Haplogroup G from the Levant (early farmer), R1b & J (herders) from East Anatolia

Maciamo

Veteran member
Admin
Messages
9,970
Reaction score
3,273
Points
113
Location
Lothier
Ethnic group
Italo-celto-germanic
Here is a new hypothesis. I, like most of the population genetics community, have assumed until now that haplogroup G originated in Anatolia or in the Caucasus, because this haplogroup is the most common there. A few elements make me think that haplogroup G could have expanded from the Levant instead.

1) Agriculture expanded from the Levant to Greece, then to the Balkans and the Mediterranean. Most of the early farmers tested so far being members of hg G2a, it would make sense that they originated where agriculture started, i.e. the Levant.

2) Haplogroup G has a fairly high frequency in Egypt (9%). There is so far no explanation as to how it got there. Either hg G was already in Egypt since the late Paleolithic, or it came with the spread of agriculture from the Levant. If Anatolian G people learned to farm from their Levantine neighbours (so far assumed to be E1b1b or J2 people) then expanded to Europe, there is no reason to find any G in Egypt. If G was absorbed by E1b1b an/or J2 farmers, then these two haplogroups should be found among early farmers in Europe, but so far it hasn't been the case.

3) What's more, hg G is found (at low frequencies) as far south as East Africa, Yemen and Oman, and as far east as India and Central Asia. So I think that the most reasonable assumption is that agriculture started with G people in the Levant, then expanded to Egypt, East Africa, all the Middle East, South Asia, Central Asia, and of course Europe. However they would probably have been outnumbered by local hunter-gatherers as G is a minority haplogroup almost everywhere.


If farming started with G in the Levant, then domestication started in East Anatolia/North Mesopotamia, and the prime candidates for spreading the new herder/stockbreeder lifestyle must have been haplogroups J and R1b1b, which both seem to have originated in that region in the Mesolithic. I see a stronger association of R1b1b with cattle and sheep, and J with goats.

As I have stated many times before, I believe that R1b1b crossed the Caucasus and settled in the Pontic Steppes, becoming one branch of the Proto-Indo-European speakers, a language that they probably spread to their R1a1a neighbours to the north and east.

As for haplogroup J, both J1 and J2 and found all over the Middle East, North Africa, Europe, and Central Asia. I really don't think that the medieval Arabic expansion is responsible for spreading all of it in North Africa and Central Asia. J2 being found among Hindus in India, was almost certainly in South Asia since the Neolithic. Dry, mountainous regions like the Maghreb, the Caucasus, most of Iran and Central Asia are also better adapted to herding than to agriculture, which may be why there is more haplogroup J than G in these regions. The same is true within Greece; Thessaly is better suited to agriculture and has a lot of hg G, while Crete is better suited to (goat) herding and has a lot of hg J2. In Iberia, hg G is more common in the wetter Northwest, while J1 and J2 are both more common in dryer Andalusia and Castilla-La Mancha.
 
Last edited:
This is a step in the right direction, I can envisage haplogroup G as an early farming community with certain locations more suggestive of stock-breeding due to altitude and poor soil types. I like where you are heading with J and R1b, they fit better when we put the clock back a bit as opposed to the Pax Romana hypothesis. J and G are Caucasian elements in Egypt's genetic history, the Phoenicians et al. are evidence throughout the early Mediterranean civilization of a significant levantine R1b history. Crete remains an interesting case as E is relatively rare and in its place there is significantly more G. The Aegean islands may prove to have similar levels of G as on Crete, time will tell.
 
In Spain, Murcia appears to have a lot of G2a according to your map, wich is quite in the South but also very in the East. I supose you used the figures from Iberian roots, giving 14% G2a. Not sure if it's much reliable such figure, it seems there's lack of Murcian data to say something, but if it really is, it comes as the exception in Iberia. I'd like to see, if it's true, wich is the most common G2a subclade between Murcians, or if there's significant presence of an especific one. Nothing clear for the moment.
 
