Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-11 > 1068070582

Subject: Re: [DNA] Questions about R1b, H and celtic
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 17:16:30 -0500 (EST)
References: <3FA96A2A.000003.01832@computer>
In-Reply-To: <3FA96A2A.000003.01832@computer> (

Debby wrote:
> 1) Is R1b (Y-DNA) an equivalent to haplogroup H (mtDNA)?

"Equivalent" is much too strong a word. They have one thing in common:
each is the most common haplogroup in Europe in its own field.

> 2) Is haplogroup H considered celtic?

No. By the way, you need to be careful here. Anthropology includes
archealogy, and the term "celt" means a stone tool, while the term
"Celt" means a person.

> 3) And what mtDNA groups are considered celtic, if any?


> 4) What areas in Europe are considered "celtic" in origin?

Origin? You've got to be kidding. Linguistically, the Celts belong
to the Indo-European family (not to be confused with the term used by
DNAprint). Linguistic and geographic clues indicate that the language
took shape somewhere in eastern Europe and spread out from there, but
there is lots of controversy about how much of the spread was by
contact. Think of "waves" of migration sweeping through Europe,
sometimes pushing the previous inhabitants aside and sometimes
catching them up in the spreading wave. The Celtic wave was a little
behind the Italic wave and a little ahead of the Germanic wave in
spreading to the west. In historic times, the Italic wave had been
obliterated by the Celtic everywhere except in Italy, and the Romans
just barely prevented the completion of that process. In those days,
the Celtic wave was located in Spain, France, northern Italy, the
British Isles, and parts of the Balkans, but the Germanic wave was
close behind. As we all know, the Romans turned back the Germanic
wave as well, but only temporarily. If you take a "snapshot" at
any particular time, you will find each wave localized somewhere,
but they were always just passing through until they ran into a
coastline or other impenetrable barrier.

> 5) and, is there any truth to a rumor that a lot of celtic people (or
> Proto-Celtic) might have be from semetic roots or from the "10 lost tribes
> of Israel"?

I don't know of anybody serious who takes that rumor seriously.

John Chandler

This thread: