Evidence for dynastic succession among early Celtic elites

[Andour]

I do not know if the PCA includes all the IA Alsatian samples available, but 40 AI1 genomes from Duttlmenheim should be published, the sonner the better. ]
 
o

Great news.

At the same time, I'd be tempted to say : Alsace again ! 

It's a bit of a pity that, though more and more ancient samples are published, the central areas of France, from Toulouse to Orléans, from La Rochelle to Lyon, remain a "genetic void". I wish they'd analyze a few Ruteni, Arverni, Bituriges or Carnutes...

[AntOnios]

Also the yDNA haplogroups assignment would be great, since its one of the largest Hallstatt samples and might be more representative for Western Hallstatt than earlier ones.

I just analysed the one which is I-L38 according to theytree (https://www.theytree.com/portal/index/sa...eyword=mbg) and it is indeed I-L38

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-L38/
seven SNPs of block I-L38 derived and one SNP of block I-L38 ancestral.

[La Tene]

The Lech Valley Early Bronze Age samples are entirely contained within the area occupied by the new SW German Hallstatt Celtic samples. Which means these Hallstatt people were similar to their Bronze Age predecessors 

Do the Lech valley EBA samples overlap with any BA samples from France?

The Hauts-de-France sample in green is the Bucy-le-long sample (BFM265). He lies at the fringe of the German samples. We should bear in mind that the Hallstattian zone of influence  in France never really concerned the Hauts-de-France, which seems to have had its own specific history.

Right. But the bulk of the Hauts de France blob on your PCA overlaps with the Hallstatt german samples, so couldn't that guy be more a "British/Armorican local like" outlier? Apparently RSFO migrants/ceramics from the south did reach to parts of Hauts de France, especially the south eastern half.

[Orentil]

The publication is said to be out but I can't find it so far. Published in Nature Human Behaviour

https://www.mdr.de/wissen/archaeologie-f...g-100.html

I assume the link will be activated later today.

[Rozenfeld]

The publication is said to be out but I can't find it so far. Published in Nature Human Behaviour

https://www.mdr.de/wissen/archaeologie-f...g-100.html

I assume the link will be activated later today.

The article: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-01888-7

[Dewsloth]

Neat:

To investigate individual ancestries within the Hallstatt group, we used the Middle Bronze Age population from the southern German Lech valley as a proxy for local ancestry. Indeed, most Hallstatt individuals fit a model of receiving all of their ancestry from Germany_Lech_MBA, with the exception of previously described southern outliers MBG004, MBG016 and northern outlier LAN001 from Alte Burg (Supplementary Table 2.8). LAN001 received the majority of his ancestry from a more northern European source, most closely related to the Bronze and Iron Age population of the Netherlands and Saxony-Anhalt (Supplementary Tables 2.9 and 2.11), which is also consistent with his elevated δ18O values supporting a coastal northwestern European or Central German origin44,45,46.
The arrival of individuals of more northern European ancestry during the La Tène period can also be observed in published data from the nearby Czech Republic42, where we analysed individual ancestry components using supervised clustering (Supplementary Fig. 5.8d) and detect a previously undescribed diversification of the gene pool with respect to northern European ancestry from the Hallstatt to the La Tène period (two-sided F test; F = 0.20174, numerator d.f. 15, denominator d.f. 60, P = 0.001). In southern Germany (here Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria) the northern European influx broadens to a major genetic turnover between the Iron Age and the Early Middle Ages (Fig. 4c and Supplementary Note 5). It is illustrated by a sharp decrease of EEF ancestry and a substantial resurgence of Steppe-related ancestry together with a re-diversification of the gene pool (Supplementary Figs. 4.4, 4.5 and 5.2). While the Hallstatt population showed highest genetic affinity to present-day French, Spanish and Belgians, the early medieval (Alemannic and Bavarian) populations of southern Germany47,48 exhibit closest resemblance to present-day Danish, northern Germans, Dutch and Scandinavians (Supplementary Fig. 5.4) and are genetically indistinguishable from Iron Age and Medieval groups in northern Germany and Scandinavia (Supplementary Table 2.10). We argue that this is the result of a major genetic influx from those regions as indicated by qpWave analysis and supervised ADMIXTURE (Fig. 4c and Supplementary Figs. 5.3, 5.5 and 5.6). The northern regions of Germany (here Saxony-Anhalt, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Schleswig-Holstein) underwent a very different population genetic trajectory than southern Germany. While the Bronze and Iron Age populations in the north also received additional EEF ancestry (Supplementary Figs. 4.5a,b), it was substantially less than what arrived in southern Germany, forming a Steppe ancestry-enriched gene pool highly similar to contemporaneous populations in Denmark, Sweden and Norway (Supplementary Fig. 5.2). Migration from northern Germany introduced EEF-depleted ancestry to southern Germany, resulting in a rise of the median northern European ancestry from 2.8% during the Iron Age to 62.5% during the Early Middle Ages (Supplementary Fig. 5.3), as well as in new paternal ancestry in the form of Y-chromosome haplogroups like I1-M253 (refs. 47,48). While we cannot precisely date this migration, Roman48 and Late Iron Age49 data from Bavaria and Thuringia indicate that parts of the early Iron Age gene pool in southern Germany were not affected until the fourth or fifth century CE (with northern European ancestry not exceeding a median of 8% in these samples). In general, this turnover seems to be part of a larger movement of people, contributing northern European ancestry to the early medieval populations of England50, Hungary51, Italy51 and Spain52.

I wonder how LAN001 compares with I17607 dated 800-550 BCE Louny, Stradonice, Czech Republic, so technically Hallstatt C or D, but autosomally much more northwest than most contemporary burials in Bohemia.

Edit:
[from paper table 2.9]PopA PopB p-value
LAN001 Netherlands_LBA (n = 2) 0.849976573
LAN001 Netherlands_MBA (n = 11) 0.773500212
LAN001 Netherlands_EIA (n = 2) 0.495262324
LAN001 Netherlands_LNB_EBA_BellBeaker (n = 3) 0.378576086
LAN001 Germany_LBA_Halberstadt_published (n = 1) 0.243762
LAN001 Germany_EBA_Unetice (n = 7) 0.243372816
LAN001 Netherlands_BA (n = 2) 0.193386259
LAN001 Netherlands_MBA_LBA (n = 2) 0.166367504
LAN001 Denmark_BA.SG (n = 2) 0.123597387
LAN001 Scotland_EIA (n = 2) 0.067879273

[from G25]
Distance to: CZE_IA_Hallstatt_low_res:I17607
0.04608915 Netherlands_LBA
0.04753983 England_MBA_lowEEF
0.04874972 Sweden_IA.SG
0.05022306 England_C_EBA
0.05097497 Netherlands_MBA
0.05097845 England_EBA_BellBeaker
0.05098995 Denmark_IA.SG
0.05194537 Wales_C_EBA
0.05210492 Scotland_Orkney_IA.SG
0.05217964 Scotland_LBA
0.05231635 England_BellBeaker
0.05275480 Norway_IA.SG
0.05329329 England_MIA_LIA_o
0.05346359 Netherlands_EBA
0.05351698 Scotland_LIA

[Urnfielder]

while DA111 lands half way between Brittany and the Basque country

Could this be some kind of west french profile?

I posted a Vahaduo PCA some way up this thread (https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?...6#pid12746) with the new Hallstatt samples plus the geographically close Lech Valley Bell Beaker and Early Bronze Age samples - plus a few Gaulish Iron Age groups. If you look at it, you'll notice a few things :
- The Lech Valley Bell Beaker samples are extremely heterogeneous, as if the fusion between incoming and local populations was incomplete yet.
- The Lech Valley Early Bronze Age samples are entirely contained within the area occupied by the new SW German Hallstatt Celtic samples. Which means these Hallstatt people were similar to their Bronze Age predecessors : no movement from the West. No increase in WHG.
- France IA Grand Est overlaps with both Lech BB and Lech EBA groups. Although there's a slight pull to the West, those pops were quite similar.
- Both France IA South-East and IA South-West (Occitanie) land outside the Hallstatt sphere, and are much more Basque-like.

Now if you add modern Auvergne samples to this PCA, you'll find it lands right in the middle of the West German Hallsatt Celtic group. Logically, given the geographic position of the Auvergne, if there hadn't been any movement from the East at some time in the Hallstatt period, the Auvergne samples should end up about half-way between the SE and SW French_IA samples. Such is not the case. There is no pull to the south-east (which might be explained by Roman veterans settling here), no pull to the north (Frankish or Burgundian). There's a pull to the east...

Czech, Hungarian, and Slovenian La Tène samples are very much Gaulish-like. I am prepared to concede that this may be due to movements from the West. But these recent German Hallstatt samples take us one step further back in time, before the La Tène eastward move. So I'll reiterate my views here that when archeologists dig into it deeper and cooperate more closely with geneticists, they may well have to give up the "no discontinuity" rant.

I was reading a fascinating paper recently on the early Iron Age in France. Interestingly, it developed like this : In the 10th and 9th centuries BC...
- plain settlements are abandoned.
- hillforts are erected everywhere.
- notable changes in ceramics appear.
- new weapons are also found.
- exchange networks are re-oriented.
--- Conclusion of the author : we do not observe any cultural discontinuity... !!

I don't know if DA111 moved to Bohemia from the West. I honestly think he was just a local who for some reaon happened to inherit more than his fair share of WHG. There might have been a residual pocket of outliers around (a bit like those Hassleben Gauls in the midst of Germans). But I am increasingly convinced that Early Hallstatt witnessed a massive move from SW Germany into Central East France, which the subsequent "conquests" (Roman or Germanic) failed to obliterate.