In Spain, Murcia appears to have a lot of G2a according to your map, wich is quite in the South but also very in the East. I supose you used the figures from Iberian roots, giving 14% G2a. Not sure if it's much reliable such figure, it seems there's lack of Murcian data to say something, but if it really is, it comes as the exception in Iberia. I'd like to see, if it's true, wich is the most common G2a subclade between Murcians, or if there's significant presence of an especific one. Nothing clear for the moment.

The Southeastern/W-Asian/Caucasus components in Iberia may be reminiscent of this G2a marker found in some isolated locations on the peninsula. The evident relationship between S-Eastern and Caucasian within the Dodecad euro7 results for Iberia may reflect the prehistoric migratory route taken from the Caucasus to Iberia through the Levant, showing up as Southeastern instead of Caucasian/W-Asian.
 
According to me there's very much hg. G in Egypt because of the Mamluks. Mamluks were slave children (sold to the Ottomans by their parents) from the Caucasus who became the greatest warriors in Egypt who defeated Saladin. The Mamluks were Caucasians (Georgians etc.) who were coverted into Islam and they fought also against the Crusaders.

Later the Mamluks were defeated by the Mongols, but that's another story...
 
Possibly. It's obvious West Asian autosomes in the Peninsula have been quite replaced, and the Southeastern could reflect different migratory ways. The problem is that the Southeastern needs to be focussed more in Europe, since includes a lot of Southwest Asian in the last run. Probably you Greeks have one of the highest amounts of real Southeastern, rather than Armenians as the spreadsheet shows.

And well, I'd really like to know more information about Murcians. Paternal grandfather was from there, but I reflect very low Southeastern, and no West Asian or Southwest Asian. Perhaps G2a is really not that huge there, or the answer is in the subclades. Who knows.
 
According to me there's very much hg. G in Egypt because of the Mamluks. Mamluks were slave children (sold to the Ottomans by their parents) from the Caucasus who became the greatest warriors in Egypt who defeated Saladin. The Mamluks were Caucasians (Georgians etc.) who were coverted into Islam and they fought also against the Crusaders.

Later the Mamluks were defeated by the Mongols, but that's another story...

Thats Wrong.
Mamluks were slaves from Central Asia or Caucasus with turkish origin and later more Adyghe origin. They defeat the progeny of Saladin and became the Rulers of Agypt. They defeated the Mongols. Later they were defeated by the Ottomans.
 
Thats Wrong.
Mamluks were slaves from Central Asia or Caucasus with turkish origin and later more Adyghe origin. They defeat the progeny of Saladin and became the Rulers of Agypt. They defeated the Mongols. Later they were defeated by the Ottomans.
Yes, you're RIGHT. Mamluks defeated the Mongols! but the Ottomans (formal leaders of the Mamluks) defeated the Mamluks later. I made a mistake.

But Mamluks were Caucasians of Circassian & GEORGIAN origin and not Turkish! They were sold by their parents and became high ranked officers in the Ottoman armies. And later rulers of Egypt.
 
hmmmm

So diversity shows G around Levant?

I was thinking around minor Asia
 
Yes, you're RIGHT. Mamluks defeated the Mongols! but the Ottomans (formal leaders of the Mamluks) defeated the Mamluks later. I made a mistake.

But Mamluks were Caucasians of Circassian & GEORGIAN origin and not Turkish! They were sold by their parents and became high ranked officers in the Ottoman armies.

?? Where did you read that?
At first the Mamluks where from turkish origin, but later more and more Mamluks were from Adyghe origin (not georgian!).
Because of the rules of Islam, moslems cant be sold as slaves.
Later, almost all Turks were Muslims, so the Mamluks went on to train Adyghe slaves.

One of the most famous Mamluk ruler, Baibar, is from turkish origin.

Now stop talking offtopic
 
?? Where did you read that?
At first the Mamluks where from turkish origin, but later more and more Mamluks were from Adyghe origin (not georgian!).
Because of the rules of Islam, moslems cant be sold as slaves.
Later, almost all Turks were Muslims, so the Mamluks went on to train Adyghe slaves.

One of the most famous Mamluk ruler, Baibar, is from turkish origin.

Now stop talking offtopic
? Mamluks were 100% not Turkish!

Adyghe were Circassian; and Circassians & Georgians are the same, all Caucasians in origin!

