teepeanTracing the Spread of Celtic Languages using Ancient Genomics
Abstract
Celtic languages, including Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Welsh and Breton, are today restricted to the Northern European Atlantic seaboard. However, between 3 and 2 thousand years before present (BP) Celtic was widely spoken across most of Europe. While often associated with Bell Beaker-related populations, the spread of this prominent Indo-European linguistic cluster remains debated1—7. Previous genomic investigations have focused on its arrival to specific regions: Britain8, Iberia9 and Southwestern Germany10. Here, we utilize new genomic data from Bronze and Iron Age Europe to investigate the population history of historically Celtic-speaking regions, and test different linguistic theories on the origins and early spread of the Celtic languages. We identify a widespread demographic impact of the Central European Urnfield Culture. We find ancestry associated with its Knovíz subgroup in the Carpathian Basin to have formed between 4—3.2 kyr BP, and subsequently expanded across much of Western Europe between 3.2 and 2.8 kyr BP. This ancestry further persisted into the Hallstatt Culture of France, Germany and Austria, impacting Britain by 2.8 kyr BP and Iberia by 2.5 kyr BP. These findings support models of an Eastern Central rather than a Western European center of spread for a major component of all the attested Celtic languages. Our study demonstrates, yet again, the power of ancient population genomics in addressing long-standing debates in historical linguistics.
Sequence data for the new 578 ancient genomes can be found in the ENA under accession:
xxxxxxxx.
No data available yet.
![]()
Tracing the Spread of Celtic Languages using Ancient Genomics
Celtic languages, including Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Welsh and Breton, are today restricted to the Northern European Atlantic seaboard. However, between 3 and 2 thousand years before present (BP) Celtic was widely spoken across most of Europe. While often associated with Bell Beaker-related...www.biorxiv.org
If I am reading the supplementary correctly there are two Finnish iron age samples with decent quality!
The paper concentrates on the amounts of different early farmer/Neolithic ancestries and being able to, if done correctly, to identify specific mass migrations into Celtic areas. Most notable, it seems to prove, going by the text, what I always considered the likeliest option, that there was a massive influx of continental ancestry into the British Isles after the initial settlement by the Bell Beakers:
For England, we find a series of transitions in the prominent farming ancestries present for212
each time slice (Fig. 3). Initially, between 4800–4000 BP, we find a individuals are modelled213
with a high proportion of Bell Beaker related ancestry, and the tendency to have a slightly214
higher proportion of local British-Irish Isles Neolithic ancestry, relative to the other215
Neolithic-related ancestries. By the Middle Bronze Age (4000–3200 BP), the highest Farmer-216
related ancestry is French/Iberian Neolithic-related rather than the local Neolithic ancestry,217
consistent with recent studies suggesting migrations from the mainland8,36. This migration,218
specifically the Iberian connection, is further supported by evidence that the UK received219
copper from Iberia during this phase (3350/3250–750 BP)41. However, in the Late Bronze220
Age, we see a shift, in which the proportion of Italian Neolithic ancestry has increased to221
similar proportions to that of French/Iberian Neolithic. In the Iron Age, similar patterns are222
seen, with the additional appearance of Bronze Age Anatolian-related ancestry. The changes223
in Farming ancestry present are suggestive of migrations from distinct regions of Europe in224
which local farming ancestry was incorporated.
I consider the last shifts to be the most important, especially since it would relate to the "Italian-like" Tumulus culture core of early Celts during the Urnfield period, with additional Carpatho-Balkan during Urnfield into Iron Age. Same pattern in France, with an apparently massive shift from Franko-Iberian Atlantic facade ancestry to "Italian-like":
In France, we see a similar transition (Fig. 3). During the Early and Middle Bronze Age,227
more local French/Iberian- than Italian Neolithic-related ancestry tends to be present. By the228
Iron Age, the relative proportions have swapped, so Italian Neolithic-related ancestry is the229
highest, accompanied by Bronze Age Anatolian ancestry. Due to the lack of samples from the230
Late Bronze Age, the time of this transition cannot be directly measured. However, the231
increased proportion of Italian Neolithic-related ancestry during the Late Bronze Age on the232
British Isles suggests it was present in France by this time.
That is a clear pattern proving how the Urnfield expansion changed the autosomal make up of the whole Western Celtic sphere, with influences from the Italian-Alpine and Carpathian area.
Further east, in the Czech Republic, we see the increase of Italian Neolithic-related and235
Bronze Age Anatolian-related ancestry between 3200–2800 BP (Fig. 3). We also note that we236
.CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licensemade available under a
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is
The copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted March 1, 2025.;https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.28.640770doi:bioRxiv preprint
detect no evidence of French/Iberian Neolithic ancestry. By splitting further into the cultural237
phases for the region, we find that this ancestry profile in the Czech Republic occurred by238
3300 BP, in individuals associated with the Tumulus Culture and continuing into the Knovíz239
and Hallstatt Periods (Extended Data Fig. 1).
