View Full Version : Y-DNA haplogroups of ancient civilizations
Here is a summary of the current genetic knowledge regarding ancient ethnic groups. This is based on Y-chromosome DNA haplogroups only. For the latest Y-DNA haplogroup tree check the ISOGG's website (http://isogg.org/tree/index.html).
The ancient Egyptians
Based on the modern population of Egypt, and removing the foreign elements, it is reasonable to assume that the ancient Egyptians belonged primarily to haplogroups E1b1b and T. Nowadays about half of the Egyptian paternal lines could be descended from invaders, notably from the Arabic peninsula (hg J1, about 1/3 of the population), but also from Greece, Anatolia and Persia.
The ancient Persians
Iran has a heterogeneous populations when it comes to Y-DNA. Percentages vary greatly between East and West, and from North to South. Ancient Persia was less diverse, but still very mixed by ancient standards. Its ethnic composition prior to the Greek, Arabic and Mongol invasions was probably made of about 40% of haplogroup J (J1 being more predominant in the South and J2 in the North), 25% of hg R1a, 15% of hg F (possibly including G's), 10% of hg G and 10% of hg H, I, K and L.
The ancient Babylonians
Babylonians and Assyrians belonged mostly to haplogroup J (mostly J2, but with some J1 in southern Mesopotamia) with a minority of E1b1b, G and K. Haplogroup G is more common around the Caucasus.
The ancient Greek & Romanss
=> See post #3 below.
The ancient Celts
It is now believed that the ancient Celts were by a very large majority R1b people. Many subclades of R1b divide the various geographic groups of Celts. 2500 years ago, British and Irish Celts belonged mostly to the subclade R1b-L21. Celts from Iberia and south-west Gaul were R1b-M167, while the other Gauls, from central France to southern Germany to northern Italy, belonged to R1b-U152. Further subgroups exist for all these clades (see Origins of European haplogroups (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml)).
The ancient Germanic people
The three main haplogroups associated with Germanic people are I1, I2b1 and R1b-U106. The latter is an old pre-Celtic branch of R1b mostly found around Frisia. These people are thought to have mixed with I1 people to form the ancient Germanic culture. In Scandinavia R1a is also quite common, although its presence could have predated a Germanic expansion from northern Germany, Denmark and southern Sweden.
The ancient Slavs
Present-day Eastern Slavs are descended from the ancient Kurgan culture of the Eurasian steppes. The Scythians were the branch of R1a that remained in the steppes of from whom modern Russians are descended (along with other haplogroups). Slavic Europeans belonged to haplogroup R1a and I2. Southern Slavs have a much higher proportion of I2 (notably in the Croatia).
Eastern Europeans from the Danubian basin and the Balkans have also inherited a sizeable percentage of haplogroup E (and some G and T) from the expansion Neolithic farmers that started from northern Greece 7,000 years ago (Linear Pottery culture).
The ancient Indians
The Indo-Aryan people who invaded the Indian peninsula from Central Asia and Iran 3,500 years ago belonged mostly to haplogroups R1a, with also some R2 and J2. This is known from the analysis of Y-DNA of the upper castes of Indian society (the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas), thought to be descended from the Indo-Aryans with minimal admixture on the paternal side. The native Dravidians belonged to the indigenous South Asian haplogroups F, H and L.
The ancient Chinese
Haplogroup O is associated with the Han ethnicity, as well as most of the people of East Asia and Polynesia. Nowadays O2a is the most common in northern China, and O1a in southern China.
The ancient Japanese
Modern Japanese people are composed of two ancient ethnicities : the Yayoi people, who migrated from the Korean peninsula about 2,300 years ago, bringing with them agriculture; and the Jomon people, the hunter-gathers who had lived on the archipelago for millennia before that. The Yayoi were hg O people, like the Chinese and Koreans. The Jomon belonged mostly to the rare haplogroup D (also found in Tibet and in the Andamans, some of the most isolated places on Earth). For more information see The Origin of Japanese people (http://www.jref.com/culture/origins_japanese_people.shtml).
The ancient Americans
Be them nomadic tribes from North America, Aztecs, Mayas, Quechuas or cannibals from Amazonia, almost all native Americans belonged to haplogroup Q1a3a, but a minority of hg C existed in North America.
Just as I was looking for something like this you put up a post about it. There is a baka on Jref who seems to think that ancient Israelites are responsible for Buddhism amoung other starnge and weird ideas. His evidence is scripture. I mentioned DNA doesn't hold any of his shite to be true and he asked for sources. I put up two links, but this is an excellent link. Cheers:cool:
A little update based on new information.
All haplogroups I are the indigenous people of Europe, the direct descendants of Cro-Magnon (it isn't R1b as previously thought). This is why I is found everywhere in Europe at low frequencies, except I1 which remained strong in Germanic countries. A pocket of I2a2 survived around Croatia because of it's relative isolation, outside the Danubian corridor used by new waves of immigrants/invaders. I2a1 survived at high frequency in Sardinia simply because it is the most isolated place in Europe.
Ancient Greeks
Pelasgians (pre-Minoan Greeks, or Helladic Greeks) belonged to an admixture of I, E-V13, T and G2a. E-V13 and T probably arrived in Greece from the Levant (and ultimately from Egypt, hence the small percentage of T) in the early Neolithic, 8,500 years ago. G2a came from the Caucasus approximately 6,000 years ago as herders of sheep and goats (and early miners ?).
Minoan Greeks migrated from Mesopotamia via Anatolia. They were mostly J2 people, but probably had some E too.
Mycenaean Greeks arrived around 3,600 years ago from the Ukrainian steppes. They were an Indo-European people belonging to R1a. So were the Macedonians and the Thracians (hence the higher density of R1a in northern Greece).
Greece was invaded by the Dorians around 1200 BCE. Nobody knows who they were or where they came from, but the high percentage of R1b in the regions where they settled (Peloponese, Crete) strongly suggest that they were R1b people. The events are linked to the Sea Peoples (see below), who were probably R1b people from the north-east of the Black Sea, or early Celts from central Europe.
Greek historians sometimes mention that the Dorians were the descendants of the Trojans who came back to avenge their ancestors. The Trojans were an Indo-European people related to the R1b Hittites (see below). This would also explain why there is about the same percentage of R1b and R1a in modern Greece. Each correspond to a different wave of Indo-European invader. They only make up 12% of the population (each) because the Neolithic farmers (especially E and J2) were already well-established and numerous by that time.
Ancient Anatolians
Southern Anatolia was colonised early by Neolithic farmers from the Near East (E + J2).
The Indo-European invasions brought the Hittites (1750 BCE), the Lydians and Lycians (1450 BCE) and the Proto-Armenians (1200 BCE). All were probably R1b, considering the high percentage of R1b in the regions they settled. R1b Indo-Europeans are thought to have originated on the north-eastern shores of the Black Sea, just north of the Caucasus. They could have invaded northern Anatolia by crossing the Caucasus, sailing across the sea, or going around via the steppes through the Bosphorus.
Later R1b were possibly (part of) the Sea Peoples that ravaged the ancient Near Eastern civilizations, from Greece to Egypt. Their advance military technology and sea-based culture make of them very good candidates.
The Phrygians arrived in northern Anatolia after 1200 BCE, and were probably an offshoot from the Thracians (so R1a).
The Cimmerians are probably the last wave of migration (around 700 BCE) from the R1b homeland. They are said to have be expelled from Anatolia and moved to Europe, where they joined the other R1b people. Germanic and Celtic people both claim (partial) Cimmerian ancestry.
Romans, Celts and Germans
Celtic, Italic and Germanic people are all descended from the same R1b1b2 stock. They split north of the Alps.
The Italic branch went south and mixed with the Terramare people who were I2a, G2a and E-V13. Northern Italians have more Indo-European Celto-Italic blood, while southern Italian have more indigenous blood (the highest being Sardinia, then Basilicata).
The Germanic branch moved north and mixed with the indigenous I1 and I2b people, who had already mixed with R1a migrants from the Corded Ware (Battle Axe) culture. The new hybrid Germanic people retained the highest percentage of aboriginal haplogroup I.
Celtic people split in several groups : the Brythonic went to Britain and Ireland, the Gaulish to France, the Iberian to Spain and Portugal, and the Alpine remained around Austria, Switzerland, southern Germany, Eastern France and Belgium. The Iberian and Gaulish groups mixed with I2b, I2a and E people, the Alpine with I2b and E, and the Brythonic just with I2b people.
It is likely that the language of the aboriginal Europeans influenced the various Celtic, Italic and Germanic dialects. Germanic languages diverted the most from the original European R1b language because it assimilated a very large part of aborigines.
From about 700 BCE, the Etruscans settled around Tuscany and the Greeks in southern Italy. Etruscans probably came from Palestine and brought haplogroups J1, J2 and E with them. The Greeks in Italy were Doric and brought J2, E, G2a and probably more R1b (see above). The Romans progressively absorbed the Etruscans and Italian Greeks and mixed with them. By the time of Julius Caesar Roman citizens were probably composed of 45% of R1b, 20% of J, 15% of E, 15% of G2a and 5% of I2a.
The Phoenicians
The unique colonization pattern of the Phoenicians and the isolation of some of their colonies (Ibiza, Sardinia, Malta) have made it easy to identify their genetic signature. The Phoenician population was already very mixed 3000 years ago : E-V22, J1, J2, J2a4b, J2a4b1, G2a, R1a and R1b1a. E-V22 and R1b1a are quite specific to Levantines (Syrians, Lebanese, Druzes, Jews, Palestinians).
The Hungarians
Modern Hungarians are virtually undistinguishable from their Austrian and Slovak neighbours in terms of Y-chromosome haplogroups.
