Celts
 

There didn't seem to be any threads about Celts. We should put that right!

Who were the Celts and where did they come from?

I propose that:

Proto-Celts were the people who brought R1b, agriculture and Indo-European language to Western Europe, arriving roughly 4000-3000BC.
They were the bell beaker people, and the people of the 'atlantic bronze age'. The people who built stone circles. They form the bulk of the Iberian, French and British isles populations today as well as some of the more easterly people of the low countries, Northern Italy and Western Germany. This therefore means they form the bulk of the North American population.

I think the central European homeland of the celts has been proven incorrect both by genetic and other research, as has the theory of some sort of iron age celtic invasion of Britain. I don't see that there is much link between the La Tene and Halstatt cultures and these atlantic people.
Clearly celtic languages have not survived in many areas, but although Germanic and Romance languages have taken their place the people are mostly as 'celtic' as they ever were.

What do you think of these ideas? Everything seems to add up fairly well in light of the ancient R1b samples discovered a few months ago, don't you think?

Why does everybody seem to believe this?. Just because they aren't nordics they have to be celtic?.

The way I see it is, Western Europe is this group, Eastern Europe is R1a/corded ware and then Germanic is a mixture of the two plus also a larger proportion of hunter gatherers than elsewhere. Then also we have Southern Italy and Greece where other neolithic groups settled.

there are many claims though that Celts were rather cultural than ethnical group. What about this? Maybe there were a few sub-groups for instance? (reflected in subclades of R1b)

There were definitely subgroups. Gauls, Celt-Iberians, Britons and Gaels seem to be the main ones.

Picts lived in Scotland, but I don't think anyone knows whether they were Brythonic or what.

---------- Post added 2012-06-24 at 18:51 ----------

How can we explain the fact the basque is not a celtic or even Indo-European language, but that also they have the highest R1b levels?

According to John Collis in the "Celts: Origns, myths, inventions" there's no such thing as Celts and everything you thought you knew of them is WRONG.

A lot of people say a lot of things. I wonder if John Collis would care to inform the people of Wales that their language doesn't exist and neither do they.

It is possible that certain subclades of R1b picked up the Indo-European cultural package from R1a groups around Central/Eastern Europe and then moved West spreading the language and culture to their R1b kin.

According to the Myres study, U152 (S28) is most diverse in Western Poland and matches the spread of the Celtic and Italic languages rather nicely, at least more so than other R1b subclades, save the British Isles and Ireland; two areas which adopted the IE languages relatively late.

http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/file.php...c_1_fig008.jpg

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhtha...S28-poE-CT.png

I wouldn't stake my life on this claim, but it seems plausible.

Its not so much that as more the fact that "Celtic" people never referred to themselves as such at the macro level unlike the Slavs. The term doesn't come into play to lump people together who have an apparent "Celticness" together until much much later. It is a type of exonym rather than an endonym.

Oh I see. Well just because they didn't recognise their similarity to each other and their relationship it doesn't mean we shoudn't.

---------- Post added 2012-06-24 at 19:25 ----------

The problem with that is, if the R1a and R1b people were so similar, how could they possibly speak languages from totally different families before this exchange took place?

Do you mean similar in terms of autosomal DNA?

For a book that goes the other way check out Barry Cunliffe's "the Ancient Celts". It actually upholds the traditional frame work for understanding "Celts".

There are some serious theoretical problems to understanding "Celto-ethnogenesis" though. For instance are we absolutely sure that Halstatt culture really was ethno-linguistically related to the people of NW Europe?

Also are we really sure that everyone of Iron age France was a type of "Celt", y'know similar to NW Europe ethno-linguistic identities. I don't believe Vercingetorix referred to himself as such and his people weren't necessarily referring to themselves as Gauls either.

Continental "Celtic" differs greatly from Insular Celtic.

I enjoy the problems of understanding "Our Ancestors the Gauls" (as Michael Dietler sarcastically put it) and I don't think the traditional frame work is 100% bogus but do enjoy playing devils advocate regarding "Celts".http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/evilgrin.gif

Well not necessarily, but are there many instances of closely related haplogroups where one speaks one language and the other speaks a language that isn't even from the same family?

---------- Post added 2012-06-24 at 19:38 ----------

This whole thing of Celts coming from Central Europe is based on Herodotus saying that they were from the source of the Danube.

But he thought that it was near the Franco-Spanish border.

What link is there between Halstatt/La Tene and Celts in Western France, Iberia or Britain?

The more traditional frameworks from the last century proclaimed Halstatt culture as Proto-Celtic. The material culture associated with Iron Age Marnia (N. France) which had apparent Halstatt/La Tene links was supposed to have arrived in Britain sometime soon after. Collis is hyper critical of this and refers to the time when British schools referred to the coming of the "Celts" to Britain as the "Marnian invasion' scenario.

Cunliffe also talks much about the Halstatt culture's role of being Proto-Celtic.

In my opinion that view is too simplistic.

The germanics conquered and then created the western europe we still live in so the importance of them is enormous. They have contributed to the western European culture(since the fall of Rome) more than the celts.

The continental Celts was culturally marginaliced a long time.

The native American languages were very diverse and yet the vast majority of Amerindian men belong to Y-DNA Q1a3a1. I'm sure there are other examples, but that is the first that comes to mind.

Were those languages all part of the same family?

---------- Post added 2012-06-24 at 20:03 ----------

But we are not talking about anything after the migration period here.

No. Check the wiki page for details.

According to Andrew Garrett there were no Proto-Celts. Celtic dialects aroused from local Sprachbund phenomena:

the formation of a Celtic subgroup of Indo—European, the formation of an Italic subgroup, and even the formation of ‘Greek’ itself may have been secondary Sprachbund phenomena: local responses to areal and cultural connections that could very well have arisen in Greece, on the Italian peninsula, and in western and central Europe. These would represent linguistic areas, not merely the final landing sites of three discrete Indo—European subgroups after some millennial peregrination from the steppes. If this view is right, it makes no sense to ask what route the speakers of ‘Proto—Greek’, ‘Proto—Italic’, or ‘Proto—Celtic’ followed from the Indo—European homeland: no such languages existed, and no such populations. It is an accident of history that these three families and apparent branches of Indo—European have arisen (or four, if we restore Albanian to its place among the living). This accident reveals nothing about Indo—European, its speakers, or the dispersal of Indo—European languages and their speakers.
http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~garrett/BLS1999.pdf

Ethnogenesis of Celts and Germanics is a very interesting subject now. It seems that both those ethnicities originated in Atlantic Europe and have nothing to do with Eastern Europe.

But someone still had to bring Indo-European languages for them to develop from, unless he is suggesting that all Indo-European languages are actually a sprachbund?