Why Indo-Europeans have different Haplogroups?

[isatis]

My questions is: Why Indoeuropeans have different Haplogroups like I and R and speaking same language?
If they have for example, I and L, okay same groupe, it makes sense. Or L and T, it makes sense.
But two different haplogroups in two different groups of HG speaking the same old language, its strange.

 

[Mars]

Because Indo-Europeans did not replace the post-neolithic populations of Europe and the Middle East, but they more likely mixed with them through the centuries. They were more like a warrior elite which conquered the "neolithics" imposing their own language/languages, and habits. Just think of what happened much later in places such as Iberia, Italy and France with the germanic invasions of the early Middle Ages (germanics couldn't impose their languages over the natives although).

 

[Melancon]

My questions is: Why Indoeuropeans have different Haplogroups like I and R and speaking same language?
If they have for example, I and L, okay same groupe, it makes sense. Or L and T, it makes sense.
But two different haplogroups in two different groups of HG speaking the same old language, its strange.

This is because some of the I* men (or other Neolithic men) were assimilated into the R1* Indo-European culture. Instead of being slaughtered. Some of the Neolithic men may have been spared. Most likely the male children, I would theorize. Others were men who assimilated, mainly. The women were raped/forced to assimilate; taken by the leaders.

 

[Alan]

The reason is, most Haplogroups are older than 20,000 years old and Indo Europeans are only 6000 at max. When Indo Europeans emerged they had been a mixture of various Haplogroups and additional to that they took up some Haplogroups from the natives of the lands they moved into.

 

[Ike]

@Alan
LoL, I tried to close/minimize an add, and gave you a neg. Sorry

 

[Sile]

The reason is, most Haplogroups are older than 20,000 years old and Indo Europeans are only 6000 at max. When Indo Europeans emerged they had been a mixture of various Haplogroups and additional to that they took up some Haplogroups from the natives of the lands they moved into.

It because the very ancient first european haplogroups after the neanderthals where all markers found in europe ( before the R and Q markers arrived) . so do a map of europe and remove R and Q and we see original ancient zones for europe

 

[Melancon]

It because the very ancient first european haplogroups after the neanderthals where all markers found in europe ( before the R and Q markers arrived) . so do a map of europe and remove R and Q and we see original ancient zones for europe

I believe that some subclades of Q are purely European and came with the Indo-European arrival; just like R1b and R1a. (but Q at a low frequency, of course.)

I don't buy the Hun theory; that Mongoloids from Asia spread it around Europe. It seems more likely to me that some subclades of Q were Indo-European and came with R1*.

This would also explain why Phoenicians, Jews and other Levant people carry Q1b; while having almost no Mongoloid contact or admixture. The Phoenicians spreading Q1b to Portugal and Sicily happened way before the Bronze Age. Long before the Hunnic Empire.

 

[Rethel]

My questions is: Why Indoeuropeans have different Haplogroups like I and R and speaking same language?

If Indoeuropeans had one original haplogroup, then right question should be: why people who are indo-european
speakers now, have diffrent haplogroups, because if the satement above is correct, Indoeuropeans have only one
haplogroup, and they didn't change it. Insted some peoples began speak their language. If I start speak chinese it
doesn't mean, that I'll become Chinese

Instead of being slaughtered.

Oh... How nice! We were so kind

 

[Rethel]

I don't buy the Hun theory; that Mongoloids from Asia spread it around Europe. It seems more likely to me that some subclades of Q were Indo-European and came with R1*.

The map made by Maciamo shows, that presence of Q can have diffrent origin. For example,
presence in Britain, Burgundy, Normandy, Germany, south baltic lands, Novgorod-Land and
some part of Ukraine and even in Sicily can be from Scandinavia. The scandinavian Qpeople
can be simply non known migration from Syberia like the uralic N-people. It doesn't have to
be a great or very ancient migration. It could be very old migrantion of course, but could be
independent too. Rest of Q in south Poland, Balkans & Ukraine can be remains after Hunns,
Avars, Bulgars, Kumans, Pechingans, Hungarians, Tatars, Ottomans and Mongols invasions.

 

[nr9]

Avars, Huns, Bulgars, Kumans, Pechenegs, Oghuz, Hungarians, Tatars, Ottomans and Mongol invasions might have brought many other haplogroups from Central Asia and Ural-Volga region.

 

[arvistro]

Q people in Latvia project tend to have Jewish names surnames in familytreedna

 

[RobertColumbia]

The reason is, most Haplogroups are older than 20,000 years old and Indo Europeans are only 6000 at max. When Indo Europeans emerged they had been a mixture of various Haplogroups and additional to that they took up some Haplogroups from the natives of the lands they moved into.

Yes, this explanation makes the most sense. Would it even make sense for there to be a language that was 100% correlated to a haplogroup? That would mean that when that haplogroup first mutated, the only people that those mutants could talk to were their fellow mutants. That doesn't make sense.

It's quite likely that founder effects, bottlenecks, and the especial desirability of culturally elite men contributed to the fact that many languages today are strongly associated with a haplogroup. The fact that haplogroup G is associated with Caucasian languages doesn't necessarily mean that every single G man is, or is even a descendant of, a Caucasian speaker, nor does it mean that every Caucasian speaker must necessarily be a G.

 

[Rethel]

That doesn't make sense.

It make sense, if you take another explanation than evolution.
In eolutionary model you have many thousands of years with
hollow time, when lived only one primogeniture line and noone
else... this have not sense at all...

 

[RobertColumbia]

If Indoeuropeans had one original haplogroup, then right question should be: why people who are indo-european
speakers now, have diffrent haplogroups, because if the satement above is correct, Indoeuropeans have only one
haplogroup, and they didn't change it. Insted some peoples began speak their language. If I start speak chinese it
doesn't mean, that I'll become Chinese ...

Right, but it is not clear at this point whether or not Proto-Indo-Europeans were all one haplogroup or not. After all, people are social beings and seek contact, trade, and travel - how long do you suppose that a hypothetical PIE R1 tribe would remain entirely R1 (that is, 100%, with not even one out of a million members being non-R1)? My guess is not long at all. The question then becomes whether or not PIE culture and language developed in a milieu of HG's that might have been mostly R1 or whether it was literally just some R1 guy and his five R1 sons who came up with the entire PIE concept, and oh, none of their daughters survived to have sons with non-R1 men, or those sons never learned PIE.

 

[Yetos]

just because they are so many today,