G2a Indo European?

Fluffy

Regular Member
Messages
186
Reaction score
28
Points
0
Ethnic group
Dutch / French
Y-DNA haplogroup
G2a l497 s10458
mtDNA haplogroup
H1n
Hi, just wanted to ask people's opinion regarding G2a's status as an I.E. Haplogroup. Any feedback would be appreciated. People say different things, some say it is some say it's not, so I thought I'd create a thread on the topic.
 
Hi, just wanted to ask people's opinion regarding G2a's status as an I.E. Haplogroup. Any feedback would be appreciated. People say different things, some say it is some say it's not, so I thought I'd create a thread on the topic.

If you go to the Ancestral Journeys website and look at the Y DNA results for the European Neolithic, you'll see that G2 was already in Europe during the Neolithic. That does not prove that it couldn't also have been part of the IE population, but the limited amount of data available so far doesn't show G2 in the IE results from Samara.
 
Hi, just wanted to ask people's opinion regarding G2a's status as an I.E. Haplogroup. Any feedback would be appreciated. People say different things, some say it is some say it's not, so I thought I'd create a thread on the topic.

This is very difficult question. You should first explain, what do you mean by I.E.?
Do you want know, if there are G2a people speaking on I.E. languages? Yes, they are.
But G2a-people are speaking in non-IE languages too. Did first G2a people come from
IE-prototribe? I don't think so, because they are descendants from G2 people. :)
Could some G2a people join IE tribe? Yes of course, they could. Why they did it?
No one knows. Some of them could be slaves, some migrants, some war captives,
some could be conquerd.... but they don't have the same haplo and ethnic origin.
 
This is very difficult question. You should first explain, what do you mean by I.E.?
Do you want know, if there are G2a people speaking on I.E. languages? Yes, they are.
But G2a-people are speaking in non-IE languages too. Did first G2a people come from
IE-prototribe? I don't think so, because they are descendants from G2 people. :)
Could some G2a people join IE tribe? Yes of course, they could. Why they did it?
No one knows. Some of them could be slaves, some migrants, some war captives,
some could be conquerd.... but they don't have the same haplo and ethnic origin.

IE meaning the original Indo Europeans.
 
IE meaning the original Indo Europeans.

So, on this conditions, I must say that: not at all.
Everything seems to proof that original IE-people
are/were R1 (maybe R). G2a - I guess - could be
probably of prapraprakartvelian (or caucasian in
makrolanguistic sense) origin (if we are talking
about origins of hg+ethnicity+language(+mayby
anthropological type - in this case... unkonwn?).
This is my proposal, which seems to be for me
with known data most reasonable.
 
The svan people of georgia from the current confereance in st Loius

Focused on the Svan population

mtDNA
H-18%
K-15%
U1-8%
U2-7%
U3-2%
U4-2%
U5-2%
U5a-1%
U6-2%
U7-1%
W-1%
W6-12%
R0a1a
T-3%
C-4%
D-2%
X2-6%
X2a-1%
X4-1%

The Svan are an outlier with the Caucasus pops

yDNA
G2a1a-76%
G2a1c-3%
J2a1-6%
N-1%
I2-4%
R1a-10%

Estimating the MRCA of G2a at 12.6kya via STRs

Svans live between Ossets and Abkhaz in YDNA frequencies.
 
G2a as IE fits with a possible neolithic expansion of IE as agriculture boom, and generally with a South of Caucas, or Anatolian model,

but G2a does not fit well with a steppe model, or a bronze age devastation, generally with with a North of Caucas or open valley model,
 
G2a probably existed at low freqeuncies in early IEs but that's it. Nothing is more clear looking at ancient Y DNA that G2a first(in significant numbers) came to Europe from west Asia(or Balkans) in the Neolithic with farming. Both R1b-L11 and R1a-M417 are supported as being markers of the expansion of IEs with ancient Y DNA.
 
