Is there any evidence of pre-Celtic language or culture in Ireland?

The question is, how much pre-celtic genetics remained in Ireland to the modern era?

There's very little evidence of large scale massacres dating to the era of celtic colonization, so modern Irish are probably an admixture

Pretty much none, people may argue that the black hair is part of it but that's bullshit. Just because modern day arab, turkshits, Serbs and yada yada got black hair does not mean the irish got it from anyone of them.

In general, migrations don't tend to totally replace existing populations. You need genocide or plague in order to do that. I don't believe there's ever been and large studies done but I imagine they're similar to the brits, who are still largely pre Celtic and pre Germanic genetically.

The original Irish migrated from Iberia, so it's probably from them.

>language
No
>culture

How would we know?

Or maybe from the Irish that came from Egypt

>the original Irish migrated from iberia

Yeah, and scots come from scythia and egypt

alot
irish and british people tend to be a combination of mesolithic and neolithic ancestry
the adoption of indo-european/celtic language and culture was likely accomplished by a process of cultural diffusion

That applies to late iron age onward mostly, it was fairly common for migrants to go full genocide or the old inhabitants to just pick up and leave for emptier places if ancient chroniclers were anything like reliable.
Gauls and germanics were known to do that all the time actually, even sedentary tribes. The whole nation of the boii did just that after Rome kicked their collective arse after the second punic war for example. Rather than stay in northern Italy under Rome's domination, they just left and went northward to rejoin their danubian cousins.

Scots' biggest genetic influence is Indo-European, England's too is about the same as Neolithic. I doubt Ireland is much different

whilst it's true there is a steppe component in the british genome i think that chart kind of overstates it a bit
using lbk as a reference for the neolithic farmers may not paint the most precise picture for all groups as populations tend to differentiate from one another
same with using loschbour as the reference for the hunter gatherers instead of also including scandinavian hg samples or specimens like la brana in their analysis especially when northern european populations are concerned
i suppose we can't be too certain though until more finds from the isles are analysed

although i'd still say the chart is fairly accurate at showing the general genetic makeup of european populations

kind of interesting how it shows the english are predominantly pre-roman, pre-anglo saxon.

As Wales was a Hebrew mining colony and Welsh is a derivative of Hebrew, the Celts are the blood descendants of the holy and righteous "House of Israel" from before it went into the crapper of history and was exterminated by Rome and the Khazars.

There's probably some evidence from place names like there is in mainland europe.

>Patrick isn't even an Irish name, it's Latin and supposedly he was called Cothraige when he arrived, precisely because the Irish couldn't pronounce his name. The reason modern Irish Pádraig has a P is because for the next thousand years the learned classes of Ireland had a very close knowledge of Latin and realised they were supposed to pronounce it with a P.

funny that every single gaelic word seems to have an etymology that's either latin or english. It's almost as if its a language nearly entirely derived from both developed by catholic monks in irish monastries

yes they did in part, whats your point?

Or because Celtic languages are a branch of Indo-European that diverged from the Italic branch relatively late

>relatively late

yeh so in other words their language comes from italic

>culture

yes, Ireland was inhabited since the Neolithic, those people came from the Agean region and populated most of Europe, they were farmers and built megalithic monuments such as Newgrange in Ireland.

about 40-45% of their genetics belongs to neolithic farmers, the rest is from the Eurasian steppe people, aka Indo European invaders.

>Goidelic substrate hypothesis
>Gearóid Mac Eoin proposes the following words as deriving from the substrate: bréife 'ring, loop', cufar, cuifre/cuipre 'kindness', fafall/fubhal, lufe 'feminine'

Daily reminder that subhuman Indo-EuRAPEan cavepeople didn't have words for "kindness" or "feminine" before they learned it from pre-European black civilizations.

Seriously you're not funny fuck off back to pol

>The name of a non-Gael is of non-Gaelic origin
imagine that.

The relationship between Italic and Celtic is unclear. It's possible there was a common "Italo-Celtic", it's possible that the proto-Italics and proto-Celts were in contact with each other and it's possible that any similarities are a coincidence.

