PDA

View Full Version : If R1b comes from the east why it didn't bring I2a2 with it?



spongetaro
08-07-11, 00:56
On the haplogroup migration map of Maciamo, R1b1b2 is supposed to have originated in the Caucasus/ Anatolia then to have cross the Balkans to settle in Western Europe.
That migration may have taken thousands of year, a time that suppose mixing with the local I2a2 Balkanic people. So why R1b1b2 didn't bring I2a2 to western Europe ?

zanipolo
08-07-11, 09:04
good question

Maybe its because the I2a2 was brought in the balkans by the goths , who stayed there for over 200 years.

Maciamo
08-07-11, 10:30
Simple. R1b comes from the region between the Caucasus/North-East Anatolia and the Pontic steppes east of the Dnieper. I2a2 was located further west, between the Adriatic and the Dnieper. R1b moved pretty fast through the Danube basin to settle around the Alps, then across western Europe, because the Balkans and Carpathians were already heavily populated by the Neolithic cultures of Old Europe (especially the Cucuteni-Tripolye, which had the most populous towns in the world at the time, exceeding the early Mesopotamian cities of Ur and Uruk in size). At the time of the great Indo-European migrations, R1b people didn't mix with the people they encountered in the Danube basin. It is only later, when R1a people from further east and north (Volga-Ural region) moved into the vacuum left by the R1b Indo-Europeans around modern Ukraine, Belarus and south-west Russia that R1a people started mixing with the indigenous I2a2 people, and became the Slavs.

It's easier to visualise all this on the migration maps (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml) I created. Just one error I need to fix on the first map: the Pontic-Caspian Neolithic was probably composed I2a2 and E1b1b lineages, not R1a as indicated. That is why I2a2 and E1b1b peak as far to the north-east as Belarus today. Some R1a people might have lived side-by-side in the same region at the same time, but as foragers (hunter-gatherers) not farmers.

Another thing to correct in the 5th map: the Greco-Macedonians and Thracians were probably not R1a but R1b, and didn't descend directly from the Trzciniec culture but from the R1b already established in the Balkans (Cernavoda, Ezero, etc.). The R1a in the Balkans came much later with the Scythians, Sarmatians, Slavs, Bulgars, and so on.

spongetaro
08-07-11, 13:47
At the time of the great Indo-European migrations, R1b people didn't mix with the people they encountered in the Danube basin. .

And what about Antolia ? they didn't mix with J2 populations too?

Maciamo
08-07-11, 14:55
And what about Antolia ? they didn't mix with J2 populations too?

R1b was already in Anatolia before the Indo-European migrations (namely the older subclades of R1b1b, upstream of R1b1b2a1). Some branches migrated back and obviously mixed with the natives over time since they settled there permanently. What I meant about the Danube basin is that for most Indo-Europeans from the steppes only passed briefly through the region and pushed forward to less densely inhabited regions. Some obviously stayed behind, but only a minority.

spongetaro
08-07-11, 15:06
R1b was already in Anatolia before the Indo-European migrations.

That is my point. R1b stayed thousands of year in Anatolia among a majority of J2 populations. So if R1b really originated there, we should see J2 following R1b migration to Western Europe which is not the case. So R1b homeland must be the steppe and only the steppe.

spongetaro
08-07-11, 15:16
BTW if R1b originated in the Caucasus and Anatolia and didn't mix with the Danubian populations, western european should have had more western Asian component in their genetic admixture

iapetoc
08-07-11, 16:38
what about the epizephyrian Locri in Magna Grecia is that slavic Balkar also?
remember locri is from Locris central greece to west Fyrom today nation area.
Locri where the tallest among Greeks and lived in Mountain areas
Locri is also the alternate name of upper (makedonians)

sp now we are abandon a possible R1a come with J2b from minor Asia, in balkans and we are connecting it with North only,
hmmmm

IF , I ask if Summer = Gomer and first IE were the Sumerians that means either R1b either R1a should be south area of caucas,



so now we connecting Erzerovo tombs with R1b?

sparkey
08-07-11, 16:45
Maciamo pretty much nailed it, and there's also something important to remember about I2a in the Balkans: I2a-Din-L147 has a TMRCA of no more than 3000 years or so, which clearly demonstrates an expansion AFTER European R1b, probably southward. That means that we wouldn't expect mixing with R1b if we assume that R1b took a route through the Balkans... rather, we would expect (and see) mixing with the R1a that took the more northerly route, followed by a more recent expansion southward.

The I2 that we've observed in ancient Neolithic samples are NOT of the type found in the Balkans, they have been I2a-M26, like we see in Sardinia... that, we see mixed with R1b more thoroughly. The kind we see in the Balkans probably comes from a smaller Neolithic population.

Dagne
08-07-11, 17:41
Another thing to correct in the 5th map: the Greco-Macedonians and Thracians were probably not R1a but R1b, and didn't descend directly from the Trzciniec culture but from the R1b already established in the Balkans (Cernavoda, Ezero, etc.). The R1a in the Balkans came much later with the Scythians, Sarmatians, Slavs, Bulgars, and so on.

Thracians and Dacians were Satem speakers, how could they have been R1b rather than R1a?

how yes no 2
09-07-11, 00:06
BTW if R1b originated in the Caucasus and Anatolia and didn't mix with the Danubian populations, western european should have had more western Asian component in their genetic admixture.

not if Asia minor (at least north part of it perhaps together with Caucasus) was R1b dominant area...
and other haplogroups settled it later...