The pulse seems to have come the Carpatho-Balkan zone (Urnfielders!):
However,245
while we see a general range reduction of the British and French/Iberian Neolithic-related246
ancestries, we find an increase in the geographical range of the Italian Neolithic-related and247
Bronze Age Anatolian-related ancestries throughout these periods.
Relevant to the appearance of Italian Neolithic and254
Bronze Age Anatolian-related ancestry in Western Europe by the Iron Age, we included255
individuals from Hungary/Serbia (0_3_4_2_2_C_2800+). Consistent with the results found256
from using the Farmer-related ancestries as a proxy, we find the appearance of Bronze Age257
French/Iberian ancestry appearing in England during the Middle Bronze Age, and the258
Hungarian/Serbian Bronze Age reaching widespread distributions during the Iron Age (Fig.259
4). In the Czech Republic, we find almost all individuals being modelled with a large260
proportion of Hungarian/Serbian ancestry during the Late Bronze Age.
The path might have been Tumulus culture expansion to the East/South East, mixing with the local Carpathians and transition to the Urnfield rites, then expansion of these Eastern mixed groups back all over the territories during Urnfield and these being the base for the later Celtic koine:
Next, we included individuals from the Late Bronze Age from the Czech Republic,282
associated with the Urnfield subgroup of the Knovíz Culture, as a source, who were modelled283
above with high proportions of Hungarian/Serbian ancestry (Extended Data Fig. 1). In the284
early Iron Age (2800–2470 BP), we find this ancestry modelled across Western Southern and285
Eastern Central Europe in varying proportions, complemented by more local sources286
(Extended Data Fig. 3.). In England, the highest proportion tends to be modelled as Bell287
Beaker-related, followed by Knovíz-related and French/Iberian Bronze Age-related. In288
contrast, on the mainland, the proportion of ancestry modelled as Bell Beaker-related tends to289
be low or absent, with the Steppe ancestry in these individuals better modelled by the other290
Bronze Age sources, i.e. Bronze Age Knovíz-related, French/Iberia and Hungary/Serbia
The Celtic core being covered by this "backflow migration" from the Carpathian zone:
Compared to England, the impact of Knovíz-related ancestry is particularly high in France,292
Germany and the Czech Republic. In Austria, we note considerable diversity at the293
eponymous Hallstatt site, with individuals modelled with particularly high proportions of294
either Knovíz or Hungarian/Serbia Bronze Age-related ancestry, more similar to Hungary,295
Slovenia and Slovakia, where the Hungarian/Serbian Bronze Age-related ancestry is296
modelled in high proportions.
Knoviz itself is just the result of this admixture from the Eastern Urnfield (Lusatian-Kyjatice-Gáva) sphere.
This ancestry later spread to Scandinavia too - see migration period patterns:
Some of the Migration Period individuals from Britain carry313
high proportions of Knovíz-related ancestry and little to no British-Irish Bronze Age-related,314
suggestive of migrations from or admixture on the continent (Supplementary Figure S1.1).315
Migration Period migrations into Denmark and Sweden detected elsewhere revealed that316
people carrying some continental ancestry12,50, but primarily of Scandinavian ancestry31,317
arrived in Denmark and Southern Sweden by the Viking Period; here we provide further318
insight into the source of the continental ancestry: the influx of small proportions of319
continental ancestry is modelled as Knovíz and Hungary/Serbia Bronze Age-related ancestry,320
generally lacking British-Irish Bronze Age and French/Iberian Bronze Age. As such, we can321
exclude the Netherlands, France, Britain and Ireland as a source of this continental ancestry,322
and infer a source region further east. This stands in direct contrast to Norway, where high323
proportions of the British-Irish Bronze Age-related ancestry are detected in most individuals324
with non-local ancestry, consistent with previous studies50.
This paper seems to prove unambiguously that the Urnfield phenomenon was associated with mass migrations and spread in the Western sphere the Celtic language and culture:
Furthermore, the expansion of Knovíz-related ancestry from Eastern Central Europe detected458
here, continuing into Hallstatt and La Tène populations, provides new evidence supporting459
the linguistic model in which Celtic languages were mediated to France, Britain, Iberia and460
Italy during the Late Bronze Age by populations associated with the Urnfield Culture67,68.461
This aligns with the association of the Lepontic language with the Urnfield-derived462
Golasecca Culture of Northern Italy69, as well as the Urnfield-type weaponry of ~3200–3000463
BP depicted on Late Bronze Age warrior stelae of the Southwestern Iberian Peninsula70–72.
Link: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.02.28.640770v1.full.pdf
With the Gomolava samples and other Carpatho-Balkan samples, we might prove, very soon, the same on an even higher level for the Balkans, where these Eastern Urnfielder groups didn't just spread their ancestry indirectly, like in the West, since the dominant factor were the "converted Eastern Tumulus culture" people, but directly, like with Gáva-related Channelled Ware.
Knoviz and the Middle Danubian Urnfield group were kind of a experiment and mixed territory, whereas to the West we primarily deal with the spreads of Proto-Celtic "converts" to the Urnfield religion/package.