G2a as IE fits with a possible neolithic expansion of IE

Even if they were among (original) Indoeuropeans during their neolithic expantion, it doesn't mean
that they are IE at their origin, because origin of these two groups are diffrent in time and space... :)
 
Is he? :) I didn't know :)
But he is very similiar to me on that picture.
My friend once even was sure, that it is I :)

his name is Travis Fimmel
Fimmel was signed as the lead character in the television series Vikings, co-starring Jessalyn Gilsig, Katheryn Winnick and Gabriel Byrne. Premiering in 2013, the show was filmed in Ireland over 18 weeks and chronicles "the extraordinary and ferocious world of the mighty Norsemen who raided, traded and explored during medieval times."[39] He plays Ragnar Lothbrok who is loosely based on Ragnar Loðbrók, the legendary Viking leader who is frustrated by the unadventurous tendencies of his local chieftain and strikes out to pillage new lands.[
 
his name is Travis Fimmel
Fimmel was signed as the lead character in the television series Vikings, co-starring Jessalyn Gilsig, Katheryn Winnick and Gabriel Byrne. Premiering in 2013, the show was filmed in Ireland over 18 weeks and chronicles "the extraordinary and ferocious world of the mighty Norsemen who raided, traded and explored during medieval times."[39] He plays Ragnar Lothbrok who is loosely based on Ragnar Loðbrók, the legendary Viking leader who is frustrated by the unadventurous tendencies of his local chieftain and strikes out to pillage new lands.[

That I know - I watch that show :)
I didn't know that he is australian. :)
 
As Aberdeen explained, G2 was already present in Neolithic Europe, prior to the arrival of the IE folk.
I'm pretty sure that Otzi the iceman(c. 3300 BCE) belonged to G2, and it's considered to be one of the main Y-DNA haplogroups of the near eastern folk who brought agriculture to Europe. It was certainly picked up and assimilated by the IE folk in their travels, but, it was not one of the key lineages representing the IE expansion. The IE migrants(or invaders) belonged predominantly to R1a and R1b.
 
Last edited:
I would recommend reading the essay on this site, in the "genetics" section, dealing with Y haplogroup G.
It should clear up any remaining questions you may have.
 
As Aberdeen explained, G2 was already present in Neolithic Europe, prior to the arrivals of the IE folk.
I'm pretty sure that Otzi the iceman(c. 3300 BCE) belonged to G2, and it's considered to be one of the main Y-DNA haplogroups of the near eastern folk who brought agriculture to Europe. It was certainly picked up and assimilated by the IE folk in their travels, but, it was not one of the key lineages representing the IE expansion. The IE migrants(or invaders) belonged predominantly to R1a and R1b.

All these below are found in the Feb.2015 paper and all the G2a and T1a are the same age as oetzi..........but these are all in "old" east Germany.
all are in 20km of each other.



far right is the Ydna ............and the next column is mtdna
 
Those are even older than Otzi.
So, clearly, G2 had already been present for quite some time when the IE folk began arriving in the area.
 
Some subclades of G2a might be related to I.E., but not all of them.
 
To pick up the original question, in my opinion (and, I think I've stated this before), G2a makes a lot of sense as the original Proto-Indo-European main Y-line, if one assumes Colin Renfrew's Anatolian hypothesis to be accurate, that is, that PIE was spoken by farmers in Neolithic Anatolia, and expanded from there into Europe. And as it turns out, G2a has been found in samples from virtually all Neolithic sites in western Europe (including Treilles in southern Francs, Cogolls in Catalonia, and Ötzi).

There's a huge "but" with this, however:

On the linguistics side, the Anatolian hypothesis is extremely problematic, in particular because it fails to explain how the Proto-Indo-Europeans would have a common word "wheel" or "wheeled vehicle" (amongst other things) if Neolithic Anatolians didn't have that, and the adherents of the Anatolian hypothesis have been, thus far, extremely dodgy on the issue.

On the genetic side, while there can be little doubt that G2a was the main Neolithic Y-lineage (I think that association is quite safe to make by now), that way, you don't explain what R1a or R1b (which were clearly later, newcomers in Central and Western Europe) were, if they do not represent the lineages of newcomer Indo-Europeans...
 

This thread has been viewed 16943 times.

Back
Top