R1b in Iberian Peninsula, France and the British Islands

[Ziober]

I must second what Sparkey said: do not get your hopes high for such an idea.

This is a map that was published by Alexander Falileyev of the University of Aberystwyth in Wales. It shows the distribution of (Continental) Celtic place names inside the domain of the Roman Empire. As you can easily see from it, Celtic place names are most abundant in the north of the Iberian peninsula, rather than the southwest. How likely is it then that the Celtic-speaking peoples originated in the Southwest and then migrated across half of Europe from there?

Por favor, acabemos con la DESINFORMACION. Aquí hay gente inteligente que se comporta como si no lo fuera. Eso simplemente me lleva a pensar, que su comportamiento está dirigido a entorpecer la comunicación, a ocultar la verdad, a desinformar. Pues no señores, los británicos no son arios, son ibéricos.

¿Qué clase de argumento es ese de que el origen celta no puede estar en Iberia porque hay más topónimos celtas en centroeuropa?

¿No hablan más personas español en América que en España? ¿No hay mas pelirrojos en USA que en Irlanda? ¿ no tiene más hojas un árbol en la copa que cerca del suelo?

El trabajo de B. Sykes se basa en 10000 muestras, veamos estos otros trabajos propagandísticos como andan de muestras....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO__hE1wNQU

[Taranis]

Before you continue to accuse me of spreading false information, I'd politely suggest that you read the following papers and get a bit more up to date about the history of R1b:

1) "A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for European Paternal Lineages" (January 2010)
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/i...l.pbio.1000285

2) "A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe" (August 2010)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...2/?tool=pubmed

3) "Ancient DNA suggests the leading role played by men in the Neolithic dissemination" (August 2011)
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/20...61108.abstract

4) "Emerging Genetic Patterns of the European Neolithic: Perspectives From a Late Neolithic Bell Beaker Burial Site in Germany" (March 2012)
http://uni-kiel.academia.edu/CherylM...ite_in_Germany

Regarding Bryan Sykes, you are probably refering to this book. It is correct that in that book, he suggested that R1b originated on the Iberian peninsula. But, he published this book in 2006. He could not have known about the research that happened in the meantime when he wrote that book.

If you have finished reading the papers above then you will realize that it is very unlikely that R1b originated on the Iberian peninsula, and that is just as unlikely that R1b entered Western Europe from the Iberian peninsula.

Regarding the term "Aryan" (by that, I presume, you mean "Indo-European"), it's very probable that the people who brought R1b to Western Europe were Indo-Europeans themselves.

On the origin of the Celts, I'd like to repeat what Sparkey said, because I think that it summarizes the situation pretty neatly:

I do, however, think that Celtic peoples are more ancient to the Atlantic region than the "purely-Halstatt/La-Tene" theory would suggest. So I think you're getting at an important point, at least, when you mention that there were probably multiple important routes of Celtic expansion. My initial thought is that Celtic languages evolved somewhere in Central or Western Europe from a common proto-Italo-Celtic, which had drifted from rather farther east. (I know that's not very specific, but it's tough to get more specific than that for now.) And after that, an Atlantic spread and a later Alpine Iron Age spread were both important. That's my guess for now, anyway... I think it fits nicely with the modern distributions of R1b-P312 and its subclades, as well as what we know about the Celtic languages and their complex familial relationships to one another.

[MOESAN]

[QUOTE=Ziober;396709]Pues no señores, los británicos no son arios, son ibéricos.

¿Qué clase de argumento es ese de que el origen celta no puede estar en Iberia porque hay más topónimos celtas en centroeuropa?
¿No hablan más personas español en América que en España? ¿No hay mas pelirrojos en USA que en Irlanda? ¿ no tiene más hojas un árbol en la copa que cerca del suelo?


No offense, just a remark: I do not understand your way of thinking! what is the link between the number of a present day language speakers and the core region of the ancient placenames in the ancestral place of this language? did the Spaniards erase their spanish placenames in Iberia when carrying their castellano da America??? No, I think- the only way to celtic placenames to be scarce in South Iberia is that Celts ware absent before, or were EARLY swept out from there without being dense there at anytime... that do not correspond to their apparently strong position in Iberia in Antiquity -
the single other explanation could be (when I try to follow you) that Celts colonized Southern Iberia at first time, BUT found (an) already settled population(s) there and already named old places AND colonized after that almost empty regions in Northern Iberia: it seams to me not to realistic for I know...