La Tene = Celtic

Tollense samples were completely different ydna (zero G2a, mostly I2a, even rare R1a) and match closest with Polish and Ukrainians, La Tene match closest with French and Swiss. Urnfield formed in Hungary/Slovakia/Poland and expanded west/north/south while La Tene formed in Switzerland/France and expanded east + west.

[Riverman]

Urnfield culture was a religious-cultural phenomenon, with three to four main groups at its source, in order of adoption of the rites:
- Kyjatice and Gáva in the Carpathian basin, based on preceding local groups of Piliny, Suciu de Sus, Berkesz-Demecser, Igrita etc. Presumably J2a-R1a (Kyjatice) and E-V13 (Gáva)
- Lusatians North of the Carpathian mountain range. Presumably I2 with R-L51 in the West and R-Z283 in the East.
- Tumulus culture into Central European Urnfielders. Presumably dominated by R-L51, especially R-L2.

The borderline is the Middle Danube bent in Hungary and Slovakia between the Eastern (Lusatian, Kyjatice, Gáva) and Western Tumulus derived groups, like Knoviz (which was already dominated by R-L51, but had I2 too), Middle Danubian Urnfield group (direct descendant of Middle Danubian Tumulus culture) and other Urnfield groups.

More uncertain are the Protovillanovans in my book, which show close ties both with Middle Danubian and other Tumulus derived Urnfielders, but also to the Eastern groups (Kyjatice-Gáva).

In any case, its impossible to put all these groups which carried the Urnfield expansion outward into one ethnolinguistic formation and give them one single uniparental and autosomal profile. They are clearly different from their background and genetics.

[pelop]

La Tene = Celtic

Tollense samples were completely different ydna (zero G2a, mostly I2a, even rare R1a) and match closest with Polish and Ukrainians, La Tene match closest with French and Swiss. Urnfield formed in Hungary/Slovakia/Poland and expanded west/north/south while La Tene formed in Switzerland/France and expanded east + west.

La Tene was much later than Urnfield so I don't think they can be compared. Besides, Urnfield was a multi-ethnic/multi-lingual phenomenon.

There's an I2 branch found in both Danubian Urnfield-related and in later Celtic contexts:

https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/I-L1229/tree

Also, R-PF7589 (with a similar central-east European origin) has been found in Knoviz Culture and Tollense samples and is later seen among Iron Age groups in Italy.

[Mitchell-Atkins]

Hopefully someone can drill down further on the 3 P312 samples

[Riverman]

At this piont it is completely beyond me how more fine grained papers which explicitly target dynasties and familial relationships can still miss out on yDNA at a higher resolution.
For most haplogroups we are now at a point where we look out for specific younger branches, instead of more generalised haplogroups and paternal relationships are the safest if being confirmed by high resolution yDNA testing.

[Daemon2017]

Map of places from this study:

[Mitchell-Atkins]

Map of places from this study:

That’s the same area (and to the west in eastern France) where I think my branch was hanging out during this period.

[Pribislav]

It seems we could be talking about a patrilineal dynasty as well, since samples from three different sites could belong to the same subclade (the last two have lower coverage):


LWB003; G2a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>CTS4803>S2808>Y3098 (xFGC8346,Z40765,Z45548,FT47568,FT153446,BY34320,FGC34822,Y97811)

MBG017; G2a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>CTS4803>S2808>Y3098 (xY3101,S2795,FGC8346,Z45548,FT153446,FTD7424,BY34320,BY130701,Z30742,FGC34822,Y97811,FT367097)

HOC002; G2a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>CTS4803

HOC003;  G2a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816

MBG016; 616-530 BC; Magdalenenberg, Germany; Hallstatt_IA; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a-L497>Z1815>Y7538

MBG010; 616-530 BC; Magdalenenberg, Germany; Hallstatt_IA; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823 

HOC004; 530-500 BC; Eberdingen-Hochdorf, Germany; Hallstatt_IA; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>CTS4803>S2808>BY46757>S23438

[okshtunas]

It seems we could be talking about a patrilineal dynasty as well, since samples from three different sites could belong to the same subclade (the last two have lower coverage):


LWB003; G2a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>CTS4803>S2808>Y3098 (xFGC8346,Z40765,Z45548,FT47568,FT153446,BY34320,FGC34822,Y97811)

MBG017; G2a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>CTS4803>S2808>Y3098 (xY3101,S2795,FGC8346,Z45548,FT153446,FTD7424,BY34320,BY130701,Z30742,FGC34822,Y97811,FT367097)

HOC002; G2a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>CTS4803

HOC003;  G2a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816

MBG016; 616-530 BC; Magdalenenberg, Germany; Hallstatt_IA; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a-L497>Z1815>Y7538

MBG010; 616-530 BC; Magdalenenberg, Germany; Hallstatt_IA; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823 

HOC004; 530-500 BC; Eberdingen-Hochdorf, Germany; Hallstatt_IA; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>CTS4803>S2808>BY46757>S23438

What about these "so called Slavic-Like Czech Celts" ambron is referring? Any of them males with Y-DNA reads?