That is my point. R1b stayed thousands of year in Anatolia among a majority of J2 populations. So if R1b really originated there, we should see J2 following R1b migration to Western Europe which is not the case. So R1b homeland must be the steppe and only the steppe.
J2 maybe entered area later... in fact, maybe R1a entered Asia minor as Hittite, and J2 perhaps with E-V13 entered through south most end of Asia minor...

European R1b has such variance that allows even estimating timing of spread to certain areas...... large variance in Asia minor indicates that it was for long time settlement area of R1b.....
perhaps pre-Hittite Hatti were R1b, but I think Hatti were related to Germanic people so perhaps haplogroup I...



Maciamo pretty much nailed it, and there's also something important to remember about I2a in the Balkans: I2a-Din-L147 has a TMRCA of no more than 3000 years or so, which clearly demonstrates an expansion AFTER European R1b, probably southward. That means that we wouldn't expect mixing with R1b if we assume that R1b took a route through the Balkans... rather, we would expect (and see) mixing with the R1a that took the more northerly route, followed by a more recent expansion southward.

The I2 that we've observed in ancient Neolithic samples are NOT of the type found in the Balkans, they have been I2a-M26, like we see in Sardinia... that, we see mixed with R1b more thoroughly. The kind we see in the Balkans probably comes from a smaller Neolithic population.

I think that in Balkans Slavs brought mainly I2a-din, while R1a was mostly native - ancient Macedonians...

Serbs came from white Serbia that can only be mapped to Bohemia that is local source of I2a2, and Croats from white Croatia whose core was Galicia which is another local source of I2a2... in fact, it is indicated that white Serbia and white Croatia were neighbouring areas which maps to stretch of I2a-din along Carpathians (also called Mont Serrorum, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpathian_Mountains) from Black sea to Bohemia.... in fact Carpati = tribal name Hrvati, montes Serrorum = mountains of Serians... proto-Serbs I think were those Serians who were moving along Danube from Bohemia towards south perhaps as Scordisci/Serdi and Tribali....

Dacians were in between - they had proto-Serbs on south/sothwest and proto-Croats on north...
lol, if Lithuanians were Dacians as suggested by Dagne...that proximity may explain why Serbs, Croats and Lithuanians excel in basketball... perhaps there was similar game popular in area... however, Balts have significant haplogroup N while Croats have almost no N and Serbs have around 7% which is low but much more than environment...which contradicts assumption I made unless Balts only got N when they moved to north...


R1a we find equally in FYRM Slavs and albanians, while I2a2 we find as dominant in FYRM Slavs and almost not existing in FYRM Albanians. FYRM Albanians have same R1a as Serbs from Serbia and Macedonian Slavs from FYRM and much more R1a than Slavic Montenegro. all south Slavs are distinguished from environment by dominant i2a-din.....
In Greek Macedonians R1a tend to be very frequent...

I think I2a-din is related to Cimmerians...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/75/Thraco-Cimmerian.png

if you look at spread of Ciimmerians imagine it as I2a-din, than take Serbs and Croats from cores of those spreads and bring them from white-Serbia and white-Croatia to their current locations you get I2a-din looking like this

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

on Balkan Cimmerians didnot spread in Illyria, and south Thrace, but we find them in Danube basin, north of Black sea and north of Carpatians..hence almost no I2a-din in Albanians from north Albania, Kosovo and Macedonia....
curiously, there is I2a-din in south Albanians.... it could have been Slavic population or older I2a-din mix that travelled with J2

in Roman era we should try to map I2a-din to Tribali, Scordisci, perhaps also Panonians and Veneti... although last two could have been R1a...

R1a would be Scythians, ancient Macedonians, and Thracians
Sarmatians would be haplogroup G and R1a

and Dacians are puzzle ...
both Dacians and Getae seems to me as originally germanic tribal names... so they could have been R1b or I2b people... in fact, from some I2b maps I have seen, Getae might have been I2b
Dacians could have been R1b or R1a... not sure...



Thracians and Dacians were Satem speakers, how could they have been R1b rather than R1a?
good point



good question

Maybe its because the I2a2 was brought in the balkans by the goths , who stayed there for over 200 years.
in that case I2a-din can be related only to Ostrogoths , as there is no I2a-din in lands that Visigoths ruled over... such as Spain, south France, Italy...
I find it strange that Ostrogoths and Visigoths didnot have same lineages, but is possible...

also, from what I explained above south Slavs were I2a2 dominant people when they entered Balkan...
I relate them to white Serians
but indeed Goths could have been I2a2-din, and white Serians /white Syrians could have been those Goths or Guti who ruled over Sumer (according to Strabo sumerians = Syrians)...there is an issue of language here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutian_dynasty_of_Sumer

there is disputed medieval chronicle that states south Slavs are Goths...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronicle_of_the_Priest_of_Duklja

spongetaro
09-07-11, 00:40
J2 maybe entered area later... in fact, maybe R1a entered Asia minor as Hittite, and J2 perhaps with E-V13 entered through south most end of Asia minor...

But such migration in the south of Asia minor is not recorded by the History

sparkey
09-07-11, 00:44
I think that in Balkans Slavs brought mainly I2a-din, while R1a was mostly native - ancient Macedonians...