[Ziober]

Estimados moesan y taranis.

Answer to Moesan:

With these examples i'd tried to explain that a place with most of something, don't means that this place was the origins of something.
Don't spaniards but iberian proto-celts don't need to delete anything. Just .they were the disorganized homeless from the end of Tartessos. In the begining of celt expansion, they don't want to stand long time in places where the sea can flood the land. So another tartessian peoples done, proto-celts not. They runaway. For understand proto-celts origins reading "cogotas" a vetton clan.

Taranis, nuestro mayor desencuentro parece estar en las fechas. Para usted r1b vino tardiamente, para nosotros, estaba en iberia desde el paleolitico

http://lacomunidad.elpais.com/bronce...-subclado-r1b1

[sparkey]

Taranis, nuestro mayor desencuentro parece estar en las fechas. Para usted r1b vino tardiamente, para nosotros, estaba en iberia desde el paleolitico

http://lacomunidad.elpais.com/bronce...-subclado-r1b1

This was actually a rather interesting read, but I'm not sure it really supports anything you've been saying. If I'm understanding correctly (I don't speak Spanish), they present an objection to Maciamo's theories on the basis that Y-line drift overstates the impact of migrations, and that they don't expect this sort of drift to stand a chance in the Chalcolithic and Bronze Age, only the Neolithic and Paleolithic. They also engage Renfrew and Oppenheimer, basically accepting Oppenheimer's conclusion of an Iberia-to-Britain expansion of R1b, but indicating that they don't know how R1b could have expanded to Spain in the first place.

The main problem with this piece is that it doesn't engage L11 subclades. If it did, it would be clear that their acceptance of anything Oppenheimer concluded is nonsense. After considering the discrepancy between subclade distributions, it becomes clear that British R1b does not fit an out-of-Iberia model. They also fail to engage TMRCA calculations and ancient DNA studies (many of which have been performed since it was written), which support Maciamo's theory the best of the lot (although a case could be made for Renfrew, or a none-of-the-above option... just certainly not Oppenheimer).

I should also note that their declaration of YDNA as "neutral" in terms of selection is probably incorrect, as well as their assumption that migrating populations suddenly absorbed native populations, rather than gradually. As a result, their mathematical model doesn't show a lot other than that YDNA drifts a lot quicker than mtDNA, and overestimates certain migrations a lot more. But that's OK in Maciamo's theory, and in other theories, and we already knew that.

[MOESAN]

Estimados moesan y taranis.

Answer to Moesan:

With these examples i'd tried to explain that a place with most of something, don't means that this place was the origins of something.
Don't spaniards but iberian proto-celts don't need to delete anything. Just .they were the disorganized homeless from the end of Tartessos. In the begining of celt expansion, they don't want to stand long time in places where the sea can flood the land. So another tartessian peoples done, proto-celts not. They runaway. For understand proto-celts origins reading "cogotas" a vetton clan.

Taranis, nuestro mayor desencuentro parece estar en las fechas. Para usted r1b vino tardiamente, para nosotros, estaba en iberia desde el paleolitico

http://lacomunidad.elpais.com/bronce...-subclado-r1b1

sorry but it looks as a pre-concluded reasonment: you want to justify the low density of celtic placenames in Iberia by an unsteady way of life ran by a "fugitive population" of Celts fearing the searises? my maps of Andalusia do not show me low level lands, do they? -
and as said by Sparkey and yet by others, the present day knowledges about the late SNPs of Y-R1b do not show us a "out of Iberia" for the bulk of the R1bs in the Isles and in other places of Central and North-Eastern Europe - I 'm still unsure about the timing of the arrival of Y-R1b but this hesitation does not erase theses facts...

[Ziober]

sorry but it looks as a pre-concluded reasonment: you want to justify the low density of celtic placenames in Iberia by an unsteady way of life ran by a "fugitive population" of Celts fearing the searises? my maps of Andalusia do not show me low level lands, do they? -and as said by Sparkey and yet by others, the present day knowledges about the late SNPs of Y-R1b do not show us a "out of Iberia" for the bulk of the R1bs in the Isles and in other places of Central and North-Eastern Europe - I 'm still unsure about the timing of the arrival of Y-R1b but this hesitation does not erase theses facts...