But Hungary is a notoriously difficult country for Y-DNA proportions. Percentages tend to vary widely from one study to another, depending on the regional populations sampled. Some studies have found over 60% of R1a in Hungary, although the average if half that figure. Some villages have a small percentage of CentralNorth Asian haplogroups N, Q or C, but they are otherwise quite rare. Interestingly neighbouring countries like Austria, Slovakia and Ukraine appear to have more C, Q and N than Hungary.
Hungary has a peculiar history due to its geography - a vast plain surrounded by mountains on every side (the Alps and the Carpathians). In Neolithic times, it was at the centre of the Danubian cultures, which was composed of E-V13 farmers from Thessaly and I2 hunter-gatherers (soon converted to farming). Then came the Slavic invasion (around 3,000 BCE), followed by the Proto-Italo-Celts and Alpine Celts (2,000 BCE to 200 BCE), who brought respectively R1a and R1b to the region.
Hungary was named after the Huns, who invaded Europe from 370 CE and partly settled in the Pannonian plain (now known as Hungarian plain). It isn't sure where the Huns came from, but it is generally believed that they descended from the Xiongnu peoples of Mongolia. They were a confederation and included various ethnic group under Hunnic leadership. It is likely that there were many R1a peoples (e.g. Scythians) from the Eurasian Steppe. The Huns themselves may have been an admixture of haplogroup Q and C. However less than 2% of the modern population belong to Q and C combined.
The next invaders were the Magyar, a Finno-Ugric people who arrived in Europe in the 9th century, and settled in Hungary in the 10th. Hungarian language is actually a descendant of Magyar, not Hunnic, despite the misleading name in "Hun-". The Magyar came from Central Asia, and are related to the modern Bashkirs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashkirs) of Russia. Modern Bashkirs have about 35% of haplogroup R1b1b2, 26% of R1a, 17% of N1c and 13% of R1b1b1. However, they were conquered by the Mongols, which may account for all the haplogroup C. In fact, the presence of C in Europe is usually attributed exclusively to the Mongols, and C is almost non-existent in Hungary anyway.
A study (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/01/magyars-and-madjars.html) compared the Y-chromosome of the Madjar tribe from Kazakhstan to the Magyars of Hungary, and found that some G lineages were related. The article doesn't specify the subcalde, but G1 is the dominant strain in Kazakhstan, and is also found in Hungary (but normally not elsewhere in Europe).
Another study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18373723) compared the Y-DNA of Hungarians with other Finno-Ugric-speaking populations in order to understand why modern Hungarians have so little of the typical Uralic haplogroup N1c. They tested a few individuals from a 10th-century cemetery found out that half of the individuals belonged to N1c. The sample was small, and maybe "pure" Magyar, but it nonetheless suggests that the original Magyar had much more N1c than modern Hungarians.
The Magyar population is thought to have suffered considerably from the 13th-century Mongol invasion of Europe, and from the 16th-century war against the Ottomans. Hungary was repopulated in great number by ethnic Germans/Austrians, which explains why modern Hungary is closest to Austria for its Y-DNA composition.
From all this can be deduced that the original Magyars were an admixture of N1c and R1a (predominant), with some G1, and maybe some R1b.
As haplogroup Q is neither associated with the Magyars not with the Mongols, it must be either be of Hunnic origin, or from other Asian tribes part of the various invaders from the steppes.
The Magyar came from Central Asia, and are related to the modern Bashkirs of Russia. Modern Bashkirs have about 38% of haplogroup C, 27% of R1a, 18% of N1c and 13% of R1b. However, they were conquered by the Mongols, which may account for all the haplogroup C. In fact, the presence of C in Europe is usually attributed exclusively to the Mongols, and C is almost non-existent in Hungary anyway.
You are mistaken.
According to paper by Russian geneticists - "Structure of gene pool of Bashkir subpopulations"
Bashkirs have (N=471)
47% R1b (35% R1b1b2, 13% R1b1b1)
26% R1a1
17% N1c
C haplogroup occurs in only 2.3% of Bashkir sample.
You are mistaken.
According to paper by Russian geneticists - "Structure of gene pool of Bashkir subpopulations"
Bashkirs have (N=471)
47% R1b (35% R1b1b2, 13% R1b1b1)
26% R1a1
17% N1c
C haplogroup occurs in only 2.3% of Bashkir sample.
Sorry I mistook while copying my sources. Thanks for pointing that out.
By the way, there are significant differences in haplogroup frequencies between subpopulations of Bashkirs. This indicate that each could have a different origin.
I managed to find the original study by Lobov et al. (http://www.anrb.ru/molgen/Lobov_AS.PDF) (in Russian only). Indeed the percentages vary widely according to the subpopulation. the Bashkirs total is 17% of N1c, 26% of R1a, 13% of R1b1b1, 35% of R1b1b2.
R1b1b2 (M269) is much more common the Baymaksky district of Bashkortostan (81%) and the Perm region (84%), but otherwise osciliates between 7% and 23%.
R1b1b1 (M73) reaches an amazing 55% in the Abzelilovsky district, but otherwise does not exceed 2%.
N1c is very high in East Orenburg (65%) and Sterlibashevsky (54%), moderate in Samara & Saratov (20%) and low elsewhere (3% to 7%).
Samara & Saratov is the only Bashkir region with a reasonable amount of haplogroup C (17%) and O (6%).
But overall it is R1a that is the most common, reaching 38% in Sterlibashevsky district, 40% in West Orenburg, and 48% in Saratov & Samara.
ordinary_guy
20-05-09, 13:28
You did not mention the Avars. Their khaganane was centered in and around the present-day Hungarian city of Debrecen and their presence in the Carpathian Basin lasted several centuries until 800 AD. The presence of the Huns, even when compared with that of Avars, was insignificant in terms of the time spent there. Also, you mention Hungary as the name that originates from the name Hun. The territory was called Pannonia since the Roman times and long after the fall of the empire. The name Hungary is much younger and comes from the word On Ogur the Bulgarians gave to the 10 (?) Asian tribes that invaded the Carpathian Basin in 896 AD. As for the Mongol invasion of 1242, it lasted only 1 or 2 years, which is too short, in my opinion, to leave any genetic trace in the population, though I agree that the country, especially the plains (probably inhabited by the Magyars) was almost depopulated. The highlands (Romania, Slovakia) offered better refuge to the locals (Vlachs, Slavs), so their population was largely preserved.
The Avars were steppe people from Central Asia, so they must have been predominantly R1a, with maybe some J2, R1b and/or C3.
A little update based on new information.
All haplogroups I are the indigenous people of Europe, the direct descendants of Cro-Magnon (it isn't R1b as previously thought). This is why I is found everywhere in Europe at low frequencies, except I1 which remained strong in Germanic countries. A pocket of I2a2 survived around Croatia because of it's relative isolation, outside the Danubian corridor used by new waves of immigrants/invaders. I2a1 survived at high frequency in Sardinia simply because it is the most isolated place in Europe.
Ancient Greeks
Pelasgians (pre-Minoan Greeks, or Helladic Greeks) belonged to an admixture of I, E-V13, T and G2a. E-V13 and T probably arrived in Greece from the Levant (and ultimately from Egypt, hence the small percentage of T) in the early Neolithic, 8,500 years ago. G2a came from the Caucasus approximately 6,000 years ago as herders of sheep and goats (and early miners ?).
Minoan Greeks migrated from Mesopotamia via Anatolia. They were mostly J2 people, but probably had some E too.
Mycenaean Greeks arrived around 3,600 years ago from the Ukrainian steppes. They were an Indo-European people belonging to R1a. So were the Macedonians and the Thracians (hence the higher density of R1a in northern Greece).
Greece was invaded by the Dorians around 1200 BCE. Nobody knows who they were or where they came from, but the high percentage of R1b in the regions where they settled (Peloponese, Crete) strongly suggest that they were R1b people. The events are linked to the Sea Peoples (see below), who were probably R1b people from the north-east of the Black Sea, or early Celts from central Europe.
Greek historians sometimes mention that the Dorians were the descendants of the Trojans who came back to avenge their ancestors. The Trojans were an Indo-European people related to the R1b Hittites (see below). This would also explain why there is about the same percentage of R1b and R1a in modern Greece. Each correspond to a different wave of Indo-European invader. They only make up 12% of the population (each) because the Neolithic farmers (especially E and J2) were already well-established and numerous by that time.
Ancient Anatolians
Southern Anatolia was colonised early by Neolithic farmers from the Near East (E + J2).
The Indo-European invasions brought the Hittites (1750 BCE), the Lydians and Lycians (1450 BCE) and the Proto-Armenians (1200 BCE). All were probably R1b, considering the high percentage of R1b in the regions they settled. R1b Indo-Europeans are thought to have originated on the north-eastern shores of the Black Sea, just north of the Caucasus. They could have invaded northern Anatolia by crossing the Caucasus, sailing across the sea, or going around via the steppes through the Bosphorus.
Later R1b were possibly (part of) the Sea Peoples that ravaged the ancient Near Eastern civilizations, from Greece to Egypt. Their advance military technology and sea-based culture make of them very good candidates.
The Phrygians arrived in northern Anatolia after 1200 BCE, and were probably an offshoot from the Thracians (so R1a).
The Cimmerians are probably the last wave of migration (around 700 BCE) from the R1b homeland. They are said to have be expelled from Anatolia and moved to Europe, where they joined the other R1b people. Germanic and Celtic people both claim (partial) Cimmerian ancestry.
Romans, Celts and Germans
Celtic, Italic and Germanic people are all descended from the same R1b1b2 stock. They split north of the Alps.