I haven't seen any quality estimates of how much R1a in the Balkans is pre-I2a-Din migration and how much is post-I2a-Din migration, but there's a real possibility that you could be right about that. Although, I definitely don't think that the South Slav migrants were purely I2a-Din by any means, and I still think that the proto-Balto-Slavs (Corded Ware descendants?) were mostly R1a that trasmitted their culture to a small I2a-Din people who then lucked into an expansion... although that expanding I2a-Din population could have had a real effect on the development of Slavic culture (less so on Baltic culture, which is probably a more direct continuation of early proto-Balto-Slavs under that hypothesis).


I think I2a-din is related to Cimmerians...

I think that pushes I2a-Din's origins too far East, and supposes them to have been a larger population early on than they actually were... although I don't have a great candidate for who they would have been, instead. I wouldn't be surprised if I2a-Din people weren't the original Cimmerians, but got adapted into their culture. Were there any non-IE candidates nearby that would fit that description, perhaps a bit to the West? I'd be interested in looking at a full range of possibilities here.


curiously, there is I2a-din in south Albanians.... it could have been Slavic population or older I2a-din mix that travelled with J2

If it's really I2a-Din, then it's not that old. Must be transmission from the Slavs. If some of it is I2a-M26, that's a different story...

how yes no 2
09-07-11, 00:54
I haven't seen any quality estimates of how much R1a in the Balkans is pre-I2a-Din migration and how much is post-I2a-Din migration, but there's a real possibility that you could be right about that. Although, I definitely don't think that the South Slav migrants were purely I2a-Din by any means, and I still think that the proto-Balto-Slavs (Corded Ware descendants?) were mostly R1a that trasmitted their culture to a small I2a-Din people who then lucked into an expansion... although that expanding I2a-Din population could have had a real effect on the development of Slavic culture (less so on Baltic culture, which is probably a more direct continuation of early proto-Balto-Slavs under that hypothesis).

yes, Taranis mentioned that Baltic is essentially Balto-slavic, while Slavic has lot of added features on top of it...
that would be influence of I2a-din language on R1a language



I think that pushes I2a-Din's origins too far East, and supposes them to have been a larger population early on than they actually were... although I don't have a great candidate for who they would have been, instead. I wouldn't be surprised if I2a-Din people weren't the original Cimmerians, but got adapted into their culture. Were there any non-IE candidates nearby that would fit that description, perhaps a bit to the West? I'd be interested in looking at a full range of possibilities here.
Cetlic Scordisci/Serdi/Boii and Helveti
east Germanic Scirri and Hirri /Heruli

I find it very interesting that those tribes were paired same as Serbs and Croats are....
Scordisci are often mentioned in relation to Helveti, and Scirri in relation to Hirri...

note that cores of I2a2 outside of Balkan are Bohemia and Galicia - both named after Celts.... Bohemia to Boii and Galicia is clearly a name for settlement of Gali/Gauls = Celts


Scordisci/Serdi and Sherden are interesting with respect to spread of I2a-din into Asia...

Scordisci/Serdi and Sherden may be same tribal name... today we have I2a-din in Kurds which is tribal name that may origin from tribal name Sherden/ Scordisci



If it's really I2a-Din, then it's not that old. Must be transmission from the Slavs. If some of it is I2a-M26, that's a different story...
I think that Slavs who settled Macedonia also settled south Albania that was in that time Greek people...and albanians expanded to south later from mountains on north...
that scenario also explains lot of Slavic toponyms all over south and central Albania...
besides area of south Albania was for long time ruled by Bulgarians...

how yes no 2
09-07-11, 01:09
But such migration in the south of Asia minor is not recorded by the History
well, maybe it is but we do not recognize it...

J2+ E-V13 are in my opinion real Sumerians/Syrians... Syrians did spread along Levant into south Anatolia...

while Gutians who ruled over Sumer for like 100 years could have been I2a-din that became white-Syrians and now Kurds...
alternatively, or as another wave, Shereden sea peoples (Serbonian bog in Egypt is place named after them) could be origin of I2a-din in Kurds...

spongetaro
09-07-11, 01:16
well, maybe it is but we do not recognize it...

J2+ E-V13 are in my opinion real Sumerians/Syrians... Syrians did spread along Levant into south Anatolia...

Really? What does History tell us?

Massive invasion of Anatolia from Syria and destruction of the Hattian civilization and its people?

I don't think so...

zanipolo
09-07-11, 01:17
But such migration in the south of Asia minor is not recorded by the History

in about 1200 BC there was the bronze age migrations from asia minor

there is a lot of literature on

http://www.psupress.org/books/titles/0-271-01151-3.html

spongetaro
09-07-11, 01:22
in about 1200 BC there was the bronze age migrations from asia minor

According to How yes no a migration from Syria to Anatolia brought J2 and Ev13 and replace the majority of R1b.

iapetoc
09-07-11, 01:39
in about 1200 BC there was the bronze age migrations from asia minor

there is a lot of literature on

http://www.psupress.org/books/titles/0-271-01151-3.html


I believe much before
if hettits are from about 2000 means Hattians were before at least 3-4 centuries,

copper was known from 3500 bc


well, maybe it is but we do not recognize it...

J2+ E-V13 are in my opinion real Sumerians/Syrians... Syrians did spread along Levant into south Anatolia...

while Gutians who ruled over Sumer for like 100 years could have been I2a-din that became white-Syrians and now Kurds...
alternatively, or as another wave, Shereden sea peoples (Serbonian bog in Egypt is place named after them) could be origin of I2a-din in Kurds...