I haven't thought about fugitives in fear. Just peoples going to search safety.There is in "Golfo de Cadiz" an extended depression. "depresion betica o del Guadalquivir". Which was affected by mare-moto a few times. One of it destroyed Tartessos. http://otraorillahistoria.foroactivo...l-guadalquivir http://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depre...tica#section_1

[Taranis]

I haven't thought about fugitives in fear. Just peoples going to search safety.There is in "Golfo de Cadiz" an extended depression. "depresion betica o del Guadalquivir". Which was affected by mare-moto a few times. One of it destroyed Tartessos. http://otraorillahistoria.foroactivo...l-guadalquivir http://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depre...tica#section_1

This is impossible. Tartessos still existed in the time of Herodotus, who lived in the 5th century BC. If there was a seaquake that occured in later times, it would have been recorded by ancient Greek authors. Sorry, but I'm under the impression you are just making this up to have a specious pretense to place the origin of the Celts in southwestern Iberia.

By the way, in my opinion it is more likely that the city of Tartessos was destroyed by the Phoenicians, who are well-known to have occupied the south of Iberia, and who founded cities like Cadiz, Malaga and Cartagena.

[zanipolo]

Around 1100 BCE Phoenician merchants founded the trading colony of Gadir or Gades (modern day Cádiz). In the 8th century BCE the first Greek colonies, such as Emporion (modern Empúries), were founded along the Mediterranean coast on the East, leaving the south coast to the Phoenicians. The Greeks are responsible for the name Iberia, after the river Iber (Ebro).

The natives of Tarshish were the original Celtic groups in Iberia and these appear to be the ancestors of the Basques also. However, Basque YDNA is R1b and their YDNA may have been an earlier form from K as we find the same K2 form among the Welsh and in Tyre and Malta. Tarshish ran naval expeditions from there across the Atlantic for centuries (see Cyrus Gordon’s work Before Columbus, Touchstone Press, 1972).

The K2 is now refered to T1, but actually it must be T1a as T1b is only in the north.

i doubt the phoenicians fully destroyed them , but I guess traded with them to relay goods to britain

[Taranis]

The natives of Tarshish were the original Celtic groups in Iberia and these appear to be the ancestors of the Basques also. However, Basque YDNA is R1b and their YDNA may have been an earlier form from K as we find the same K2 form among the Welsh and in Tyre and Malta. Tarshish ran naval expeditions from there across the Atlantic for centuries (see Cyrus Gordon’s work Before Columbus, Touchstone Press, 1972).

Across the Atlantic? That's certainly nonsense.

By the way, it is also by no means clear if the Tartessians were really Celtic. What I mean is this: yes, John Koch of the university of Cardiff proposed that the "Tartessian" language may have been Celtic, but this language is known from the Algarve. The civilization and culture of Tartessos, however, was located in the Guadalquivir region in Andalusia. It is explained here.

i doubt the phoenicians fully destroyed them , but I guess traded with them to relay goods to britain

The Phoenicians (or, more accurately, the Carthaginians) conquered the areas of modern-day Andalusia.

[zanipolo]

Across the Atlantic? That's certainly nonsense.

By the way, it is also by no means clear if the Tartessians were really Celtic. What I mean is this: yes, John Koch of the university of Cardiff proposed that the "Tartessian" language may have been Celtic, but this language is known from the Algarve. The civilization and culture of Tartessos, however, was located in the Guadalquivir region in Andalusia. It is explained here.



The Phoenicians (or, more accurately, the Carthaginians) conquered the areas of modern-day Andalusia.

across the atlantic is a term used from iberia to britain without landing on french soil.

here is more on phoenicians, clearly before they became cartagians
http://phoenicia.org/canaancornwall.html


below is the site where in 2008 they found undisturbed phoencian urn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padstow

[JFWR]

Wrong. Basque is a pre-indoeuropean language. The R1b people spoke indo-european languages who split into the Germanic, Celtic, Latin languages

71 percent of Basque are R1b. Not all members of R1b retained their Indo-European languages, and not all Indo-European language are related to R1b (Germanic peoples are heavily associated with I).

[Ziober]

This is impossible. Tartessos still existed in the time of Herodotus, who lived in the 5th century BC. If there was a seaquake that occured in later times, it would have been recorded by ancient Greek authors. Sorry, but I'm under the impression you are just making this up to have a specious pretense to place the origin of the Celts in southwestern Iberia.