These children were sold by their parents and later these children (Mamluks) got the Islamic schooling from the Ottomans.

This is not offtopic, because according to me the Mamluks carried hg. G into Egypt!
 
? Mamluks were 100% not Turkish!

Adyghe were Circassian; and Circassians & Georgians are the same, all Caucasians in origin!

These children were sold by their parents and later these children (Mamluks) got the Islamic schooling from the Ottomans.

This is not offtopic, because according to me the Mamluks carried hg. G into Egypt!

I believe you mistake Mamluks for Janissary.
The Mamluks where from turkish and adyghe origin.
In the beginning they had nothing to do with the Ottomans.
Later they became enemies and the Ottoman vanquished the Mamluks.
 
hmmmm

So diversity shows G around Levant?

I was thinking around minor Asia

Hi Yetos and welcome to the forum. It is not the Levant, it is to the north in the Caucasus and through a process of diffusion in eastern Anatolia. If an individual however shows more Southwestern or Southwest Asian on a Dodecad admixture run and they are known to be haplogroup G2a, it suggests their ancestors possibly traveled along the Levantine/Mediterranean route as opposed to the Central/Alpine corridor, into Europe. But for all intents and purposes haplogroup G is Caucasian (Caucasus).
 
Here is a new hypothesis. ...
If farming started with G in the Levant, then domestication started in East Anatolia/North Mesopotamia, and the prime candidates for spreading the new herder/stockbreeder lifestyle must have been haplogroups J and R1b1b, which both seem to have originated in that region in the Mesolithic. I see a stronger association of R1b1b with cattle and sheep, and J with goats.

As I have stated many times before, I believe that R1b1b crossed the Caucasus and settled in the Pontic Steppes, becoming one branch of the Proto-Indo-European speakers, a language that they probably spread to their R1a1a neighbours to the north and east.

We are still waiting for proof of the latter mantra :)=)). What contemporary archaeology has established is that (except for the earlier Bug-Dnister culture) the hunter-forager communities of the Pontic-Caspian steppes had no domesticated cattle or sheep prior to ca. 5.200/5.000 BCE [Cf. generally Anthony,2007, pp. 134-159], and that the breakthrough for innovation came from the farming communities of southeast Europe (esp. from the Crish and subsequently from the Cucuteni-Trypilia peoples). We have no evidence for "transCaucasian" arrivals in the steppes at that time. And even if we were to assume that many Crish and Trypolian people were R1b1b, there is even less evidence of their settlement in the steppes. If anything, this latest hypothesis would support the notion that R1b were assimilated fellow-travellers of the IE's (after Yamna) rather than originators of IE speech and culture.
 
I'll do a quick diversity analysis for dummies using the Haplogroup G FTDNA Project, to see what subclades are in the Levant. The fuller the G tree is there, the more likely this theory is correct:

G1: Yes, Lebanon and Palestine
G2*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a1: No
G2a2: No, but appears quite young
G2a3: Yes, and quite diverse in Lebanon, also present in Palestine
G2a4: No, but does include members that surround the Levant, in North Africa and the Caucasus
G2a5: No, but appears quite young
G2a6: Yes, in Lebanon
G2a7: No, but appears quite young
G2a8: No, but appears quite young
G2a9: No, but appears quite young
G2c: Yes, in Lebanon and Syria
G2d: No, but appears quite young

So, my preliminary thought is that the diversity of G in the Levant holds well enough to suppose that levels of G in the Levant could have been higher then than they are today (which is already pretty high), especially since the common J2 subclade in the Levant that makes J2 particularly frequent in the region, J2a4h, seems to be a more recent expansion (although its presence outside of the Levant may indicate otherwise... I'm not that familiar with it). I'm less clear on J1 and E in the region.

So far so good, but it needs more analysis.
 