E-V13 came about or before hettits about little before 2000
J2 it depends, and which j2
some j2 are older in greece before 2000 BC and at my estimation and thera island and sesclo dimini are at least before 3500 BC the minor.

zanipolo
09-07-11, 01:41
According to How yes no a migration from Syria to Anatolia brought J2 and Ev13 and replace the majority of R1b.

bronze age immigrations in the aegean includes asia minor, the hittites (hatti), trojans, lydians, paphlogians, bithynians , myceanean greeks etc etc

I do not know about how and yes reference

I just stated that there was a huge 1200BC migration from the area

zanipolo
09-07-11, 01:43
I believe much before
if hettits are from about 2000 means Hattians were before at least 3-4 centuries,

copper was known from 3500 bc

are hitties and hatti the same, hittite text at the time of the trojan war ( 1198 -1185 BC ) still has hittites in asia minor. text say they laft about 1170BC

iapetoc
09-07-11, 01:48
bronze age immigrations in the aegean includes asia minor, the hittites (hatti), trojans, lydians, paphlogians, bithynians , myceanean greeks etc etc

I do not know about how and yes reference

I just stated that there was a huge 1200BC migration from the area

indeed there was a migration to north of balkans from minor asia that time
200 years after we have etruscans moving west,
no Hettits are not Hattians Hattians is the father of pelasgian Non IE
Hatti-son = Attikon = Attica
a possible domino is the entrance of hettits in minor asia from pontic caucasus
or an even previus or later,

Hettits destroy Greek city miletus that means that IE were already in Greece before hettits
cause miletos-millawassa
ilias-ilawassa etc
they speak same language
Pelasgians - peleset were before IE
so J2 was already here much before 1200

how yes no 2
09-07-11, 02:04
Really? What does History tell us?

Massive invasion of Anatolia from Syria and destruction of the Hattian civilization and its people?

I don't think so...

why do you think people spread only by wars?
Syrians lived in Levant, so it is highly likely that E-V13 + J2 continued along sea coast...
while white-syrians lived in Capadocia...



It seems that the name of the Syrians extended not only from Babylonia to the Gulf of Issus, but also in ancient times from this gulf to the Euxine.

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/16A*.html

gulf of Issus is south Anatolia
Euxine is Black sea



At any rate, both tribes of the Cappadocians, both those near the Taurus and those near the Pontus, have to the present time been called "White Syrians,"3 as though some Syrians were black, these being the Syrians who live outside the Taurus; and when I say "Taurus," I am extending the name as far as the Amanus. When those who have written histories of the Syrian empire say that the Medes were overthrown by the Persians and the Syrians by the Medes, they mean by the Syrians no other people than those who built the royal palaces in Babylon and Ninus; and, of these Syrians, Ninus was the man who founded Ninus in Aturia, and his wife, Semiramis, was the woman who succeeded her husband and founded Babylon. These two gained the mastery of Asia; and as for Semiramis, apart from her works at Babylon, many others are also to be seen throughout almost the whole of that continent, I mean the mounds called the Mounds of Semiramis, and walls, and the construction of fortifications with aqueducts therein, and of reservoirs for drinking-water, and of ladder-like ascents of mountains, and of channels in rivers and lakes, and of roads and bridges. And they left to their successors their empire until the time of the empires of Sardanapalus and Arbaces. But later the empire passed over to the Medes.
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/16A*.html


Syrians = Sumerians and we know that there was kind of merge of Akkadian and Sumerian
perhaps E-V13 is Akkadian, and J2 Sumerian... or other way around

hm, maybe Akkadian later gives Acheans / Danaans (in fact Akkadian may be composite name = Achean + Danaan)



they probably spread in ancient times into Asia minor.

Hitittes came from Caucasus and pushed out previous people.... from north part of Asia minor



this indicates R1b or G or R1a or combination...

haplogroup G matches well form of Hititte state...

some possibilities:
1) R1b are Hatti
G is Hittite

2) I haplogroups are Hatti
Hittite are R1b + G

in any case
E-V13 + J2 spreads along south anatolia from Levant
and R1a could have been Hurians


1900 BC - Hittite enter from Caucasus
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Mass_migration_of_Greece_and_Turkey_in_1900BCE.svg/800px-Mass_migration_of_Greece_and_Turkey_in_1900BCE.svg .png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mass_migration_of_Greece_and_Turkey_in_1900BC E.svg

now 1900 BC is too late for European R1b to enter... but it could have been Caucasian one...
R1b that entered to Europe brought copper and was much before...


Hurians could have been r1a..

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Orientmitja2300aC.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurrians

iapetoc
09-07-11, 03:28
I have seen the maps,

I know about a Celtic move that time to Greece But i disagree with name,

also E-V13 is so old that existed 9kyb ?

and can we have some descriptions about J2 if a or b and not just J2

Mzungu mchagga
09-07-11, 08:06
It's easier to visualise all this on the migration maps (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml) I created. Just one error I need to fix on the first map: the Pontic-Caspian Neolithic was probably composed I2a2 and E1b1b lineages, not R1a as indicated. That is why I2a2 and E1b1b peak as far to the north-east as Belarus today. Some R1a people might have lived side-by-side in the same region at the same time, but as foragers (hunter-gatherers) not farmers.

Another thing to correct in the 5th map: the Greco-Macedonians and Thracians were probably not R1a but R1b, and didn't descend directly from the Trzciniec culture but from the R1b already established in the Balkans (Cernavoda, Ezero, etc.). The R1a in the Balkans came much later with the Scythians, Sarmatians, Slavs, Bulgars, and so on.