By the way, in my opinion it is more likely that the city of Tartessos was destroyed by the Phoenicians, who are well-known to have occupied the south of Iberia, and who founded cities like Cadiz, Malaga and Cartagena.

Taranis, the tartessos which you are talking about is only the decaying remains of a civilization comparable to greek one. Tartessos is a geographic nomenclature, not cultural at all.

As i said, there was at least 3 branches divided from the finish of Atlantis. One of those, remained near to the colapse, another one exploring by navy the west facade of Iberia (all coast of actual Portugal) and settlement that places: Portugal, Galicia, Asturias, British isles...etc. The last of those should be which go to interior, forming the Vetton clan as others clans.

Taramis, i can see how for you, all cultural transitions was made by kill peoples (saxons killing britons, phoenicians killing Tartessos... oh my God!!!) I can't, i can't, i can't believe that.

As well say Zanipolo, phoenicians found Gadir, because tartessians were pacifics, generous and rich peoples, Very good thing for trading. Humanity is not so worst like you and others like you want to show it.

Facts about ancient Tartessos from 3.000 years ago :

There are too writes about Tartessos from Greeks, romans, asirians...

http://terraeantiqvae.blogia.com/200...n-el-campo.php


http://www.tartessos.info/html2/Atlantis-Jaen.pdf
http://georgeosdiazmontexano.files.w...uadeeuropa.pdf

[Ziober]

71 percent of Basque are R1b. Not all members of R1b retained their Indo-European languages, and not all Indo-European language are related to R1b (Germanic peoples are heavily associated with I).

As far as i know, basques are near to 90% r1b.

[Knovas]

71 percent of Basque are R1b. Not all members of R1b retained their Indo-European languages, and not all Indo-European language are related to R1b (Germanic peoples are heavily associated with I).

Haplogroup I as whole represents a Paleolithic remmant in Europe. So the argument for R1b is also valid for haplogroup I: they didn't retain their pre-indoEuropean language/languages, that simple. Basques did despite the fact they have the highest R1b percent, but modern frequencies tells us very little. Haplogroups (specially Y-DNA) are very easy to replace in a few generations.

I personally wouldn't link any Indo-European language with Haplogroup I for obvious reasons.

[Taranis]

Taranis, the tartessos which you are talking about is only the decaying remains of a civilization comparable to greek one. Tartessos is a geographic nomenclature, not cultural at all.

You're wrong. To the ancient Greeks, Tartessos was a kingdom or city state (or possibly both). Archaeologists associated the so-called "Orientalizing Culture" (called "orientalizing" due to the visible cultural influence from the Phoenicians) of the early iron age of Andalusia with Tartessos.

As i said, there was at least 3 branches divided from the finish of Atlantis. One of those, remained near to the colapse, another one exploring by navy the west facade of Iberia (all coast of actual Portugal) and settlement that places: Portugal, Galicia, Asturias, British isles...etc. The last of those should be which go to interior, forming the Vetton clan as others clans.

Ziober, I'm giving you a very good advice: this is not a place for dispersing fantasy stories about your "Atlantean" racial vision because that's basically, through the course of this thread, what you're trying to tell us. And my patience as a moderator for such is about to be spent.

What I have to add that I do not understand is this: Spanish history is as amazing and as fascinating as it is in reality. There is no need to spin fancy tales about an ahistorical, mythical 'Atlantean' past.

Taramis, i can see how for you, all cultural transitions was made by kill peoples (saxons killing britons, phoenicians killing Tartessos... oh my God!!!) I can't, i can't, i can't believe that.

Did Alexander the Great conquer the Achaemenid Empire through peace and harmony? Did the Romans conquer the entire Mediterranean through peace and harmony? Did the Umayyad Caliphate conquer Iberia through peace and harmony? Obviously not.

As for Tartessos, this should be obvious:

- Herodotus mentions the city of Tartessos as existing in the 5th century BC.

- By the early 3rd century BC, the Carthaginians had conquered the south of Iberia.

- When the Romans seized these areas of Spain (at the end of the Second Punic War), there is no more mentioning of a city of Tartessos, however the Turdetani people are mentioned by various authors as descendants of the Tartessians. The only conclusion is that the city/kingdom of Tartessos was destroyed by the Carthaginians in the intermediate period.