The Italic branch went south and mixed with the Terramare people who were I2a, G2a and E-V13. Northern Italians have more Indo-European Celto-Italic blood, while southern Italian have more indigenous blood (the highest being Sardinia, then Basilicata).
The Germanic branch moved north and mixed with the indigenous I1 and I2b people, who had already mixed with R1a migrants from the Corded Ware (Battle Axe) culture. The new hybrid Germanic people retained the highest percentage of aboriginal haplogroup I.
Celtic people split in several groups : the Brythonic went to Britain and Ireland, the Gaulish to France, the Iberian to Spain and Portugal, and the Alpine remained around Austria, Switzerland, southern Germany, Eastern France and Belgium. The Iberian and Gaulish groups mixed with I2b, I2a and E people, the Alpine with I2b and E, and the Brythonic just with I2b people.
It is likely that the language of the aboriginal Europeans influenced the various Celtic, Italic and Germanic dialects. Germanic languages diverted the most from the original European R1b language because it assimilated a very large part of aborigines.
From about 700 BCE, the Etruscans settled around Tuscany and the Greeks in southern Italy. Etruscans probably came from Palestine and brought haplogroups J1, J2 and E with them. The Greeks in Italy were Doric and brought J2, E, G2a and probably more R1b (see above). The Romans progressively absorbed the Etruscans and Italian Greeks and mixed with them. By the time of Julius Caesar Roman citizens were probably composed of 45% of R1b, 20% of J, 15% of E, 15% of G2a and 5% of I2a.
This was extremely informative and very helpful.:grin:
The ancient Basques
Although modern Basques belong predominantly to haplogroup R1b with a minority of I2a, there is little alternative but to suppose that Neolithic Basques were I2a, prior to the Indo-European invasions (that brought R1b). Modern Basque would have retained a lot of ancient autosomal characteristics through female lineages. Modern Basque have dark hair and eyes, and it is probable that ancient I2 people from continental Europe were also dark-haired and dark-eyed, although with fairer skin that their closest cousins, the Near/Middle Eastern J2 and J1.
Ancient mtDNA indeed indicate that prehistoric Basques were closer to modern Near Easterners (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/03/prehistoric-basques-were-closer-to.html).
The ancient Basques
Although modern Basques belong predominantly to haplogroup R1b with a minority of I2a, there is little alternative but to suppose that Neolithic Basques were I2a, prior to the Indo-European invasions (that brought R1b). Modern Basque would have retained a lot of ancient autosomal characteristics through female lineages. Modern Basque have dark hair and eyes, and it is probable that ancient I2 people from continental Europe were also dark-haired and dark-eyed, although with fairer skin that their closest cousins, the Near/Middle Eastern J2 and J1.
Ancient mtDNA indeed indicate that prehistoric Basques were closer to modern Near Easterners (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/03/prehistoric-basques-were-closer-to.html).
Just out of curiosity, can you give us the links to the scientific papers that will verify your suppositions about color in these people?
Just out of curiosity, can you give us the links to the scientific papers that will verify your suppositions about color in these people?
It is my own supposition based my knowledge of the modern Basque people. That's why I said "it is probable". If DNA had been conducted on the ancient, pre-Indo-European Basques proving that they indeed had dark hair and eyes, I would have said "it has been proved". I cannot see how they would have fair hair or eyes before the R1b Indo-European invasion.
The ancient Egyptians
Based on the modern population of Egypt, and removing the foreign elements, it is reasonable to assume that the ancient Egyptians belonged primarily to haplogroups E1b1b and T. Nowadays about half of the Egyptian paternal lines could be descended from invaders, notably from the Arabic peninsula (hg J1, about 1/3 of the population), but also from Greece, Anatolia and Persia.
The ancient Persians
Iran has a heterogeneous populations when it comes to Y-DNA. Percentages vary greatly between East and West, and from North to South. Ancient Persia was less diverse, but still very mixed by ancient standards. Its ethnic composition prior to the Greek, Arabic and Mongol invasions was probably made of about 40% of haplogroup J (J1 being more predominant in the South and J2 in the North), 25% of hg R1a, 15% of hg F (possibly including G's), 10% of hg G and 10% of hg H, I, K and L.
The ancient Babylonians
Babylonians and Assyrians belonged mostly to haplogroup J (mostly J2, but with some J1 in southern Mesopotamia) with a minority of E1b1b, G and K. Haplogroup G is more common around the Caucasus.
The ancient Greek & Romanss
=> See post #3 below.
The ancient Celts
It is now believed that the ancient Celts were by a very large majority R1b people. Many subclades of R1b divide the various geographic groups of Celts. 2500 years ago, British and Irish Celts belonged mostly to the subclade R1b-L21. Celts from Iberia and south-west Gaul were R1b-M167, while the other Gauls, from central France to southern Germany to northern Italy, belonged to R1b-U152. Further subgroups exist for all these clades
The ancient Germanic people
The three main haplogroups associated with Germanic people are I1, I2b1 and R1b-U106. The latter is an old pre-Celtic branch of R1b mostly found around Frisia. These people are thought to have mixed with I1 people to form the ancient Germanic culture. In Scandinavia R1a is also quite common, although its presence could have predated a Germanic expansion from northern Germany, Denmark and southern Sweden.
The ancient Slavs
Present-day Eastern Slavs are descended from the ancient Kurgan culture of the Eurasian steppes. The Scythians were the branch of R1a that remained in the steppes of from whom modern Russians are descended (along with other haplogroups). Slavic Europeans belonged to haplogroup R1a and I2. Southern Slavs have a much higher proportion of I2 (notably in the Croatia).
Eastern Europeans from the Danubian basin and the Balkans have also inherited a sizeable percentage of haplogroup E (and some G and T) from the expansion Neolithic farmers that started from northern Greece 7,000 years ago (Linear Pottery culture).
The ancient Indians
The Indo-Aryan people who invaded the Indian peninsula from Central Asia and Iran 3,500 years ago belonged mostly to haplogroups R1a, with also some R2 and J2. This is known from the analysis of Y-DNA of the upper castes of Indian society (the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas), thought to be descended from the Indo-Aryans with minimal admixture on the paternal side. The native Dravidians belonged to the indigenous South Asian haplogroups F, H and L.
The ancient Chinese
Haplogroup O is associated with the Han ethnicity, as well as most of the people of East Asia and Polynesia. Nowadays O2a is the most common in northern China, and O1a in southern China.
The ancient Japanese
Modern Japanese people are composed of two ancient ethnicities : the Yayoi people, who migrated from the Korean peninsula about 2,300 years ago, bringing with them agriculture; and the Jomon people, the hunter-gathers who had lived on the archipelago for millennia before that. The Yayoi were hg O people, like the Chinese and Koreans. The Jomon belonged mostly to the rare haplogroup D (also found in Tibet and in the Andamans, some of the most isolated places on Earth). For more information see
The ancient Americans
Be them nomadic tribes from North America, Aztecs, Mayas, Quechuas or cannibals from Amazonia, almost all native Americans belonged to haplogroup Q1a3a, but a minority of hg C existed in North America.
I believe that it is a mistake, albeit a common one to assume one of two things:
1. That the haplogroups of the masses necessarily represents the founding element of the civilisation that they adhere to and:
2. That the present populations of certain civilisation areas genetically corelate to the original founding populations of the civilisations concerned.
I believe that it is a mistake, albeit a common one to assume one of two things:
1. That the haplogroups of the masses necessarily represents the founding element of the civilisation that they adhere to and:
2. That the present populations of certain civilisation areas genetically corelate to the original founding populations of the civilisations concerned.
1. Let's see if I understand what you mean. Supposing that the Romans might have been predominantly R1b (just a supposition for the argument's sake), but surrounded by I2, G2a, J2 and E1b1b people. You would consider that the "founding element of the Roman civilisation" is therefore R1b.
2. I have already pruned haplogroups representing later migrations. But it's true that the percentage can vary over time even without migrations.
In some periods of history the ruling class had more children (kings could father hundreds of children through concubines) and more of them survived into adulthood because they had more food and lived in better conditions. In other periods of history, the poor had more children (like now, because they are less concerned about their career and comfort level). Some regions might suffer serious epidemics that might wipe out a big part of the population. All these factors can change the haplogroup frequency of a region over the centuries. Furthermore, some haplogroups may confer increased fertility, or be associated with azoospermia.
1. Let's see if I understand what you mean. Supposing that the Romans might have been predominantly R1b (just a supposition for the argument's sake), but surrounded by I2, G2a, J2 and E1b1b people. You would consider that the "founding element of the Roman civilisation" is therefore R1b.
2. I have already pruned haplogroups representing later migrations. But it's true that the percentage can vary over time even without migrations.
In some periods of history the ruling class had more children (kings could father hundreds of children through concubines) and more of them survived into adulthood because they had more food and lived in better conditions. In other periods of history, the poor had more children (like now, because they are less concerned about their career and comfort level). Some regions might suffer serious epidemics that might wipe out a big part of the population. All these factors can change the haplogroup frequency of a region over the centuries. Furthermore, some haplogroups may confer increased fertility, or be associated with azoospermia.
Where is the proof that R1b contributed fair hair and eyes to Europe? Isn't R1b also closely linked to the Amerindians and others who have dark hair and eyes. Didn't blue eyes develop somewhere around the Baltic sea- not the area of introduction of R1b near the Black sea around Georgia and the Ukraine? How are the people of Italy's southern heel, Apulia for example, much lighter then most of central western Europe? They are nearly up to 50% blond according to the recent maps and I thought from your previous posts that they are really Greco-Roman and not Italo-celtic (as you put it- although I'm am still looking for proof of the term Italo-celtic) How did you come up with your beliefs since they are not based on fact?