Where on the first map would you locate R1a then? Or at least as the major component?

Maciamo
09-07-11, 14:53
Where on the first map would you locate R1a then? Or at least as the major component?

In the grey area of Russia, where only hunter-gatherer cultures existed at the time.

Maciamo
09-07-11, 15:05
That is my point. R1b stayed thousands of year in Anatolia among a majority of J2 populations. So if R1b really originated there, we should see J2 following R1b migration to Western Europe which is not the case. So R1b homeland must be the steppe and only the steppe.

Hunter-gathering tribes didn't mix with one another so easily. J2, G2a and R1b people might very well have lived side by side around Anatolia and the Caucasus for a few thousands years. It is possible that J2 and G2a people were the first to develop agriculture, and that they pushed many R1b people out of Anatolia to the steppes when they started expanding and taking hunting land for agriculture. Some R1b might have been encircled and eventually assimilated, while others crossed the Caucasus. It seems that they already knew domestication when they reached the steppes, which is why the Indo-Europeans developed a society based on stockbreeding, and eventually tamed horses to ride them to control better their herds. They were the first "cowboys". It's pretty amazing that North-western Europeans repeated so faithfully the behaviour of their PIE ancestors when they settled North America and Australia. They took advantage of their horses and better weaponry to conquer the land of the less developed hunter-gatherers and primitive farmers that they encountered, created vast ranches for their cows and sheep. It's pretty much what the R1b people did when they moved from the steppes to Western Europe. If behaviour is anchored in the genes, then it is not that surprising that of all people, North-western Europeans should be the direct descendants of the Bronze-age PIE from the Pontic steppes.

Maciamo
09-07-11, 15:14
BTW if R1b originated in the Caucasus and Anatolia and didn't mix with the Danubian populations, western european should have had more western Asian component in their genetic admixture

No. The "West Asian" component used by Dienekes only refers to the modern West Asians (mostly G2a and J2), not the people who lived in the region in the remote past but left. I explained that in this thread (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26583-Origins-of-the-Indo-Europeans-based-on-autosomal-analysis) 10 days ago. The R1b people didn't mix much with Danubian people, but they did mix a lot with the Neolithic Western Europeans (I1, I2a1, I2b, G2a). Based on the difference between paternal and maternal lineages, a lot of Neolithic Western Europeans were taken as wives by the invading R1b. That's why I think that the R1b men had some sorts of harem, which allowed R1b to replace so quickly older paternal lineages, while maintaining most of the maternal lineages.

Maciamo
09-07-11, 15:22
Thracians and Dacians were Satem speakers, how could they have been R1b rather than R1a?

I didn't mention that Dacians, but that's exactly because the Thracians were satem speakers that I originally classified them as R1a. But I have doubts about this, because if the R1a expansion happened so early there should be much more R1a proportionally to R1b in Bulgaria, Macedonia and north-western Anatolia. Then the Thracians could also have been mixed R1a and R1b. They are one of the most difficult people to classify because they migrated to the Balkans around the time when the R1b people had almost completely left the steppes and nearly finished moving to central and western Europe, and when R1a people started filling the gap in the steppes and the Balkans.

spongetaro
09-07-11, 15:41
Hunter-gathering tribes didn't mix with one another so easily. J2, G2a and R1b people might very well have lived side by side around Anatolia and the Caucasus for a few thousands years.


Even if they didn't mix with other Anatolian populations,Anatolian R1b people must have spoken and brought to Europe something like the Hattian language (non IE)

spongetaro
09-07-11, 15:52
No. The "West Asian" component used by Dienekes only refers to the modern West Asians (mostly G2a and J2), not the people who lived in the region in the remote past but left

Northern Indian have the "Dagestan" that goes back to Indo Aryan stay in the mitanni area (thousands of years ago)

spongetaro
09-07-11, 15:59
Hunter-gathering tribes didn't mix with one another so easily. J2, G2a and R1b people might very well have lived side by side around Anatolia and the Caucasus for a few thousands years.

In an other you said that unlike R1a, R1b people didn't keep the Steppic phenotype since they were more mixed with other populations

iapetoc
09-07-11, 17:28
Hunter-gathering tribes didn't mix with one another so easily. J2, G2a and R1b people might very well have lived side by side around Anatolia and the Caucasus for a few thousands years. It is possible that J2 and G2a people were the first to develop agriculture, and that they pushed many R1b people out of Anatolia to the steppes when they started expanding and taking hunting land for agriculture. Some R1b might have been encircled and eventually assimilated, while others crossed the Caucasus. It seems that they already knew domestication when they reached the steppes, which is why the Indo-Europeans developed a society based on stockbreeding, and eventually tamed horses to ride them to control better their herds. They were the first "cowboys". It's pretty amazing that North-western Europeans repeated so faithfully the behaviour of their PIE ancestors when they settled North America and Australia. They took advantage of their horses and better weaponry to conquer the land of the less developed hunter-gatherers and primitive farmers that they encountered, created vast ranches for their cows and sheep. It's pretty much what the R1b people did when they moved from the steppes to Western Europe. If behaviour is anchored in the genes, then it is not that surprising that of all people, North-western Europeans should be the direct descendants of the Bronze-age PIE from the Pontic steppes.