As well say Zanipolo, phoenicians found Gadir, because tartessians were pacifics, generous and rich peoples, Very good thing for trading. Humanity is not so worst like you and others like you want to show it.

The Phoenicians (and their heirs, the Carthaginians) were a great civilization with great achievements (especially regarding seafaring and engineering), but they were no pacifists as you wish to portray them as. Gadir was founded as a trade town, yes, but in later history the Carthaginians took a more aggressive and expansionist stance. To pick a particularly gruesome example, Hamilcar Barca, the father of Hannibal Barca, was responsible for the execution of 40,000 mercenaries who had rebelled against Carthage.

Haplogroup I as whole represents a Paleolithic remmant in Europe. So the argument for R1b is also valid for haplogroup I: they didn't retain their pre-indoEuropean language/languages, that simple. Basques did despite the fact they have the highest R1b percent, but modern frequencies tells us very little. Haplogroups (specially Y-DNA) are very easy to replace in a few generations.

I personally wouldn't link any Indo-European language with Haplogroup I for obvious reasons.

Knovas, you're generally right, but, if you consider the TMRCAs and the distributions of certain specific subclades Haplogroup, they very well can be associated with (individual) Indo-European-speaking groups in later history despite the fact that they all represent surviving Paleolithic lineages. Haplogroup I as a whole is Paleolithic, but individual subclades became Indo-European at a later point of history. The most obvious example for this would be Haplogroup I1, which was later expanded by the Germanic migrations. Sparkey also suggested that it was possible to narrow things even further down, for instance that I1-Z58 (in the British context) can be associated with the Anglo-Saxons whereas I1-L22 is associated with the Vikings. What we should not underestimate in this context (and, the same, I presume, applies for the dominance of R1b amongst the Basque population), is that we must not underestimate the role of founder effects, especially with Y-DNA.

But, you are absolutely correct that this doesn't change the fact that the original Paleolithic bearers of Haplogroup I (or their Neolithic descendants, for that matter) were obviously no speakers of Indo-European languages.

[zanipolo]

what is required is to first know the phoenician gene pool and then see its influence in Spain. In 2008 NATGEO did this survey on phoenicians

There were 2 main genotypes in Ancient Phoenicia.

J (Y-DNA) J1 proto-Semites that semitized the coastal natives & J2 Mesopotamians agriculturalists who moved into the inland regions before the J1 proto-Semites.

The Coasts are still till this day dominated by E1b1b an overall 32% of Lebanese are E1b1b (highest subclade). J is an overall Lebanese gene, while E1b1b & T are exclusive coastal genes.

Any Phoenician genetic impact has to be mainly connected with the coastal older Neolitihic offset of E1b1b & T the shared an 8:1 ratio, thats also exists in Greece in the same ratio which easily shows that simply all East Med coast dwellers (E1b1b & T) originated from the same group .

E1b1b came from somali's and T from west asian caspian sea area. they both occupied the levant coast.

Origin of the Med Sea E1b1b-T offset (The most important compononent of the Phoenician DNA)

Somalians--------- T = 10% E1b1b =81%-------> (ancestors)

Lebanese---------- T = 3% E1b1b = 25%

Greeks-------------T = 3% E1b1b = 25%

Sicilains----------- T = 2.5% E1b1b = 20%


To track the Phoenican genetic impact you have to take the E1b1b + T & the J2.

While E1b1b and T was coastl for the phoenicians , the J1 and J2 became in majority the phoenicians who settled in the new colonies in the Med. In the decline, the eastern phoenicians died out and the western phoenicians became the carthagians.
As I stated the markers in the levant ( phoenician) in the bronze age, are the same in southern Spain and are the same in wales and cornwall

granted, that NATGEO use in majority only a 12 markers system because they care only for mass of people instead of individuals

[zanipolo]

Haplogroup I as whole represents a Paleolithic remmant in Europe. So the argument for R1b is also valid for haplogroup I: they didn't retain their pre-indoEuropean language/languages, that simple. Basques did despite the fact they have the highest R1b percent, but modern frequencies tells us very little. Haplogroups (specially Y-DNA) are very easy to replace in a few generations.

I personally wouldn't link any Indo-European language with Haplogroup I for obvious reasons.

link below is a bit old , but still applies as the markers have not mutated

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...02929707621521

[Ziober]

Estoy teniendo problemas para expresarme en inglés, así que si me disculpan intentaré explicarme en castellano.