Indeed. Probably because Ireland was the colder rainier back ass end of nowhere, so only saw a trickle of IE settlers, who were themselves likely from Britain, Doggerland, and the nearby mainland. Farming was always historically fairly shit in Ireland, due to the damp and grey skies (i.e. an unimpressive growing season). They had grain of course, but spoilage and famine were a constant threat. Potatoes were so agriculturally revolutionary because they grow underground, come from chilly mountain valleys in Peru/Chilé, so are well suited to not mind rain or cold or shit soil.

...

Yes, that is how languages come to be, they split from other languages

Completely wrong.

Virtually all Irish paternal lineages are Indo-European, and they have 1/3rd Yamnaya admixture

pnas.org/content/113/2/368.full.pdf

are you trying to say Irish isn't a real language? or that it was only spoken and written by medieval monks? because that's retarded.
sure it may be a bit thin on the ground now, but the Irish language has been around in one form or another for a very long time.

Not 'comes from'. They are both branches of an earlier stem. The Italo-Celt 'Urheimat' is (unsurprisingly) central Europe.

Italics developed south of the Alps into Italy (duh), though it took a long time for 'them' to dominate (for example, the Etruscans who were Rome's early competitors were not Indo-European speakers.)

The proto-Celts meanwhile were those that developed north of the Alps, especially in what is today Austria/Czech/Slovakia/Hungary and generally the Pannonian plain. They spread west and also east, but as we know today they didn't ever really remain culturally dominant anywhere except Ireland or Scotland, and even then not for long.

Excuse me? Learn to read closely m8. I was not stating something meant to be contradictory to what I replied to, and nor does your 'completely wrong' even address what I wrote

I'm saying the reason there were no (or few) massacres is because it was not some 'hot' popular destination. Constant but relatively low numbers of IE-origin settlers would not have resulted in the need for massacres to take over territory.

You want to tend a handful of barley and a few sheep on that cold rocky hill? Go ahead m8, plenty of space, I'll just fish and hunt seals from my cold rainy coastal hut, and we can sell our daughters to each other's sons now and then. Deal? Deal.

Modern Irish people are about 99% R1b but the Mesolithic bodies whose DNA has been tested were mostly G, like Otzi the iceman. R1b slowly became the dominant Y-haplogroup in Western Europe but this does not mean all the genes were wiped out violently.
I would say the vast majority of modern Irish genes are pre-Celtic and this is where they get their looks from, since haplogroup G people generally had dark hair and blue eyes.

>Farming was always historically fairly shit in Ireland

>is the one of the richest grass growing lands in the entire world

You cant eat grass

Humans can't eat grass, ancient and medieval Irish were animal herders. Sheep and cows live well off of it.

Cows eat grass, cows provide milk and meat all year round

Yeah that'd be pretty fucking useful for herding wouldn't it but I believe the guy mentioned farming, as in crops, you fucking dick

farming
ˈfɑːmJŋ/
noun
the activity or business of growing crops and raising livestock.

Arable farming, livestock farming... It's all farming
Educate yourself before you try that argument

Cattle provides much less calories per acre than cereal farming.

Ireland has historically had one of the lowest population densities in Europe for this reason.

>breaking your back growing shitty crops in a damp sunless climate or instead just letting a herd of animals eat the fucking grass and then kill them at your ease

You aren't very bright are you? What did you ancestors eat, cum?

You dictionary pedant fucking peckerwood it was obvious in context what he was referring to.

I don't think you are good at reading and comprehending

Then he was wrong in saying farming was shit

Otzi was a neolithic farmer and haplogroup G is associated with the farmers.

Yeah granted maybe he should have specifically said agriculture but since he was referring solely to crops when he said 'farming' I think it's prettyyyy obvious that he wasn't making any judgements on the viability of livestock.