that story reminds me another story from christian bible, we know that there was en era were people were divided in city dwell and nomads,
Abraham and Lot as also the abraham case by it self,
although around we find city names and 1 of the most ancient is jericho, Abraham continue to leave in tents, and he avoid cities,
we know that G2a people like etruscans had wall cities, but how sure we are that R1b people did not organised in cities?

iapetoc
09-07-11, 17:35
Even if they didn't mix with other Anatolian populations,Anatolian R1b people must have spoken and brought to Europe something like the Hattian language (non IE)

hattian is a west meta Ugaritic
Hattian is father or brother language of Pelasgian who is father language of Etruscan, Phillistine, Minoan, Illyrian proprie, Thessalian argos , Attica and possible of Troy
in fact attica means sons of hattian Hathi-son
from thoukidides we know that Athens before IE spoke a relative to thyrrenian language which is connected with Minoan language, (athens change language bedores the return of temenides est time 900 bc)


in fact words like aqua or naval is not IE but hattian

Maciamo
10-07-11, 09:40
In an other you said that unlike R1a, R1b people didn't keep the Steppic phenotype since they were more mixed with other populations

That's right, but let's not mix everything up. At the age of the hunter-gatherers people didn't mix much with other tribes. But after the Indo-Europeans conquered Europe and Asia, they eventually end up blending with the conquered people. I always said that the Indo-Europeans killed or ostracised the indigenous men and took their women. That's how they lost their steppe phenotype. Anyway that was 4500 years ago, and there has been plenty of time for phenotypes to evolve.

Maciamo
10-07-11, 09:56
Even if they didn't mix with other Anatolian populations,Anatolian R1b people must have spoken and brought to Europe something like the Hattian language (non IE)

I don't see why. Even 100 years ago people spoke very different dialects or languages just 20 or 30 km away within pretty much any European country. If the R1b, G2a and J2 people never mixed during the Paleolithic and Mesolithic (and I think they didn't), then there is absolutely no way they could speak a similar language. Big language families, like Indo-European, Semitic, Hattic or Caucasian date back to the Paleolithic, when tribes stayed away from people very different from them. It's only after the rise of civilizations and empires that people were united under a common administrative language, and even then the ordinary people kept speaking the language of their ancestors.

The Greeks conquered the Middle East under Alexander, but never succeeded in replacing local languages by Greek in 300 years. The Romans failed to impose Latin too across the whole empire, except where people already spoke a mutually intelligible language (those of the Italo-Celtic family, be it Oscan, Gaulish, Celtiberian or Brythonic). Greek dialects were widely spoken in parts of South Italy (like in Calabria) until recently, and are still spoken to this day in some villages. Basque managed to survive all attempts of eradication and all foreign influence apparently since the Paleolithic (or at latest since the Neolithic). So I really don't see how R1b people in Mesolithic Anatolia could have adopted Hattian or any other utterly foreign language so easily. The chances are less than one in a million.

Language replacement can happen quickly when languages are closely related grammatically (like Gaulish and Latin, or Aramaic and Arabic, or German dialects and Hochdeutsch), but otherwise doesn't happen without a major population shift. This is why it makes absolutely no sense to envisage a diffusion of Indo-European languages by mere contact with neighbours. At small scale, it has happened that a small ruling class manage to impose its language over the conquered people, but that too doesn't normally happen, as I have explained with the Greeks and Romans. For an imported language to successfully replace in deeply rooted indigenous languages a radical population change is required. This is why I cannot envisage any other scenario than a violent conquest by the Indo-Europeans, accompanied by a quick gene replacement. So far all ancient DNA studies confirm this, since R1b has never been found in Paleolithic or Neolithic sites in Europe.

Maciamo
10-07-11, 10:12
hattian is a west meta Ugaritic
Hattian is father or brother language of Pelasgian who is father language of Etruscan, Phillistine, Minoan, Illyrian proprie, Thessalian argos , Attica and possible of Troy
in fact attica means sons of hattian Hathi-son
from thoukidides we know that Athens before IE spoke a relative to thyrrenian language which is connected with Minoan language, (athens change language bedores the return of temenides est time 900 bc)


in fact words like aqua or naval is not IE but hattian

It is entirely possible that all these languages are related to haplogroup J2 and/or G2a, while Semitic languages would originate in E1b1b and T.

spongetaro
10-07-11, 16:20
Hunter-gathering tribes didn't mix with one another so easily. J2, G2a and R1b people might very well have lived side by side around Anatolia and the Caucasus for a few thousands years.

Hunter-gathering tribes really? At the time where R1b is supposed to leave Anatolia, there was already big cities in the area where people are more likely to mix than in the steppe.

I can't imagine that R1b people lived thousands of year near cities like Catalhöyük without having contact and mixing with the cities'inhabitants

Goga
10-07-11, 16:52
It is entirely possible that all these languages are related to haplogroup J2 and/or G2a, while Semitic languages would originate in E1b1b and T.It's a well-known fact that the Semitic languages originated in some subclades of haplogroup j1.

I believe that the very first Semites were J1 & E1 people.

Taranis
10-07-11, 17:26
It's a well-known fact that the Semitic languages originated in some subclades of haplogroup j1.

I believe that the very first Semites were J1 & E1 people.

Yes, the Proto-Semitic speakers were very likely J1, but the actual proto-speakers of the greater Afro-Asiatic language family (which, in addition to the Semitic family, includes the Berber languages, Egyptian, Chadic, as well as a few other language families at the Horn of Africa) were not. Haplogroup E1b1b is a far better candidate for Afro-Asiatic as a whole.

Besides, in my opinion, (Western) European R1b is not originally from Anatolia. What speaks heavily for this is the fact that the outgroup of R1b-M269 (which, after all, makes up virtually all Western European R1b) is R1b-M73, which is the Central Asian branch of R1b. In my opinion, the origin of R1b, at least of R1b-P297 (which is the combined clade of both the Western European and Central Asian branches of R1b) is most likely the Caspian-Uralic region.

iapetoc
10-07-11, 17:40
It's a well-known fact that the Semitic languages originated in some subclades of haplogroup j1.

I believe that the very first Semites were J1 & E1 people.

both semitic and Hattians languages meet in Akkadian

the one that moved south is semitic branch
the one stayed is Hattian
and the one moved west is Pelasgian
in fact Hattian could be language of J2a and G2a
while semitic could be a language of semitic j1 (compare with no semitic J1 in caucasus)

Goga
10-07-11, 17:47
both semitic and Hattians languages meet in Akkadian

the one that moved south is semitic branch Yes, when J1 folks moved south-westwards they met and mixed with E people and maybe that's how they evolved into Arabs and other modern Semites.

Taranis
10-07-11, 18:14
both semitic and Hattians languages meet in Akkadian

the one that moved south is semitic branch
the one stayed is Hattian
and the one moved west is Pelasgian
in fact Hattian could be language of J2a and G2a
while semitic could be a language of semitic j1 (compare with no semitic J1 in caucasus)

No, Akkadian is the oldest attested Semitic language. It's clear however that it is very distinct amongst the Semitic languages - it may have been the first branch of Semitic to branch off, and it was considerably inluenced by Sumerian.

Hattians clearly spoke a non-IE language, which is however too poorly attested to make any better statements about it's exact relationship.

I have absolutely no idea who these Pelasgians are that you keep talking about? Minoans? Eteocretans? Mycenean Greeks (the people who spoke the language recorded in the Linear-B inscriptions)?

Maciamo
10-07-11, 21:06
I can't imagine that R1b people lived thousands of year near cities like Catalhöyük without having contact and mixing with the cities'inhabitants

I can, because towns like Catalhöyük (not really "cities" as they held barely 10,000 people) were few and far between. Anatolia is a huge expanse of land to roam, even today, so imagine on foot, without horses, without roads, with more forests than today and on such hilly terrain. North-East Anatolia in particular is so rugged that small tribes of hunter-gatherers could have lived there pretty much undisturbed and unaware of what was happening beyond the mountains until farmers popped up one day in search of arable land to colonise.

Çatalhöyük is in South-Central Anatolia. It is about 900 km away from Trabzon in the North-East. It would take three weeks to hike from one place to the other tramping 9 hours a day with good walking shoes and knowing exactly where you are going. Without maps or roads or any idea of where you are and where you are going it could take months for Mesolithic/Neolithic people to cover such a distance. Hunter-gatherers were not particularly nomadic in regions where food was abundant like northern Anatolia. They would be rather sedentary and territorial, avoiding as much as possible to stray too far away from their prized land. Things were very different in the steppes or in deserts, but not in northern Anatolia. Farmers were naturally sedentary and territorial, with the difference that they could sustain more population growth and constantly advance to colonise new lands. It was just a few kilometres each year, but they would eventually have reached northern Anatolia, and perhaps forced the local R1b to move north across the Caucasus.

Maciamo
10-07-11, 21:24
It's a well-known fact that the Semitic languages originated in some subclades of haplogroup j1.

I believe that the very first Semites were J1 & E1 people.

I first thought too that Semitic languages originated among J1 people, but it is fairly clear that Semitic languages are just an offshoot of Afro-Asiatic languages, which originated in North-East Africa (like E1b1b) and spread to North-West Africa and the Middle East (also like E1b1b). Therefore I think that the J1 people of South-West Asia as well as J2 people of West Asia progressively lost their original languages to the profit of Semitic languages. Eventually only Arabic and Hebrew survived.

Maciamo
10-07-11, 21:36
Yes, the Proto-Semitic speakers were very likely J1, but the actual proto-speakers of the greater Afro-Asiatic language family (which, in addition to the Semitic family, includes the Berber languages, Egyptian, Chadic, as well as a few other language families at the Horn of Africa) were not. Haplogroup E1b1b is a far better candidate for Afro-Asiatic as a whole.

Besides, in my opinion, (Western) European R1b is not originally from Anatolia. What speaks heavily for this is the fact that the outgroup of R1b-M269 (which, after all, makes up virtually all Western European R1b) is R1b-M73, which is the Central Asian branch of R1b. In my opinion, the origin of R1b, at least of R1b-P297 (which is the combined clade of both the Western European and Central Asian branches of R1b) is most likely the Caspian-Uralic region.

Then how do you explain that R1b1c (V88) is found in Africa, and R1b1c1 (M18) is pretty much limited to the Middle East, especially the Levant ? These are very old subclades that attest that R1b were in the Middle East region rather than in Central Asia at the end of the last Ice Age circa 12,000 years ago. The Middle East would have been much greener back then. As the climate warmed up, they would have moved north to Anatolia to escape the hot weather, the desertification and tropical diseases (like malaria) that were advancing northward, and perhaps also to follow the game they were used to hunt as new unfamiliar animals from Africa penetrated the Middle East when it started getting hotter. Only a minority of R1b stayed behind, and were soon met by E1b1b and T people moving north with global warming.

iapetoc
10-07-11, 22:12
No, Akkadian is the oldest attested Semitic language. It's clear however that it is very distinct amongst the Semitic languages - it may have been the first branch of Semitic to branch off, and it was considerably inluenced by Sumerian.

Hattians clearly spoke a non-IE language, which is however too poorly attested to make any better statements about it's exact relationship.

I have absolutely no idea who these Pelasgians are that you keep talking about? Minoans? Eteocretans? Mycenean Greeks (the people who spoke the language recorded in the Linear-B inscriptions)?

cut and paste you want to open a thread about them?

Taranis
10-07-11, 22:31
Then how do you explain that R1b1c (V88) is found in Africa, and R1b1c1 (M18) is pretty much limited to the Middle East, especially the Levant ? These are very old subclades that attest that R1b were in the Middle East region rather than in Central Asia at the end of the last Ice Age circa 12,000 years ago. The Middle East would have been much greener back then. As the climate warmed up, they would have moved north to Anatolia to escape the hot weather, the desertification and tropical diseases (like malaria) that were advancing northward, and perhaps also to follow the game they were used to hunt as new unfamiliar animals from Africa penetrated the Middle East when it started getting hotter. Only a minority of R1b stayed behind, and were soon met by E1b1b and T people moving north with global warming.

Yes, it's plausible for R1b to have been in the Middle East earlier, but what is critical is the relationship of these R1b clades and also the age of them: according to your own website, R1b-M73 and R1b-M269 are about 9,500 years old (I've seen other values which state an older date). This is near the end of the last ice age. Both are subclades of R1b-P297. It's very clear that R1b-P297 originated in the Caspian-Uralic region at the end of the last ice age, and not in the Middle East.

spongetaro
11-07-11, 01:29
they would have moved north to Anatolia to escape the hot weather, the desertification and tropical diseases (like malaria) that were advancing northward, and perhaps also to follow the game they were used to hunt as new unfamiliar animals from Africa penetrated the Middle East when it started getting hotter.


Or to escape the Black sea deluge

Shetop
12-07-11, 11:22
I agree that 25% is probably a bit too high and assume something around 20%. But I dont believe that all of it is misprediction because otherwise why only among Kurds? And this in Nebel and Nasidzes studies?

In Nasidze paper, predictions were made from 9 STR markers. From what I know 17 markers is minimum to have a good prediction. Regarding that same study, don't you find it strange there is not even one Kurd with J1?

Nebel study from 2001 I haven't even looked at, I think it is to old to deserve credibility.

spongetaro
12-07-11, 11:34
This is also simple. The Reason why Western Europe has less of the "West Asian" component is because the "West Europe" component it self is already like a branch of the "West Asian". The closest component to "West Asian" is indeed the "West European"!

Really? This would mean that people from Turkey or the Caucasus are genetically closer to French and Irish people than to the Greeks?

Maciamo
12-07-11, 13:57
I have split the discussion about Kurdish I2a (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26619-I2a-origins-in-Kurdistan) and what derived from it.

Alan
12-07-11, 14:49
Really? This would mean that people from Turkey or the Caucasus are genetically closer to French and Irish people than to the Greeks?

No you are mixing things up. I am talking about components not folks. Just because Turks are West Asian this doesent mean they belong pred. to "West Asian" component. The same with South Europeans just because the Mediterranean element is the strongest among South Europeans it doesent mean this is the only represented among them.

See it like this. if we had two Groups. One of them only belonging to "West Asian" component and the other only "Mediterranean" than obviously the Group with "West Asian" would be closer to West Europeans. But in reality their is almost no South European Group which only belongs to "Mediterranean" component. Lets take Spaniards as example. they have almost 40% of the "West European" component.

We are not talking about West Asian Groups. But the West Asian component which is rather representative for Georgians and North Caucasians.

Turks on the other hand belong rather to the West Asian component with strong input by the Mediterranean component(usually between 20-30%)and some South West input while South Europeans mainly belong to Mediterranean component with strong (10-30%) West /East European and West Asian (5-40%) and some smaller South West Asian input.

It is all about frequencies. And not because of the Components. The West Asian component indeed is the closest to West and East European while even more so to the West European. The Mediterranean component on the other hand seems to stand between South West Asian and West Asian-East/West European.

Here a map
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-llezDuKBAwM/TgDzprB0zuI/AAAAAAAAD2c/k89ILpspSac/s1600/nj.png

spongetaro
12-07-11, 15:21
But in reality their is almost no South European Group which only belongs to "Mediterranean" component. Lets take Spaniards as example. they have almost 40% of the "West European" component.

Sardinian people have almost 100% of " south European" component (I guess it means "Mediterranean" to you)

Alan
12-07-11, 22:44
Sardinian people have almost 100% of " south European" component (I guess it means "Mediterranean" to you)

Your mixing things up again. I am not talking about the "South European" component of the first dodecad admixture tool but the new V3 tool where there is no "South European" component any more.

Still even the South European component wasnt that close to Northwest European than West Asian.

The Sardinians of the new v3 admixture program have ~30% West European admixture

5012

Knovas
12-07-11, 22:55
Sardinians were showed more than 96% Southen European and almost 98% total Europe in the K=10 run. However, this last run changed so much, note first that the average is more or less 85% total Europe, wich is too low compared to K=10. I don't know what to think about this population, since I also saw photos and they can look very different Caucasian types, going from Jewish/Middle Eastern appearence, to a tpycal Central European looking, although this is quite rare in them.