Yo en ningún momento he hablado de "una raza atlante". Solo he recopilado indicios conexos, de forma multidisciplinar, ya sean culturales, genéticos, geográficos etc, para poder unir las piezas del puzzle.

Se están encontrando en España varias oppida con diseño arquitectónico igual al descrito por Platón referiéndose a Atlantis. La vasija que aparece en mi avatar, encontrada en Jaén, presenta dibujos que representan varias oppida con el mismo diseño. Círculos concéntricos, alternando tierra-agua, con un corredor radial, que parte desde el centro de la oppidum hasta un punto en el perímetro de la misma. Una de las oppida encontradas ya esta datada en el Calcolítico, por lo que guarda relación temporal, para poder entender transformaciones en la genética poblacional y en la cultura de esas gentes y el acervo que pudieron dejar en las gentes de Tartessos (como área geográfica):

http://www.tartessos.info/html2/Atlantis-Jaen.pdf
http://georgeosdiazmontexano.files.w...uadeeuropa.pdf

Si partimos de que en las leyendas o mitos, no hay nada de realidad. Deberíamos invalidar muchos hechos historicos comprobados. Pero no es así. Lo mismo que en La Odisea hay elementos reales mezclados con elementos fantasticos, o en el libro de Las Siete Invasiones de Irlanda. Narraciones con elementos fantásticos, podrían ser como un film histórico actual con FX y música, que son elementos de atracción/motivación, para acercar los hechos de forma amena a un "público general", público que en su día a día quizás no muestre interés por hechos históricos y no se preocupan en leer acerca de ellos. Pero que si se adornan adquieren interés.

A pesar de esto, la descripción geofísica que hace Platón de Atlantis no presenta elementos fantásticos. Y las ciudades que se están encontrando en España son tan reales como las piedras. Yo no soy responsable de la imaginación de la gente que inventa fantasías acerca de Atlantis. Yo hablo de un Atlantis histórico.

[sparkey]

Estoy teniendo problemas para expresarme en inglés, así que si me disculpan intentaré explicarme en castellano.

You could try passing your text through Google translate before you post, because that's what most of us will be doing with your Spanish posts, anyway.

A pesar de esto, la descripción geofísica que hace Platón de Atlantis no presenta elementos fantásticos. Y las ciudades que se están encontrando en España son tan reales como las piedras. Yo no soy responsable de la imaginación de la gente que inventa fantasías acerca de Atlantis. Yo hablo de un Atlantis histórico.

Jeez, you're trying to convince us of your hypothesis, and you bring up "un Atlantis histórico"? You're making it sound like the existence of such a thing ties strongly to the evidence for your hypothesis. It would be like if I brought up Thule to make a point about the properties of the proto-Germanic population.

[MOESAN]

what is required is to first know the phoenician gene pool and then see its influence in Spain. In 2008 NATGEO did this survey on phoenicians

There were 2 main genotypes in Ancient Phoenicia.

J (Y-DNA) J1 proto-Semites that semitized the coastal natives & J2 Mesopotamians agriculturalists who moved into the inland regions before the J1 proto-Semites.

The Coasts are still till this day dominated by E1b1b an overall 32% of Lebanese are E1b1b (highest subclade). J is an overall Lebanese gene, while E1b1b & T are exclusive coastal genes.

Any Phoenician genetic impact has to be mainly connected with the coastal older Neolitihic offset of E1b1b & T the shared an 8:1 ratio, thats also exists in Greece in the same ratio which easily shows that simply all East Med coast dwellers (E1b1b & T) originated from the same group .

E1b1b came from somali's and T from west asian caspian sea area. they both occupied the levant coast.

Origin of the Med Sea E1b1b-T offset (The most important compononent of the Phoenician DNA)

Somalians--------- T = 10% E1b1b =81%-------> (ancestors)

Lebanese---------- T = 3% E1b1b = 25%

Greeks-------------T = 3% E1b1b = 25%

Sicilains----------- T = 2.5% E1b1b = 20%


To track the Phoenican genetic impact you have to take the E1b1b + T & the J2.