Hi Yetos and welcome to the forum. It is not the Levant, it is to the north in the Caucasus and through a process of diffusion in eastern Anatolia. If an individual however shows more Southwestern or Southwest Asian on a Dodecad admixture run and they are known to be haplogroup G2a, it suggests their ancestors possibly traveled along the Levantine/Mediterranean route as opposed to the Central/Alpine corridor, into Europe. But for all intents and purposes haplogroup G is Caucasian (Caucasus).

ty that is also my believe


I'll do a quick diversity analysis for dummies using the Haplogroup G FTDNA Project, to see what subclades are in the Levant. The fuller the G tree is there, the more likely this theory is correct:

G1: Yes, Lebanon and Palestine
G2*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a1: No
G2a2: No, but appears quite young
G2a3: Yes, and quite diverse in Lebanon, also present in Palestine
G2a4: No, but does include members that surround the Levant, in North Africa and the Caucasus
G2a5: No, but appears quite young
G2a6: Yes, in Lebanon
G2a7: No, but appears quite young
G2a8: No, but appears quite young
G2a9: No, but appears quite young
G2c: Yes, in Lebanon and Syria
G2d: No, but appears quite young

So, my preliminary thought is that the diversity of G in the Levant holds well enough to suppose that levels of G in the Levant could have been higher then than they are today (which is already pretty high), especially since the common J2 subclade in the Levant that makes J2 particularly frequent in the region, J2a4h, seems to be a more recent expansion (although its presence outside of the Levant may indicate otherwise... I'm not that familiar with it). I'm less clear on J1 and E in the region.

So far so good, but it needs more analysis.

the G2a3 hmmmm
and also next to J2a

maybe do we find similar ratio in any other areas? G2a3/J2a = c (almost stable ratio)
that is interesting cause maybe, if it can be proved maybe explains a lot in pre Hettit minor asia
 
I'll do a quick diversity analysis for dummies using the Haplogroup G FTDNA Project, to see what subclades are in the Levant. The fuller the G tree is there, the more likely this theory is correct:

G1: Yes, Lebanon and Palestine
G2*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a1: No
G2a2: No, but appears quite young
G2a3: Yes, and quite diverse in Lebanon, also present in Palestine
G2a4: No, but does include members that surround the Levant, in North Africa and the Caucasus
G2a5: No, but appears quite young
G2a6: Yes, in Lebanon
G2a7: No, but appears quite young
G2a8: No, but appears quite young
G2a9: No, but appears quite young
G2c: Yes, in Lebanon and Syria
G2d: No, but appears quite young

So, my preliminary thought is that the diversity of G in the Levant holds well enough to suppose that levels of G in the Levant could have been higher then than they are today (which is already pretty high), especially since the common J2 subclade in the Levant that makes J2 particularly frequent in the region, J2a4h, seems to be a more recent expansion (although its presence outside of the Levant may indicate otherwise... I'm not that familiar with it). I'm less clear on J1 and E in the region.

So far so good, but it needs more analysis.

As a confirmed "dummie" I guess my question would be: Can the diversity of the Levant be shown to be greater than that of the Caucasus?
 
As a confirmed "dummie" I guess my question would be: Can the diversity of the Levant be shown to be greater than that of the Caucasus?

No, the Caucasus seems equally diverse as the Levant, going by the same method. The only major subclade the Caucasus seems to be missing is G2a6, which probably proves a point about the G2a6 in Europe, but little about other subclades.

So I'd say that Maciamo's theory has proven to be plausible, but hasn't been proven.
 
I believe you mistake Mamluks for Janissary.
The Mamluks where from turkish and adyghe origin.
In the beginning they had nothing to do with the Ottomans.
Later they became enemies and the Ottoman vanquished the Mamluks.
After the fall of Constantinople and onwards many Georgians shared the fate with Circassians to be sold and become mameluks. Mameluks of Georgian origin were especially present in Iraq but also in Egypt. The most famus among them were Mohammed-Beg Katamish who was assassinated in 1736, Ali Bey Al-Kabir and Ibrahim Beg (my far ancestral relative btw) etc.
So we should compare Egyptian G to the Caucasian samples to determine if it's relatively recent or several milennia old.

 
The Levant is a quite likely candidate in my opinion, but I must say that agriculture did not come directly to Greece from the Levant, but rather arrived through migrations from southwest Anatolia (or so I have read).
 

This thread has been viewed 36295 times.

Back
Top