Where is the proof that R1b contributed fair hair and eyes to Europe? Isn't R1b also closely linked to the Amerindians and others who have dark hair and eyes. Didn't blue eyes develop somewhere around the Baltic sea- not the area of introduction of R1b near the Black sea around Georgia and the Ukraine? How are the people of Italy's southern heel, Apulia for example, much lighter then most of central western Europe? They are nearly up to 50% blond according to the recent maps and I thought from your previous posts that they are really Greco-Roman and not Italo-celtic (as you put it- although I'm am still looking for proof of the term Italo-celtic) How did you come up with your beliefs since they are not based on fact?
In what way is that related to what I wrote in the post you quoted or about this thread ? Please refrain to post off-topic comments. Each thread has its own discussion.
R1b isn't found in pre-Colombian Amerindians as far as is currently known. It is common in modern native Americans because Western European colonists killed a lot of native men in the 16th and 17th centuries and procreated with their women.
Can you indicate the publication(s) relating cromagnon to hp y I(s) ?
Thank you
Manuel Costa
<mscosta2000@hotmail.com>
Can you indicate the publication(s) relating cromagnon to hp y I(s) ?
I am not sure if there is any scientific publication on the matter. Cro-Magnon have not been tested for Y-DNA yet, so nobody can be 100% sure.
Nevertheless, it is now widely accepted in the genetic genealogy community that haplogroup IJ or I are the only haplogroup that could be associated with Cro-Magnon, based on logical elimination and chronology. Logic combined to data analysis is a totally valid scientific argument. But scientists like to publish test results (often with poor analysis due to a blatant lack of historical and archeological background).
Here is why Paleolithic and Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers (aka Cro-Magnons) could not have belonged to other haplogroups than I.
Cro-Magnon arrived in Europe from the Middle East some 30,000 years ago.
Based on the ISOGG age estimates of Y-DNA haplogroups (=> chronology (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_haplogroups_timeline.shtml)), only haplogroups P, IJ, G and E1b existed between North Africa and the Middle East at the time.
Haplogroup R1a and R1b did not develop until about 20,000 years ago, and it is also generally accepted that haplogroup R appeared in Central Asia, based on the presence of R2 exclusively in South Asia, R1a from Eastern Europe to South Asia, and the oldest subclades of R1b all in Central or Western Asia. Besides the chronology of R1b subclades in Europe clearly follow of East to West migration pattern, not West to East. (see R1b migration map (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml#R1b)).
So haplogroup R1a and R1b can be effectively ruled out as possible Cro-Magnon haplogroups.
Virtually all population geneticists agree that haplogroups E and J came to Europe via Greece with the spread of agriculture during the Neolithic period. Many also add haplogroup G, though the migration pattern was obviously different from E and J, as the pockets in mountain areas of southern Europe attest.
Haplogroup G is thought to have originated somewhere between the Caucasus and South Asia. Most Europeans belong to G2a, which is less than 10,000 years old. There is a higher genetic diversity of G is Central Asia than Europe. Furthermore haplogroup G is nearly absent from Scandinavia and North-East Europe, which would be a region where the hunter-gatherer descendants of Cro-Magnon would be most likely to survive in considerable number after the arrival of Near-Eastern agriculturalists.
So, unless Cro-Magnon belonged to some completely extinct Y-DNA haplogroup (quite unlikely), the best, and indeed only candidate is haplogroup I. I am convinced that several subclades of I disappeared over time. There might not have been just I1, I2a and I2b, but probably other extinct subclades too. Given the huge bottleneck apparent from the phylogeny of I1, there might have been a lot of pre-I1 subclades, probably pruned by regular waves of stronger glaciations reducing the I1 population to only a few male individuals.
RealIllyrian
28-09-09, 22:51
Maciamo, you make a very big mistake by calling Albanians Greeks, and trying to explain history as it is greek as you have been told.
hehehe...
Pellasgians were not greek.
may I recommend you to read teh constitution of 1827 of the greek nation and find out what it really is. May I also recommend you to read the accounts of travelers and authors who wrote on the people who populated what you call greece up to the 19th century maintaining their original ethnic name?
It is so funny to see that people who are obviously intellilgent at the same time are so ignorant simply because they undermine the oldest language in the region Albanian.
you really need to correct what you write. There is nothing Pellasgian about what you call greeks, as greek is not an ethnic term but a religious term.
Pellasgian means people of the land of water.
In Albanian: Pellg = body of water,
gia = land, thing, earth
and greek is derived from the Language of the pellasgian, and the funny thing about it is that it is Albanian (SHQIP) that is the langauge that is closest to theirs, the language which translates literally the so called greek and egyptian gods which people like you who call them greeks, think are god names.
you really need to understand history a little better and find out that it is precisely the albanians who are fully in sync with the results presented on this website as far as evolution of the balkans goes. You have no idea what greek is from what I can tell by reading your comments. Unless you call Albanians greeks, and that's a different story altogether.
Find out what greek means, and understand that the historical terms that you are using are highly inaccurate as portrayed in the past 2 centuries. I don't want to ruin the surprise and give it away.
RealIllyrian
28-09-09, 23:01
and the trojans dear friend were also pellasgians. the historical accounts support that fully.
Troy is also an Albanian word for which the modern word is TROJE, meaning "our land"
you really have no idea what ancient history really is do you?
You shouldn't write things you have no idea about for the sake of writing them dear friend. You might be thinking you are helping people understand, but while you are from a scientific point of view, historically you are bastardizing the facts simply because of your own ignorance to a language that perhaps you think is irrelevant.
I will give you two quotes:
Ernst Maximilian Lambertz: "The world will not know its true history until Albanians participate in its writing"
And Edith Durham" Empires came and went, and passed over the Albanian as does the water off a duck's back"
I will be more than happy to explain you a few things that will only make you understand even better the science that you are presenting through a historical and linguistics viewpoint that only supports what you are presenting, which you seem to have no idea about.
Maciamo, you make a very big mistake by calling Albanians Greeks, and trying to explain history as it is greek as you have been told.
hehehe...
Pellasgians were not greek.
By definition, the Pelasgians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelasgians) are the autochthonous (native) inhabitants of Mesolithic Greece. They did not speak Greek, but their language may have contributed to a few loan words in ancient Greek.
may I recommend you to read teh constitution of 1827 of the greek nation and find out what it really is.
You are talking about the modern definition of "Greek" as related to the Greek nation. I don't see how this relates to genetic studies on ancient populations. For example, the modern country of Iran is not composed entirely of people descended from Iranian-speaking tribes - far from it. The same is true for Greece. Modern Greece is a melting pot. The Pelasgians were first there (probably haplogroup I2), then came early farmers from the Near East (E1b1b and J2), herders from the Caucasus and Anatolia (G2), then the Mycenaeans (I would think R1a), the Dorians (possibly R1b) and others.
Ancient Greek language and religion is surely an admixture of all this, although the Indo-European component is stronger than the rest. I suppose that this is because the Mycenaeans and Dorians were the last invaders, whose language and culture eventually stuck, after some adaptation to local idiosyncrasies.
It is so funny to see that people who are obviously intellilgent at the same time are so ignorant simply because they undermine the oldest language in the region Albanian.
Undermine ? How ? Not much is known about the actual origins of Albanian language. Although officially classified as Indo-European, it is obviously a creole with one or several other languages. I would make sense that this was the language spoken by the Neolithic E-V13, J2b and G2a population.
you really need to correct what you write. There is nothing Pellasgian about what you call greeks, as greek is not an ethnic term but a religious term.
Greek is a religious term ? And what religion would that be ancient Greek polytheism or Greek Orthodox Christianity ? What about the Minoans ? Weren't they Greek at all ?
Pellasgian means people of the land of water.
In Albanian: Pellg = body of water,
gia = land, thing, earth
So what ?
you really need to understand history a little better and find out that it is precisely the albanians who are fully in sync with the results presented on this website as far as evolution of the balkans goes. You have no idea what greek is from what I can tell by reading your comments. Unless you call Albanians greeks, and that's a different story altogether.
Find out what greek means, and understand that the historical terms that you are using are highly inaccurate as portrayed in the past 2 centuries. I don't want to ruin the surprise and give it away.
It's funny to see that you think you know what "Greek" mean when your definition is narrower than Bill Clinton's definition of "sex".
and the trojans dear friend were also pellasgians. the historical accounts support that fully.
Troy is also an Albanian word for which the modern word is TROJE, meaning "our land"
So you are basing your assertion simply on the presumed linguistic of the word Troy, which is, as you should know, a Greek word (Τροία), not a Trojan one.
The Trojans spoke Luwian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luwian_language), an Indo-European language closest to Hittite. The Hittite word for Troy is Wilusa.
you really have no idea what ancient history really is do you?
Were you addressing yourself ?
I will be more than happy to explain you a few things that will only make you understand even better the science that you are presenting through a historical and linguistics viewpoint that only supports what you are presenting, which you seem to have no idea about.
OK, go ahead. Let's have some fun.
and the trojans dear friend were also pellasgians. the historical accounts support that fully.
Troy is also an Albanian word for which the modern word is TROJE, meaning "our land"
you really have no idea what ancient history really is do you?
You shouldn't write things you have no idea about for the sake of writing them dear friend. You might be thinking you are helping people understand, but while you are from a scientific point of view, historically you are bastardizing the facts simply because of your own ignorance to a language that perhaps you think is irrelevant.
I will give you two quotes:
Ernst Maximilian Lambertz: "The world will not know its true history until Albanians participate in its writing"
And Edith Durham" Empires came and went, and passed over the Albanian as does the water off a duck's back"
I will be more than happy to explain you a few things that will only make you understand even better the science that you are presenting through a historical and linguistics viewpoint that only supports what you are presenting, which you seem to have no idea about.