While E1b1b and T was coastl for the phoenicians , the J1 and J2 became in majority the phoenicians who settled in the new colonies in the Med. In the decline, the eastern phoenicians died out and the western phoenicians became the carthagians.
As I stated the markers in the levant ( phoenician) in the bronze age, are the same in southern Spain and are the same in wales and cornwall

granted, that NATGEO use in majority only a 12 markers system because they care only for mass of people instead of individuals

Sorry, but I do not understand very well what you are trying to prove, here (maybe some word escaped to my understanding; your premices seam right, about an ancient coastal presence of E1b1 in Lebanon (and surely on the Eastern Mediterranean coastlands), OK;
but what is the time link between first Neolithic times and the Phoenician expansion to Western Mediterranea? Are you thinking that the Y-E1b1 found in old enough Neolitihic times in South-Eastern Iberia are of Phoenician origin? I do link the E1b1 of present day inland Europe to the first Neolithic people that put their foot in N-Greece and Balkans at the sunrise of Agriculture: no link in my mind with phoenician seafarers even if the first origin was almost maritime and western for Near Eastern criteria...
your ratio E1b1/T is interesting (I 'll try to check about the origin of T) but maybe a ratio or more than one about E1/J1/J2 could be interesting to try to separate diverses colonisations? subclades SNPs would be more accurate yet.
Waiting some precision...
PS: Somalian origin? Is that proved? if T is of caspian region origin, I see better a Near Eastern-South-West Asia origin for Y-E1b? Somalia = one of the terminal regions?

[zanipolo]

Sorry, but I do not understand very well what you are trying to prove, here (maybe some word escaped to my understanding; your premices seam right, about an ancient coastal presence of E1b1 in Lebanon (and surely on the Eastern Mediterranean coastlands), OK;
but what is the time link between first Neolithic times and the Phoenician expansion to Western Mediterranea? Are you thinking that the Y-E1b1 found in old enough Neolitihic times in South-Eastern Iberia are of Phoenician origin? I do link the E1b1 of present day inland Europe to the first Neolithic people that put their foot in N-Greece and Balkans at the sunrise of Agriculture: no link in my mind with phoenician seafarers even if the first origin was almost maritime and western for Near Eastern criteria...
your ratio E1b1/T is interesting (I 'll try to check about the origin of T) but maybe a ratio or more than one about E1/J1/J2 could be interesting to try to separate diverses colonisations? subclades SNPs would be more accurate yet.
Waiting some precision...
PS: Somalian origin? Is that proved? if T is of caspian region origin, I see better a Near Eastern-South-West Asia origin for Y-E1b? Somalia = one of the terminal regions?

What I am saying is that the link between iberia and british isles , for migration and commerce was established at the time by the phoenicians and/or with the armorica veneti via the phoenicians.
Caldey island in southern wales had these "levant" people arriving from the bronze age, in the levant and constantinople areas, even as late as the 13th century. northern cornwall and devon are the same position.
Bascially this bay (inland sea) , which bristol IIRC is the main port , has plenty of these finds, pottery, script and even dna which I refer to which matches identically with dna in iberia, which also matches dna in the levant.

I just gave you a history of the beginnings of the southwest british dna and where it came from.

[razyn]

I just gave you a history of the beginnings of the southwest british dna and where it came from.

It's a sort of plausible history, for a small fraction of the Y-DNA of that part of SW Britain. But it isn't really established that the said fraction came from Iberia to the Isles, as opposed to the opposite; or perhaps it went to both places from Morbihan; or to all three places from elsewhere (much farther east, and perhaps southeast). That whole "Celtic from the west" thing works OK if one limits the discussion to a certain interesting slice of history, but the Y-DNA doesn't have such brackets around it. Looking just at the phylogeny, it doesn't appear to originate in Iberia (where some subclades of it are now concentrated), and then spread to the rest of NW Europe. That model works fairly well for certain forms of Bell Beaker tableware.

I really need to update all that Z196 stuff, it's gotten obsolete in the last few months. It's still there, but DF27 has replaced it in the hierarchy. And M153 (to name just one popular Iberian subclade of DF27) is about seven steps downstream. DF27 itself is all over Europe, at least from Ukraine to Iberia; and it is much better documented on the Atlantic (northern) side of Europe than the Mediterranean side -- though that may just reflect who gets tested first, for newly discovered SNPs.