I dont think you know much about ancient Irish farming practices and are now trying to damage control after being exposed

No you're right I just like picking arguments
I don't like to think people think farming was always shit in Ireland when it's actually been prosperous in everywhere bar the west for years, the famine basically gave Ireland a stigma of being useless farmers for people who don't know their shit

The comment that you replied to was me remarking that maybe Ireland was decent for herding but not great for crops. At no point did I imply they should have been growing crops anyway so I don't know what the fuck you're on about.

Grass is not the same as grain. Wheat, oats and barley need different conditions than local non-edible grasses. Before modern times, soil quality mattered and Ireland had poor soil. Of course there are/were pockets of more fertile land, and you could generally always plant something. But on the whole, it was never great.

Funfact: Ireland (and Great Britain) were once covered in forests, like Norway or Poland today, but neolithic peoples over-harvested the trees, leading to the topsoil blowing away, resulting in all the bogs, moors and relatively barren ground the British Isles are famous for.

Pound for pound, grain is still better, which is why agriculturalists outnumber pastoralists. Ireland's population (in fact, all of Europes) didn't really grow until potatoes became widespread. You can see this reflected in famine deaths. Waves of famines were common up until the late 1700s when potatoes were finally widespread. What is Ireland and other shitty bogland famous for (northern Germany, Denmark, etc. I'm looking at you)? Potatoes.

Regardless, my point was that this is why no huge waves of IE-settlers came rushing in with their daggers and ploughs. It was no Shangri-La.

Funnier than an assmad faggot like you

IEs were cattle herders, they would have felt right at home. and there was massive IE immigration

funny how patrick is the exception and not the rule and most irish words are celtic with a small amount of latin and smaller amount of norman loanwords
theres VERY few english loanwords, theyve generally been eliminated and replaced with native irish words.

Grain prices tanking rn, small farmers not happy
Grain suits large company run farms more than family farms, only worth producing if you can pump it out big time

And it let them live, but never really thrive. As I just said though, the Ireland they would have found at the time was covered in thick ancient forests. Not too friendly to grazing bovine stomachs.

"massive" is a bit unfair when we're talking of a time period of thousands of years. It will seem massive in hindsight, as it's reflected in genetics, but may have only been a few families per year pushing their ox-carts on to a boat to join their cousins out west. Clearly they did intermarry.

potatoes were revolutionary because the brits could farm their cattle and grain on the best land while paddy could feed his family of 12 on a patch of boggy land

Exactly.

Maize is also about as dense with carbs per acre as you can get. In most of Europe it's largely only grown for animal feed today, alas, but is still famous as a hearty peasant food in Italy and Romania, etc. Needs more processing than grains to be edible, but a few acres of corn would generally be preferable to a few acres of spelt or barley.

>Funfact: Ireland (and Great Britain) were once covered in forests, like Norway or Poland today, but neolithic peoples over-harvested the trees, leading to the topsoil blowing away, resulting in all the bogs, moors and relatively barren ground the British Isles are famous for.

The eternal anglo strikes again, blaming the native people for their own crimes. In fact Ireland had huge amounts of forest before 1600 and it was almost all gone by 1800.

For the British Navy yes, such a pity these native woodlands are a rare sight nowadays, those left are parks frequented by doggers and queers

Meme less, read more. I'm not blaming 'the locals' or anyone. It's not about blame. They can't have known the long-term repercussions of what they were doing, and any one person likely wouldn't have noticed much difference, living only around 40-50 years at most, if even that lucky. I'm talking about geologic evidence from the bronze age.

Even in the 1600s, it was a shadow of what it had been in 600.

>likely wouldn't have noticed much difference, living only around 40-50 years at most, if even that lucky. I'm talking about geologic evidence from the br
if you lived past childhood you'd probably live to your 60s at least
but youre correct otherwise, which is why i believe turf is a perfectly valid fuel source and the land left behind should be replanted with forests. leave the raised bogs alone though (these were there before forests were cleared and are an important part of the ecosystem)

>time gap of 500 years of uncertainty

Holy shit do we really not know this to a higher degree of accuracy? Neither 1000 or 500 BC was very long ago.