(quote for both your posts)
Oh My God!
I would never expect to find in this forum the same Albanian Propaganda I read by all illiterate people of your nation again and again but I have to admit your posts make me (and everybody else with basic history knowledge) laugh.
All I ready by people who share your points of view is how every word in the universe derives from an Albanian one and how all that we know in this life is a result of the Albanian ancient knowledge... Get serious...
Please, there is no one here you will be able to convince with your views simply because people who post in this forum are people with a certain level of knowledge about European (and not only) history. So keep your propaganda for forums where members didn't manage to finish elementary school and might actually "buy" it...:laughing:
I won't even bother to counterattack your views because there is no point convincing brainwashed people...
Maciamo no matter what you tell him he will have something to reply so your efforts to prove him that he is wrong will go wasted...
Nicolas Peucelle
16-12-09, 01:54
Maciamo... you are THE Master..! Thank you for all these wonderful informations.
The Phoenicians
The unique colonization pattern of the Phoenicians and the isolation of some of their colonies (Ibiza, Sardinia, Malta) have made it easy to identify their genetic signature. The Phoenician population was already very mixed 3000 years ago : E-V22, J1, J2, J2a4b, J2a4b1, G2a, R1a and R1b1a. E-V22 and R1b1a are quite specific to Levantines (Syrians, Lebanese, Druzes, Jews, Palestinians).
Are you intentionally excluding T? Although they are pretty much a low frequency anywhere they are, they are found in areas that were Phoenician colonies. Cadiz, Spain and Huelva have more T than most of western Europe. I'm just getting this from the National Genographic study of Lebanon and the claim they make that they have found varieties of J2 and T where Phoenicians resided.
Are you intentionally excluding T? Although they are pretty much a low frequency anywhere they are, they are found in areas that were Phoenician colonies. Cadiz, Spain and Huelva have more T than most of western Europe. I'm just getting this from the National Genographic study of Lebanon and the claim they make that they have found varieties of J2 and T where Phoenicians resided.
Do you have the Source for this claim ?
Are you intentionally excluding T? Although they are pretty much a low frequency anywhere they are, they are found in areas that were Phoenician colonies. Cadiz, Spain and Huelva have more T than most of western Europe. I'm just getting this from the National Genographic study of Lebanon and the claim they make that they have found varieties of J2 and T where Phoenicians resided.
I should have included T. I just forgot.
iann_allein
02-01-10, 19:00
It is very interesting!
But i want to see your source!
Where is the source of this information??
This is your hypothesis?
:cool-v:
It is very interesting!
But i want to see your source!
Where is the source of this information??
This is your hypothesis?
:cool-v:
There sources are too numerous to list here. It's based on hundreds of Y-DNA studies, almost everything I could find on the Internet + my knowledge of history.
iann_allein
02-01-10, 23:22
There sources are too numerous to list here. It's based on hundreds of Y-DNA studies, almost everything I could find on the Internet + my knowledge of history.
Are you a scientist?
Why do you answer all questions on this forum?
Maybe I'm curious, but I see that the information is different in Wikipedia.
Besides I do not know who you are?
I ask because there are some problems.
Why did Europedia call haplogroup E3b Greek, Near-Eastern , North-African?
This haplogroup was born in Africa, not Greece.
Ok There are subgroups of E which are born in Europe, however, haplogroup J2 was born in northern Mesopotamia, but Europedia called this haplogroup Greco-Roman, Anatolian,Mesopotamian.
Why?
Europedia should write Mesopotamian, Anatolian, Greco-Roman. No Greco-Roman, Anatolian,Mesopotamian.
Because Mesopotamian civilization was much older than the Anatolian Civilization or Greco-Roman civilization.
Are you a scientist?
Why do you answer all questions on this forum?
Maybe I'm curious, but I see that the information is different in Wikipedia.
Besides I do not know who you are?
I ask because there are some problems.
Why did Europedia call haplogroup E3b Greek, Near-Eastern , North-African?
This haplogroup was born in Africa, not Greece.
Ok There are subgroups of E which are born in Europe, however, haplogroup J2 was born in northern Mesopotamia, but Europedia called this haplogroup Greco-Roman, Anatolian,Mesopotamian.
Why?
Europedia should write Mesopotamian, Anatolian, Greco-Roman. No Greco-Roman, Anatolian,Mesopotamian.
Because Mesopotamian civilization was much older than the Anatolian Civilization or Greco-Roman civilization.
Because, the same way some E sub-haplogroups are born in Greece, also some subclades of J2 are born in Greece, for example J2b
Are you a scientist?
Yes.
Why do you answer all questions on this forum?
Because there are many people who are interested in that subject, and because some other websites are not always reliable, especially those that rarely update their information or ask real questions, like the Genographic Project.
Why did Europedia call haplogroup E3b Greek, Near-Eastern , North-African?
This haplogroup was born in Africa, not Greece.
What's Europedia ? Nobody uses the term E3b anymore. It's over a year that it has been called E1b1b.
Ok There are subgroups of E which are born in Europe, however, haplogroup J2 was born in northern Mesopotamia, but Europedia called this haplogroup Greco-Roman, Anatolian,Mesopotamian.
Why?
Where did you see that ? Haplogroup E* is definitely African, but I don't know if it still exists. It has plenty of subclades through, like E-V13 which is almost confined to Europe and thought to have appeared (or first become widespread) in northern Greece about 8,000 years ago. Please understand that E is not the same as E1b1b, just like R is not the same as R1b. The deeper the subclade, the more specific it becomes. Besides, the main subclades of E1b1b found in Europe have their origins explained in this website's main article about the history of haplogroups (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#E). Anything you think is wrong ? Please share.
Europedia should write Mesopotamian, Anatolian, Greco-Roman. No Greco-Roman, Anatolian,Mesopotamian.
Because Mesopotamian civilization was much older than the Anatolian Civilization or Greco-Roman civilization.
Really doesn't matte to me. I wrote this in a geographic order, from west to east, not in a chronological order. Either way is fine. You could also list them alphabetically if you want.
iann_allein
03-01-10, 19:57
I can not find this map to show you. Sorry.
I hope to find this map .. it is on the internet ..
Europedia = eupedia>>> it is a mistake.
I understand that E is not the same as E1b1b,
but E1b1b is older than E-V13 that is why i want they to be in chronological order.
Ok
I see that you are not the author of this map.
Even if you are the author of this map, I can not find it to show you.
I'm sorry for my English
iann_allein
03-01-10, 20:14
I can not find this map to show you. Sorry.
I hope to find this map .. it is on the internet ..
Europedia = eupedia>>> it is a mistake.
I understand that E is not the same as E1b1b,
but E1b1b is older than E-V13 that is why i want they to be in chronological order.
Ok
I see that you are not the author of this map.
Even if you are the author of this map, I can not find it to show you.
I'm sorry for my English
i found this map but i ca not show it.
This is the link but I separated the letters in order to publish the address.
2qluxvl . p n g
Nice map, and to my limited knowledge of haplogroups it looks fine. I like the colours used, and short, spot on, description where they come from (on top).
I mentioned the colours, because sometimes I have problems distinguishing yellow from light green, and few other combinations, in small chart circles. No problems here, almost like I picked the colours here, lol.
JPtoEurope
05-01-10, 01:11
Hello Maciano,
First, sorry for my bad english, I m french
You say:
The ancient Egyptians
Based on the modern population of Egypt, and removing the foreign elements, it is reasonable to assume that the ancient Egyptians belonged primarily to haplogroups E1b1b and T. Nowadays about half of the Egyptian paternal lines could be descended from invaders, notably from the Arabic peninsula (hg J1, about 1/3 of the population), but also from Greece, Anatolia and Persia.
You are sure ? You see E1b1b and T haplogroups for ancient Egyptians in the images below? Personally I see only N (mtDNA) and R, I (and maybe IJK, but read below)(Y-DNA)...
(replace ** by TT)
h**p://img171.imageshack.us/img171/4950/toutankamonetreine2h.jpg
h**p://img297.imageshack.us/img297/6118/tomberamsesi02m.jpg
h**p://img171.imageshack.us/img171/3167/scribe01384x512.jpg (yes its eyes are blue)
h**p://img27.imageshack.us/img27/2094/ramsesenemies04.jpg
h**p://img85.imageshack.us/img85/954/tomberamsesiu.jpg
h**p://img171.imageshack.us/img171/2575/nefertitit.jpg
Except, but later after the first Egyptians dynasties, a mix with Semitic people and the short black Nubian people dynasty.
And the Egyptians knew, too, to do the difference between them and their enemies...
h**p://img27.imageshack.us/img27/420/ramssenemies01.jpg
h**p://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3903/ramsesenemies02.jpg
h**p://img177.imageshack.us/img177/1364/toutankareposepied1a.jpg
h**p://img502.imageshack.us/img502/4254/toutankamonsandales2.jpg
h**p://img171.imageshack.us/img171/6228/toutankamoncoffre1a.jpg
h**p://img85.imageshack.us/img85/9044/toutankamoncoffre2rduit.jpg
Because you forget the most important parameter, it's that the presence to the white skin in the Mediterranean human people has necessarily been generated, at a time or more, by a North > South migration and that the population movements were not only and always from South > North migrations (as in all your maps). And IJK (Y-DNA) are the haplogroups downward to this North > South migrations...
Because the white skin (and light eyes too) is only generate by the light phenomenon (sun) more rare, and this phenomenon occurs only in Europe and Northern Eurasia... And these North > South population movements have necessarily been important to be able to change skin color and appearance (nose fine and right, face shape, etc.) in a important proportion to the "Fertile Crescent" (Anatolie, The Levant, Mesopotamia) and North Africa. Or maybe totally inundate the autochthon population (if indigenous people existed? before 12/10 000 years ago).
