R1a in East Europe.

About subject of tread , I believe out of all R1a in East Europe about 80% i Slavic=Scythian + previous R1a from Yamna culture , about 5% is Germanic ( comed back with Germans in East europe, but it get in to German lands either from Yamna or later with Huns ) , and about 15% of Altay R1a that comed with Huns and later with other Turkmen nations .
There is some Altaic R1a even in Scandinavia , there is no posibility it is not in Russia to
 
R1a in original Slavs

About subject of tread , I believe out of all R1a in East Europe about 80% i Slavic=Scythian + previous R1a from Yamna culture , about 5% is Germanic ( comed back with Germans in East europe, but it get in to German lands either from Yamna or later with Huns ) , and about 15% of Altay R1a that comed with Huns and later with other Turkmen nations .
There is some Altaic R1a even in Scandinavia , there is no posibility it is not in Russia to

Modern Northern Slavic populations seem to have a medium of 50% r1a. Do you think the original slavs had a similar percentage of R1a or much higher?
 
The age of R1a is probably 20,000 years old, the age of the earliest Proto-Indo-Europeans is probably not older than 5000 years old, in other words R1a does not belong to Indo-Europeans only, it also belong to other groups because it predates the existence of Indo-European languages, basically there are no such things as Iranic, Indic, or whatever when it comes to ancient haplogroups like these.

Being Kurdish-centric is irrelevant to the topic, but if you're asking my opinion, I think the ancestors of the Proto-Indo-Europeans carried an older version of R1a, from there some of them went to Europe and others went to Asia, those that went to Asia probably developed L342, the Kurds (Based on the only Kurdish sample that participated), are from the branch that migrated to Asia, whether this was from Indo-Europeans or not, I don't know.

Just a question of methods: I don't contredict you nor agree with you just now but:
being an HG older than the I-E language cirstallization is not the proof an Y-HG (R1a here by instance, but it remains true for other HGs) was common among other cultures and tribes: not by itself: an HG can remain scarce enough a long time and remain typical of a small population before expanding and the language of this population even if DATED to a certain time can have been elaborated on place (or during movements) by this population: the process BEGINNING EARLIER (as every language before individualization) - just concerning the reasoning...
I don't say it is by forece the case for Y-R1a
 

This thread has been viewed 22359 times.

Back
Top