Here's one view of what I'm talking about. DF27 (with its numerous subclades) occupies about the bottom three inches of this chart. On one side below Z196, it turns predominantly Iberian at the Z278 level. On the other side of Z196, part of L176.2 is Iberian. DF27 has other branches that are Scandinavian, Dutch, British, etc. This doesn't remotely look like a tree that begins in Iberia (either as an LGM refuge from the ice, or as a pottery-trading enclave in Portugal) and spreads its branches to all the other areas in which its leaves are now found.

http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?nam...arent=65388520

There is much still to be learned. But while learning it, we don't have to begin with the same assumptions we held before these patterns of branching were known. There will be further refinements of our picture, over the next few years -- especially from ancient Y-DNA, of which we still have very little. None of that, so far, is Ice Age (or even Copper Age) Iberian R1b1a2, etc. The latter, at least, may well be found -- and would be a welcome addition to the spotty record we have of R1b in prehistoric Europe. Until it is, some of this "where it came from" rhetoric (out of Australia) seems a little empty (here in Virginia).

But I very much agree that connections between the Bristol Channel and Iberia are important, are several thousand years old, and seem still to be detectable in certain genes of those respective populations.

[zanipolo]

It's a sort of plausible history, for a small fraction of the Y-DNA of that part of SW Britain. But it isn't really established that the said fraction came from Iberia to the Isles, as opposed to the opposite; or perhaps it went to both places from Morbihan; or to all three places from elsewhere (much farther east, and perhaps southeast). That whole "Celtic from the west" thing works OK if one limits the discussion to a certain interesting slice of history, but the Y-DNA doesn't have such brackets around it. Looking just at the phylogeny, it doesn't appear to originate in Iberia (where some subclades of it are now concentrated), and then spread to the rest of NW Europe. That model works fairly well for certain forms of Bell Beaker tableware.

I really need to update all that Z196 stuff, it's gotten obsolete in the last few months. It's still there, but DF27 has replaced it in the hierarchy. And M153 (to name just one popular Iberian subclade of DF27) is about seven steps downstream. DF27 itself is all over Europe, at least from Ukraine to Iberia; and it is much better documented on the Atlantic (northern) side of Europe than the Mediterranean side -- though that may just reflect who gets tested first, for newly discovered SNPs.

Here's one view of what I'm talking about. DF27 (with its numerous subclades) occupies about the bottom three inches of this chart. On one side below Z196, it turns predominantly Iberian at the Z278 level. On the other side of Z196, part of L176.2 is Iberian. DF27 has other branches that are Scandinavian, Dutch, British, etc. This doesn't remotely look like a tree that begins in Iberia (either as an LGM refuge from the ice, or as a pottery-trading enclave in Portugal) and spreads its branches to all the other areas in which its leaves are now found.

http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?nam...arent=65388520

There is much still to be learned. But while learning it, we don't have to begin with the same assumptions we held before these patterns of branching were known. There will be further refinements of our picture, over the next few years -- especially from ancient Y-DNA, of which we still have very little. None of that, so far, is Ice Age (or even Copper Age) Iberian R1b1a2, etc. The latter, at least, may well be found -- and would be a welcome addition to the spotty record we have of R1b in prehistoric Europe. Until it is, some of this "where it came from" rhetoric (out of Australia) seems a little empty (here in Virginia).

But I very much agree that connections between the Bristol Channel and Iberia are important, are several thousand years old, and seem still to be detectable in certain genes of those respective populations.

Just to finish this
Cobh , in the entrance to cork ireland was known as the last stop for phoenician traders before making their return journey.
The story is that many iberian lusitani people who came with the phoenicians , stayed at Cobh

[Ziober]

Jeez, you're trying to convince us of your hypothesis, and you bring up "un Atlantis histórico"? You're making it sound like the existence of such a thing ties strongly to the evidence for your hypothesis. It would be like if I brought up Thule to make a point about the properties of the proto-Germanic population.

Yo no he establecido ninguna hipótesis, solo he puesto indicios, para el que quiera investigar. Y no hay que descartar nada a priori. No sé si tiene relación Atlantis con la cultura celta. Pero lo que sí es cierto es que en España se estan descubriendo oppida con el diseño arquitectónico descrito por platón. La única hipótesis que sí sostengo es que la población de las islas britanicas desciende de población ibérica en cerca del 70%.

No soy un alucinado fantasioso en busca de Atlantis, soy Licenciado en Ciencias.