One of this South to North movements (maybe the laster and because surely there are several), dating surely to the last big cooler weather (but without ice cap) to 12000 years ago (last big cooler with ice cap date to 18 000 years ago).
All the more recent information about that, history to Europe and Fertile Crescent and aADN, in this serious site to a historian (with all the last scientist references/links) here
w.buildinghistory.org/distantpast (add "ww" before url)
Regards
JPtoEurope
05-01-10, 01:18
PS: I want say to the admin to this site (dont know if it's you)
that the politic to accept a url only after 15 posts is very not serious and very strange (in 10 years that I surf in the Web, it's the first time that I see that on a forum).
Good points JPto.
I would like to add that if Cro Magnons picked white skin gene from Neanderthals it could have happened in Middle East. Can't point to the source now, but I remember reading article showing that both species cohabited caves around Israel area 50 thousand years ago. When Cro Magnon moved into Europe 35KYA they might have been already white or at least not very dark.
It would be nice one day to get genetic data in this regard and few others, even if it proves me wrong. :)
Hello Maciano,
First, sorry for my bad english, I m french
You say:
You are sure ? You see E1b1b and T haplogroups for ancient Egyptians in the images below? Personally I see only N (mtDNA) and R, I (and maybe IJK, but read below)(Y-DNA)...
First of all this thread is only about Y-DNA, not mtdna. But just to correct you, mtDNA N arose about 70,000 years ago (have a look at the timeline (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_haplogroups_timeline.shtml)), and we are talking about the ancient Egyptian civilisation, starting about 5,000 years ago. All the modern haplogroups and most subclades (both for mtDNA and Y-DNA) would have already existed from 5,000 to 2,000 years ago.
Y-haplogroups I and R are almost certainly two of those that, if present at all, were insignificant in the ancient Egyptian population.
Are you aware that the early Indo-Europeans (e.g. Pontic-Caspian Neolithic, the R1a and R1b "homeland") were mostly Proto-Europoids, meaning that they had mixed Europoid and Mongoloid traits (very broad, thick-boned faces, lower skulls). Ancient and modern Egyptians and Near Easterners on the contrary were/are gracile and narrow faced with high skulls. Whether you base your comparison on ancient skeletons or ancient depictions of Egyptians, it shows that the Egyptian and Levantine population almost haven't changed at all over time in this regard.
Because you forget the most important parameter, it's that the presence to the white skin in the Mediterranean human people has necessarily been generated, at a time or more, by a North > South migration and that the population movements were not only and always from South > North migrations (as in all your maps).
What makes you think that North Africans or Middle Easterners didn't have fair skin 5,000 years ago ? Fair skin is a polygenic trait (i.e. involving many genes). It has been estimated that the very first signs of skin colour becoming fairer happened sometimes between 50,000 and 20,000 years ago, so before most of the modern genes from the Middle East reached Europe. Europeans with pale skin have an additional mutation in the SLC24A5 gene, which has been estimated to have arisen between 6,000 and 12,000 years ago. Before there was no difference in skin colour between Europeans and Middle Easterners.
The first Cro-Magnons were probably dark-skinned, as opposed to white-skinned Neanderthals. Modern humans could have picke up a few genes for fair skin from Neanderthals, but whether this happened in Europe, the Middle-East or Central Asia is anyone's guess. It could have happened in the three regions. If it was only one, I would pick Central Asia, because this is where Y-haplogroups N, O, P, Q and R all came from, and white skin is present in all these populations (respectively, Siberians, East Asians, Central Asians, Native Americans and Europeans + some Middle Easterners and South Asians).
All the more recent information about that, history to Europe and Fertile Crescent and aADN, in this serious site to a historian (with all the last scientist references/links) here
w.buildinghistory.org/distantpast (add "ww" before url)
Regards
Thanks, but I know this site well (and its owner). You may have noticed that I explain a lot of these things on this site too, notably here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml).
PS: I want say to the admin to this site (dont know if it's you)
that the politic to accept a url only after 15 posts is very not serious and very strange (in 10 years that I surf in the Web, it's the first time that I see that on a forum).
This is because of spammers. That's one way of discouraging them, or at least make their spam ads useless until they get deleted.
It is my own supposition based my knowledge of the modern Basque people. That's why I said "it is probable". If DNA had been conducted on the ancient, pre-Indo-European Basques proving that they indeed had dark hair and eyes, I would have said "it has been proved". I cannot see how they would have fair hair or eyes before the R1b Indo-European invasion.
yes, they had fair hair before indo-europeans , although very minoritary. Also indicating that Basque people have only about 25% of indo-european admixture :
(13) Raza pirenaico-occidental o vasca: tipo racial surgido de la evolución local del hombre de Cromagnon. La antropología engloba el tipo vasco dentro de la raza caucásica. Sus características físicas son las siguientes:
Ortognatismo: perfil recto de la cara prescindiendo de la nariz. Dolicocéfalos con bóveda craneana baja (en Iparralde la dolicocefalia puede atenuarse, e incluso puede convertirse en braquicefalia por influencia del tipo alpino). Rino-prosapia: gran desarrollo vertical de la cara en relación a la longitud de la boca. Estrechez maxilar y mesocefalia: cara triangular con sienes abultadas. Orificio occipital oblicuo: el borde anterior se encuentra muy metido o hundido. Mandíbula inferior: más bien estrecha y la barbilla recogida. La cara es muy alta, así como la nariz, siendo esta última muy saliente y con perfil a menudo convexo. El cabello: predominan los morenos sobre los castaños, siendo los rubios o pelirrojos muy minoritarios y fruto del mestizaje. Los ojos: más bien pequeños, pero muy abiertos, predominando los castaños, garzos y azules, sobre negros, verdes y grises. Comunmente los de tipo vasco se distinguen de sus vecinos latinos por su mayorObjetos prerromanos encontrados en las ruinas de la civitas romana de Iruña-Veleia en la actual localidad de Iruña de Oka (Álava) estatura y corpulencia, a lo que ha de añadirse cierta tendencia a una coloración más clara de la tez.
http://www.kondaira.net/esp/THistoria.html#Indoeuroparrak
11) Investigaciones realizadas principalmente por Peter Forster, doctor en Biología y miembro destacado del Instituto McDonald, y sus colaboradores del laboratorio de genética molecular de este instituto. El estudio por otras universidades del ADN mitocondrial, así como el estudio del cromosoma Y (paterno) para realizar la misma investigación (en lugar del ADN mitocondrial), apunta hacia las mismas conclusiones.
A partir de esta época, probablemente, se comienza a desarrollar en la zona cantábrica y sur de Francia el grupo humano protovasco y su lengua, el protoeuskara, dando lugar a la civilización franco-cantábrica. Del 16.000 a.C. en adelante el clima comienza a ser más cálido y según las investigaciones de paleogenética, comienza la expansión de los protovascos, extendiendo su cultura, la magdaleniense, por la despoblada Europa. Una cultura cuya máxima expresión serían las pinturas rupestres con las que los protovascos Indumentaria de los protovascos en el magdalenienseornamentaron las cuevas europeas. La extensión y localización de la cultura magdaleniense en Europa, coincide exactamente con este estudio, asimismo los rasgos fonéticos y léxicos comunes con los vascos, encontrados en las tierras donde se extendió la antigua civilización franco-cantábrica (tercio norte peninsular y mitad sur de Francia) de esta época, parecen avalar también este estudio. Hace 10.000 años comenzó el deshielo de los glaciares escandinavos, lo que contribuyó a que los protovascos se extendieran también por esta zona.
Estas investigaciones genéticas llevadas a cabo para el conocimiento de la evolución humana en Europa, indican que tres cuartos de los europeos actuales proceden, por vía matrilineal, de una población europea del período preglacial y que están estrechamente emparentados con los vascos. Indicando también que el aporte genético no protovasco (indoeuropeo en su gran mayoría) supone, únicamente, el 25% del total.
JPtoEurope
07-01-10, 20:43
"Are you aware that the early Indo-Europeans (e.g. Pontic-Caspian Neolithic, the R1a and R1b "homeland") were mostly Proto-Europoids, meaning that they had mixed Europoid and Mongoloid traits (very broad, thick-boned faces, lower skulls)."Sorry, but I never read that in any serious sites. Only that the Asiatic flow (and gene) come to Est to West very later (last thousand years BC)... By example, this again explen in this page **w.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/migration.shtml (and of course cross-check by other reliable sources)
"...Studies of ancient DNA indicate the point at which East Asian peoples came to predominate over Western Eurasian in Central Asia. In Kazakhstan there were Western Eurasian lineages prior to the 7th century BC, followed by East Asian lineages appearing..."
"What makes you think that North Africans or Middle Easterners didn't have fair skin 5,000 years ago ? Fair skin is a polygenic trait (i.e. involving many genes). It has been estimated that the very first signs of skin colour becoming fairer happened sometimes between 50,000 and 20,000 years ago, so before most of the modern genes from the Middle East reached Europe. Europeans with pale skin have an additional mutation in the SLC24A5 gene, which has been estimated to have arisen between 6,000 and 12,000 years ago. Before there was no difference in skin colour between Europeans and Middle Easterners."30,000, 20,000, 12,000, 6,000 or 5,000... It's not very the problem about I speak. At any time that it is able of begin, even with a possible mix Cro-magnon with Neanderthal (besides, Neanderthal species is found mainly in Europe), "white skin" and similarly for the hair and eyes clear, is inevitably the result from a phenomenon of adaptation to northern climate. And this genetic result probably very in North for act so strongly on the genes, same if the ices were at the time closest in south Eurasia that currently... So, inevitably white skin genes comming of North toward Middle East and north africa... and in mass (of course compared to the population at the time). This climate existing only in Northern Eurasia close to the ice and cold climate...
bye
JPtoEurope
08-01-10, 03:58
PS:
The first "steppe peoples" in Eurasia are not Asiatics (racially speaking), but are the Europeans peoples (always racially speaking). The lasts representative of those Europeans peoples in the Eurasia steppes, are the Scythes. The first main people to have reversed this West > East flow in the Eurasia steppe in East > West flow, is a people interbreeding between Europeans and Asiatics... named the Turcs. And more recently and after 1400 years of Asiatics (turko-mongolians) domination in steppes, the flow is again reversed West to the East, for the Europeans, about the seventeenth century, with the Russian conquests, right down Pacific.
I think Bell Beakers were mixed.
They belonged to haplogroups I2a, I2a1, I2b, and two neolithic haplogroups E-V13 and J2b.
All of these are the first miners in the Sardinia. We still can find these haplogroups in Sardinia, together with G haplogroup, which represents later miners, after collapse of first metallurgy in Europe.
But Bell Beakers were partially dinarics.
Which racial phenotype, by which haplogroup was brought into the invader peoples and then in the invaded countries?
Maybe J2b and E-V13 were dinarics as they are today in Montenegro, Albania, Kosovo and Greece. And I2* were dolichocephals.
Sorry, but I never read that in any serious sites. Only that the Asiatic flow (and gene) come to Est to West very later (last thousand years BC)... By example, this again explen in this page **w.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/migration.shtml (and of course cross-check by other reliable sources)
...
PS:
The first "steppe peoples" in Eurasia are not Asiatics (racially speaking), but are the Europeans peoples (always racially speaking).
According to anthropologist David Anthony in his book The Horse, The Wheel, and Language (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0691058873?ie=UTF8&tag=eupedia-21&link_code=as3&camp=2506&creative=9298&creativeASIN=0691058873), steppe people of the Bug-Dniester and later Yamna culture were all low-skulled, very wide-faced Proto-Europoids (mixed European and Mongoloid traits). He also mentions that the early Yamna settlers in the Danube basin (3000-2600 BCE), in places like Bulgaria, Serbia and Hungary, were still the same Proto-Europoids, contrasting neatly with the gracile, high-skulled and narrow-faced people of "Old Europe".
David Anthony is a well-respected specialist of Indo-European archaeology. As he is first and foremost a professor of anthropology, there is no doubt he can recognise anthropological features from skeletons.
30,000, 20,000, 12,000, 6,000 or 5,000... It's not very the problem about I speak. At any time that it is able of begin, even with a possible mix Cro-magnon with Neanderthal (besides, Neanderthal species is found mainly in Europe), "white skin" and similarly for the hair and eyes clear, is inevitably the result from a phenomenon of adaptation to northern climate. And this genetic result probably very in North for act so strongly on the genes, same if the ices were at the time closest in south Eurasia that currently... So, inevitably white skin genes comming of North toward Middle East and north africa... and in mass (of course compared to the population at the time). This climate existing only in Northern Eurasia close to the ice and cold climate...
You forget that northern Europe was under a thick sheet of ice during the Ice Age, until 14,000 years ago. Only southern Europe was inhabitable, at roughly the same latitude as the Middle East and Central Asia. There is no reason to believe that fair pigmentation arose in Europe rather than in the Middle East or Central Asia. The northernmost inhabitable regions were actually in Central Asia, so it is more likely to have appeared over there. If fair skin first appeared in Europe, how did East Asians develop fair skin ?
yes, they had fair hair before indo-europeans , although very minoritary. Also indicating that Basque people have only about 25% of indo-european admixture :
(13) Raza pirenaico-occidental o vasca: tipo racial surgido de la evolución local del hombre de Cromagnon. La antropología engloba el tipo vasco dentro de la raza caucásica. Sus características físicas son las siguientes:
Ortognatismo: perfil recto de la cara prescindiendo de la nariz. Dolicocéfalos con bóveda craneana baja (en Iparralde la dolicocefalia puede atenuarse, e incluso puede convertirse en braquicefalia por influencia del tipo alpino). Rino-prosapia: gran desarrollo vertical de la cara en relación a la longitud de la boca. Estrechez maxilar y mesocefalia: cara triangular con sienes abultadas. Orificio occipital oblicuo: el borde anterior se encuentra muy metido o hundido. Mandíbula inferior: más bien estrecha y la barbilla recogida. La cara es muy alta, así como la nariz, siendo esta última muy saliente y con perfil a menudo convexo. El cabello: predominan los morenos sobre los castaños, siendo los rubios o pelirrojos muy minoritarios y fruto del mestizaje. Los ojos: más bien pequeños, pero muy abiertos, predominando los castaños, garzos y azules, sobre negros, verdes y grises. Comunmente los de tipo vasco se distinguen de sus vecinos latinos por su mayorObjetos prerromanos encontrados en las ruinas de la civitas romana de Iruña-Veleia en la actual localidad de Iruña de Oka (Álava) estatura y corpulencia, a lo que ha de añadirse cierta tendencia a una coloración más clara de la tez.
http://www.kondaira.net/esp/THistoria.html#Indoeuroparrak
11) Investigaciones realizadas principalmente por Peter Forster, doctor en Biología y miembro destacado del Instituto McDonald, y sus colaboradores del laboratorio de genética molecular de este instituto. El estudio por otras universidades del ADN mitocondrial, así como el estudio del cromosoma Y (paterno) para realizar la misma investigación (en lugar del ADN mitocondrial), apunta hacia las mismas conclusiones.
A partir de esta época, probablemente, se comienza a desarrollar en la zona cantábrica y sur de Francia el grupo humano protovasco y su lengua, el protoeuskara, dando lugar a la civilización franco-cantábrica. Del 16.000 a.C. en adelante el clima comienza a ser más cálido y según las investigaciones de paleogenética, comienza la expansión de los protovascos, extendiendo su cultura, la magdaleniense, por la despoblada Europa. Una cultura cuya máxima expresión serían las pinturas rupestres con las que los protovascos Indumentaria de los protovascos en el magdalenienseornamentaron las cuevas europeas. La extensión y localización de la cultura magdaleniense en Europa, coincide exactamente con este estudio, asimismo los rasgos fonéticos y léxicos comunes con los vascos, encontrados en las tierras donde se extendió la antigua civilización franco-cantábrica (tercio norte peninsular y mitad sur de Francia) de esta época, parecen avalar también este estudio. Hace 10.000 años comenzó el deshielo de los glaciares escandinavos, lo que contribuyó a que los protovascos se extendieran también por esta zona.
Estas investigaciones genéticas llevadas a cabo para el conocimiento de la evolución humana en Europa, indican que tres cuartos de los europeos actuales proceden, por vía matrilineal, de una población europea del período preglacial y que están estrechamente emparentados con los vascos. Indicando también que el aporte genético no protovasco (indoeuropeo en su gran mayoría) supone, únicamente, el 25% del total.
This site doesn't give clear information about the skeletons studied. What is their radiocarbon dating ? How many skeletons ? It doesn't look very scientific. Dates under the title "Neolithic" range from 2500 to 300 BCE, which is to say early Bronze Age to Iron Age. Your description is right in the middle of this "chapter" and refers to the modern incidence of R1b as a sign of "prehistoric origin". That doesn't mean anything. The Indo-Europeans could have arrived as early as 2500 BCE in Western Europe, although more probably around 2200-2000 BCE. Fair or red hair from that period onwards could be Indo-European.
If you find clearly radiocarbon dated specimens of fair/red hair in Western Europe prior to 2500 BCE, please let me know.
iann_allein
10-01-10, 06:06
The ancient Greek & Romanss
=> See post #3 below.
What do you mean? Maciamo.
The ancient Germanic people,
The ancient Slavs 0r
The ancient Indians?
Please explain me how it is possible that the Indo-Europeans had some
Mongoloide traits. The haplogroups of the Northwest-Europeans do
not show any mongoloid trait.
Please explain me how it is possible that the Indo-Europeans had some
Mongoloide traits. The haplogroups of the Northwest-Europeans do
not show any mongoloid trait.
This is because they didn't move straight from the steppe to North-West Europe (there were no air planes at the time ;-) ), but spent 500 years (roughly from 3000 to 2500 BCE) intermixing with other Europeans in the Danube basin before settling around the Alps, where they further mixed with the locals before continuing to Western and Northern Europe. This is why Europeans still vary a lot in term of autosomal DNA where Y-DNA is similar. The oldest population has had the most important phenotypic influence on modern people. Only genetic traits that were selected for their usefulness (e.g. lactose tolerance) or aesthetic value (fair pigmentation) spread quickly. For the rest we are not so strongly genetically connected with the people who lived in the Pontic steppes 5000 years ago.
But I do not understand how it is possible that the Indo-Europeans who moved to West-
Europe, had mongoloid traits. So northwest Europeans also have mongoloid ancestors?
Well northwest Europeans, as every other European, didn't "grow" suddenly in the fields and trees of Northwest Europe. They came from somewhere and that was Asia. There was mixing within Europe but all Europeans have Asian ancestors and according to the Out-of-Africa theory we all have African ancestors.
I don't understand why it is so surprising for you.
But you do not see any mongoloid traits with the Netherlands and
Danes. I suppose that they are the purest nordic and falish people.
Really germanic.
But you do not see any mongoloid traits with the Netherlands and
Danes. I suppose that they are the purest nordic and falish people.
Really germanic.
And what 'pure Nordic' is supposed to mean ??
Mongoloids traits are not just slanted eyes. Plus, thousands of years of evolution and interbreeding with the natives pre-Indoeuropeans and Near-easterns, this mongoloid traits have disappeared
But you do not see any mongoloid traits with the Netherlands and
Danes. I suppose that they are the purest nordic and falish people.
Really germanic.
Actually all Scandinavians all slight Mongoloid traits. It is more marked in some regions, like Gotland island or northern Sweden. There is a substantial amount of Siberian haplogroups in Scandinavia (e.g. 7% of N1c1 and 0.5% of Q in Sweden, and up to 5% of mtDNA A, C and D). Some places invaded by the Vikings, like Orkney, have more haplogroup Q than in modern Scandinavia, so Vikings could have been more Mongoloid-looking too. Actually, we could go as far as to say that Mongoloid DNA is what distinguishes Nordic people from other Europeans. Finland and Baltic countries, which have the highest percentage of both fair hair and blue eyes have the highest percentage of Siberian haplogroups (60% of Y-DNA in Finland).
Physical traits can change fast. Skeletons from Europeans 2000 years ago are quite different from that of modern Europeans. In the 10,000 year explosion (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0465002218?ie=UTF8&tag=eupedia-21&link_code=as3&camp=2506&creative=9298&creativeASIN=0465002218), the author explains that people back then often had strong brow ridges (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supraorbital_ridge), a trait that has nearly completely disappeared in modern Europeans.
Cambria Red
12-01-10, 17:01
Many people seem to have a distorted idea of what the term Nordic entails, racially. No different than for many other ethnicities around the world. The word "pure" should never be used to define any ethnicity / race.
Many thanks for these interesting information. But I can imagine myself
that mongoloid traits are found in Russia, Finland or Lappland. How are
these traits with the Scandinavians caused? By contacts with Finns
or Sami?
Are these mongoloid traits found with the Danes, Germans and Dutch too?
It is a difficult thing for me to understand it. Swedish people with so
pure fair (even flaxen or red) hair have mongoloid ancestors! You only can expect it with the Hungarians, Slavic and Finnish peoples.
And browrigdes: this is characteristic for farmers and sailors at the
North Sea (Friesland, north Germany and Jutland). Probably descendants
of the Bruenn/Aurignac and Borreby men who lived in southwest France
during the Ice Age. See Coon: Races of the Europe (chapter the Netherlands).
A joke: Virchow (a German anthropologist 19e century,thought that he saw real Neanderthalers in the Dutch province of Friesland).
Many thanks for these interesting information. But I can imagine myself
that mongoloid traits are found in Russia, Finland or Lappland. How are
these traits with the Scandinavians caused? By contacts with Finns
or Sami?
Are these mongoloid traits found with the Danes, Germans and Dutch too?
It is a difficult thing for me to understand it. Swedish people with so
pure fair (even flaxen or red) hair have mongoloid ancestors! You only can expect it with the Hungarians, Slavic and Finnish peoples.
Well according to this table here http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml there is 1% N1c1 and 0.5% Q in Germany (with North Germany having 2% Q and 1.5% N1c1), 1,5% N1c1 in Denmark and 0.5% N1c1 and 0.5% in The Netherlands so there is some Siberian admixture in these countries.
I still have difficulties to accept mongoloid traits in real nordic and Germanic
people. I suppose that you find these traits only in the Russians.
I should like to see such mongoloid slits in Swedes or Dutch.
I still have difficulties to accept mongoloid traits in real nordic and Germanic
people. I suppose that you find these traits only in the Russians.
I should like to see such mongoloid slits in Swedes or Dutch.
I would like to know what "real" germanic means. There is no such thing REAL
Germanic countries also have Q and N
I still have difficulties to accept mongoloid traits in real nordic and Germanic
people. I suppose that you find these traits only in the Russians.
I should like to see such mongoloid slits in Swedes or Dutch.
I don't understand why you keep supposing that only Russians have such traits since DNA tests tell you differently.
The Y-DNA table on the site is not made by assumptions but by scientific data and it shows that Scandinavians have Siberian admixture and also they have J-E-G haplogroups, that are found all over in Europe.
Genocentrist
26-01-10, 07:27
Many thanks for these interesting information. But I can imagine myself
that mongoloid traits are found in Russia, Finland or Lappland. How are
these traits with the Scandinavians caused? By contacts with Finns
or Sami?.
All the R1-M173 Eurasids (majority of Europeans today) came from Asia. The ones that came from Anatolia mixed with native Near Easterners first so their Eurasid children looked more assimilated & later mixed with native R1-M173 Europids & other Neolithic farmers so they were more assimilated than those who entered directly from the Eurasian Steppe.
In gneral all R1-M173 Eurasids picked more native traits as they moved into Western Europe thats why Western European Eurasids are the least "East Asian :grin:" looking
All the R1-M173 Eurasids (majority of Europeans today) came from Asia. The ones that came from Anatolia mixed with native Near Easterners first so their Eurasid children looked more assimilated & later mixed with native R1-M173 Europids & other Neolithic farmers so they were more assimilated than those who entered directly from the Eurasian Steppe.
In gneral all R1-M173 Eurasids picked more native traits as they moved into Western Europe thats why Western European Eurasids are the least "East Asian :grin:" looking
I agree with that.
galychanyn
26-01-10, 19:34
I still have difficulties to accept mongoloid traits in real nordic and Germanic
people.James Carville
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff277/aiwn/James_Carville3.jpg
Zack Ward
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff277/aiwn/Zack_Ward3.jpg
Emily Browning
http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg275/aiwn07/browningnormal_34.jpghttp://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg275/aiwn07/browningnormal_344.jpg
Gary McKinnon
http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg275/aiwn07/McKinnon_wideweb__430x275.jpg
Jodie Kidd
http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg275/aiwn07/jodikidd.jpg
maltesekid
08-03-10, 05:56
north euros have east asian dna? some nordics do have higher cheekbones or smaller narrow eyes! i noticed! i think that the big eyed long nose races were from arabs africa or south asia! nordics are part finnic uralic possibly! people i seen with the biggest eyes are almost always south asians! they have huge eyes and longer nose they are the opposite of east asian! people in italy and greece got huge big eyes as well not as big as india indians or mid easterns though!
The Hungarians
Modern Hungarians are virtually undistinguishable from their Austrian and Slovak neighbours in terms of Y-chromosome haplogroups.
But Hungary is a notoriously difficult country for Y-DNA proportions. Percentages tend to vary widely from one study to another, depending on the regional populations sampled. Some studies have found over 60% of R1a in Hungary, although the average if half that figure. Some villages have a small percentage of CentralNorth Asian haplogroups N, Q or C, but they are otherwise quite rare. Interestingly neighbouring countries like Austria, Slovakia and Ukraine appear to have more C, Q and N than Hungary.
Hungary has a peculiar history due to its geography - a vast plain surrounded by mountains on every side (the Alps and the Carpathians). In Neolithic times, it was at the centre of the Danubian cultures, which was composed of E-V13 farmers from Thessaly and I2 hunter-gatherers (soon converted to farming). Then came the Slavic invasion (around 3,000 BCE), followed by the Proto-Italo-Celts and Alpine Celts (2,000 BCE to 200 BCE), who brought respectively R1a and R1b to the region.
Hungary was named after the Huns, who invaded Europe from 370 CE and partly settled in the Pannonian plain (now known as Hungarian plain). It isn't sure where the Huns came from, but it is generally believed that they descended from the Xiongnu peoples of Mongolia. They were a confederation and included various ethnic group under Hunnic leadership. It is likely that there were many R1a peoples (e.g. Scythians) from the Eurasian Steppe. The Huns themselves may have been an admixture of haplogroup Q and C. However less than 2% of the modern population belong to Q and C combined.
The next invaders were the Magyar, a Finno-Ugric people who arrived in Europe in the 9th century, and settled in Hungary in the 10th. Hungarian language is actually a descendant of Magyar, not Hunnic, despite the misleading name in "Hun-". The Magyar came from Central Asia, and are related to the modern Bashkirs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashkirs) of Russia. Modern Bashkirs have about 35% of haplogroup R1b1b2, 26% of R1a, 17% of N1c and 13% of R1b1b1. However, they were conquered by the Mongols, which may account for all the haplogroup C. In fact, the presence of C in Europe is usually attributed exclusively to the Mongols, and C is almost non-existent in Hungary anyway.
A study (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/01/magyars-and-madjars.html) compared the Y-chromosome of the Madjar tribe from Kazakhstan to the Magyars of Hungary, and found that some G lineages were related. The article doesn't specify the subcalde, but G1 is the dominant strain in Kazakhstan, and is also found in Hungary (but normally not elsewhere in Europe).
Another study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18373723) compared the Y-DNA of Hungarians with other Finno-Ugric-speaking populations in order to understand why modern Hungarians have so little of the typical Uralic haplogroup N1c. They tested a few individuals from a 10th-century cemetery found out that half of the individuals belonged to N1c. The sample was small, and maybe "pure" Magyar, but it nonetheless suggests that the original Magyar had much more N1c than modern Hungarians.
The Magyar population is thought to have suffered considerably from the 13th-century Mongol invasion of Europe, and from the 16th-century war against the Ottomans. Hungary was repopulated in great number by ethnic Germans/Austrians, which explains why modern Hungary is closest to Austria for its Y-DNA composition.
From all this can be deduced that the original Magyars were an admixture of N1c and R1a (predominant), with some G1, and maybe some R1b.
As haplogroup Q is neither associated with the Magyars not with the Mongols, it must be either be of Hunnic origin, or from other Asian tribes part of the various invaders from the steppes.
I don't think
I agree with that.
I am not !!!!
Physical traits can change fast.
Yes but not so fast
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.