolunt Belgae, alii Aquitanii, terti ei qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli apellantur....
(All [of] Gaul is divided into three parts, in one of which live the Belgians, another the Aquitanians, the third called by their own language "Celts", [but] by ours are called "Gauls"....) De Bello Gallico, Julius Caesar, who had first hand contact with these people. (Written from school memorization, could be spelling errors in the Latin.)

Caesar believed that the Gauls called themselves "Celts". I guess I'd pick his testimony over Simon James, but that's just me.

As far as languages are concerned, my limited knowledge agrees with some of the "not the same language, but perhaps the same linguistic family" statements above. Portugese (Lusitanian + Latin) is not the same as Spanish (Celtiberian + Latin and Iberian + Latin, hence Castillian and Aragonian), French (Gaulic + Latin) are all examples of "Celtic root languages", their differences preserved by the common Latin connection. A Lusitanian would not have been able to converse directly with a Northern Gaul, unless the one knew the other's language, then, or spoke some common language. Am I thinking correctly?

Since anal retentiveness has been brought into discussion, here is the Caesarian text:

Quote:Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur. hi omnes lingua, institutis, legibus inter se differunt.

As for Portuguese being different from Spanish because of the Celtic substratum, I believe this is somewhat far fetched. The differences in terms of grammatical structure between the two modern languages are minimal. The most obvious are related to pronunciation, and these only evolved in the Middle Ages.

The linguistic unity of Latin over the entire space of the Roman empire is attested by the documents of Vulgar Latin (which cannot be suspected of learned artificiality), and this means the importance of Celtic in determining the course of future Romance languages is not decisive.[/quote]
Me non oracula certum sed mors certa facit.
Kaeso Otacillianus // Cristian Ghita
Reply
#41
I've always thought of Celtic as a culture more than a race/ethnicity (not all "Celts" are really related). Also, whats with the modern pronounciation of the word Celt to Selt? It should be said as Kelt.
King Arthur, High King of the Romano-British, and Restitutor Orbis
Ray
Reply


Forum Jump: