PDA

View Full Version : R1a, R1b (Offtopic from Illyria)



Yetos
02-07-12, 02:00
PIE is definitely linked only with R1a1a subclades while IE includes the R1b too.The G Y-DNA is totally excluded from being a Indo-European marker.

Nope
Kurgan Hypothesis is based upon R1b and R1a
Anatolian hypothsesis is based upon G Hp no matter how low the frequencies are today
J2a and j2b is still an opponent or an ally of G,

with the words Italian admixture I mean all Roman era + Crusaders time and Latin rulers of medieval times in Balkans, and believe me at least in History books is enough, I don't know in Genetic data.

just consider that only the Boniface de Monferrat is written to had 20-30 000 male followers who migrate from Italy and France,

Barbarosa crusade it is said to had 50-105 000 male crusaders !!!!

GloomyGonzales
02-07-12, 14:03
Nope
Kurgan Hypothesis is based upon R1b and R1a
Anatolian hypothsesis is based upon G Hp no matter how low the frequencies are today
J2a and j2b is still an opponent or an ally of G,


First of all there were neither R1a nor R1b haplos when Kurgan hypothesis was postulated. Secondly current Kurgan hypothesis presumes that IE invaders were predominantly R1a since for a while no R1b was found in kurgans.

Anyway I think that both Anatolian and Kurgan hypothesis can be right. Now when we have ancient autosomal data from Iberia and Sweden we can easily reconstruct the so-call IE invasion in Europe.

Now we can reasonably assume that North-European component (Dodecad K12) belonged to hunters-gathers with y-dna N1 and Mediterranean component (Dodecad K12) belonged to hunters-gathers with y-dna I and distribution of these components in Europe approximately mirrored current distribution: Western Europe heavy with Mediterranean component and Eastern Europe heavy with North-European component.
On the basis of the above made presumptions we can make the following conclusions:

a) R1a guys before entering Central Europe should be heavy with Caucasus component (Dodecad K12), which they most likely picked up in Anatolia when moving from Near East to Balkans.

b) R1b guys before entering Western Europe were heavy with Gedrosian component (Dodecad K12).

In this case we can make up a scenario of IE invasion:
1) R1a guys enter in Balkans from Anatolia heavy with Caucasus component (probably ~ 8000 BP) and settle in Balkans for a while.
2) Groups of R1a guys start expansion from Balkans in Central and Eastern Europe pushing away and genociding hunters-gathers with y-dna N1 and I taking their women for breeding (one male on several females) thus deluding their Caucasus component with North- European and Mediterranean components (probably ~ 6000 BP).
I guess R1a-z283 guys moved to Central Europe while R1a-z93 guys moved to East(Pontic steppes).

Scenario of R1b guys migration:
R1b guys moved from somewhere in Near East. They were heavy with Gedrosian component. I guess they divided on three groups: the first group moved to Africa (V88), the second moved through Anatolia (L23) but was stopped by R1a guys on Balkans so they could not enter Western Europe and were dissipated and assimilated by different people on Balkans, Greece, Anatolia and Caucasus, the third group used sea route from Near East to South France. Since the third group did not move through Anatolia it did not pick up Caucasus component. That explains why Basques do not have Caucasus component but only Mediterranean, North- European and Gedrosian components. From South France R1b guys started expansion in the West Europe pushing away and genociding hunters-gathers with y-dna I taking their women for breeding (one male on several females). Later some groups of R1b guys (Bell Beakers) were assimilated in Central Europe by IE R1a guys (CW) and so R1a guys passed Caucasus component to R1b. Then these groups of R1a/R1b gangs invaded Western Europe populated mostly by R1b guys spreading Caucasus component and IE language. It looks like Basques were not involved in this process since they did not gain Caucasus component. No Caucasus component no IE language.

Taranis
02-07-12, 15:45
I'd like to point out something with regard for R1b and the Anatolian Hypothesis:

The original Anatolian Hypothesis poses that the spread of the Indo-European languages occured with the spread of agriculture. The consequence of this would be that archaeological cultures such as the Linear Pottery Culture (Derenburg) were already speakers of Indo-European languages. In turn, another consequence of this (which Yetos pointed out) would be that Haplogroup G2 (rather than R1b or R1a) would be "the" main Haplogroup of the Indo-Europeans, and also this would mean that the people of Treilles, as well as for instance Ötzi, already were Indo-Europeans. And to me, this really raises the question: how do we interprete R1a and R1b in such a scenario?

The main linguistic argument against the Anatolian Hypothesis comes from the fact that Proto-Indo-European is usually reconstructed as a language with words for wheels/wheeled vehicles, domesticated horses and metals - all archaeologically tracable items which for instance the Linear Pottery Culture all lacked.

In regard for R1b, we still do not know by what route it entered Western Europe (we have, hands down, not enough data to answer that at this point) or from where. But, my opinion is that both R1a and R1b were involved in the migrations that led to the distributions of Indo-European languages, but that in both cases, only very specific subclades were involved: R1a-M417 and R1b-L23.

If we say R1a alone was "the" original Indo-European Haplogroup, then we have something that (largely) is in accordance with the Kurgan Hypothesis, but we obviously cannot explain the spread to Western Europe in any satisfiable way since R1a had - at best - an accessory role.

If we say R1b alone was "the" original Indo-European Haplogroup we have Western Europe reliably covered (L51), as well as potentially the Balkans and Anatolia (L23 and L584), but we cannot sufficiently explain the spread of Indo-European languages to Eastern Europe or South Asia. There's also the additional problem that if we go further up and include more ancient subclades of R1b as Indo-European, we get to subclades that (in my opinion) certainly were not involved with any Indo-European migrations. For instance R1b-V88 was very likely a Haplogroup carried by Afroasiatic-speaking peoples. The problem with R1b is also that is supportive of *a* Anatolian origin, but not of *the* Anatolian Hypothesis, for reasons described above.

(Gloomy Gonzales, I have to ask, though, what makes you think that R1a was on the Balkans? In my opinion from the distribution of the more ancient subclades, it seems more likely that it originated in Eastern Europe?)

GloomyGonzales
02-07-12, 17:19
I'd like to point out something with regard for R1b and the Anatolian Hypothesis:
(Gloomy Gonzales, I have to ask, though, what makes you think that R1a was on the Balkans? In my opinion from the distribution of the more ancient subclades, it seems more likely that it originated in Eastern Europe?)


I guess the Balkans is the best choice taking into account distribution of R1a clades in Europe especially Z93*, Z94* and Z283*.

Take a look at the map for Z93*, Z94* and Z283* found in Europe:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/?uploaded=1&magic_cookie=5a7e159599d85ec93a4a7f334696848b

Red pins - R1a-z93*
Green pins - R1a-z283*
Blue pins - R1a-z94*

As you can see we have abnormal amount of Z93*, Z94* found in Brittan. The majority of all Z283* was found in UK and Germany. At the same time we have more Z93*, Z94* and Z283* in Anatolia than in Eastern Europe. As far as I remember distribution of M198- and M417- clades roughly resembles distribution the above illustrated distribution of Z93*, Z94* and Z283*. Furthermore, the oldest R1a clades were found in the Balkans. And do not forget about R1a-L664 (downstream from M417) found mostly in UK.
I can not imaging how we could get such distribution of R1a clades in Europe if R1a migrated from Pontic steppes.

Yetos
02-07-12, 17:32
that is something I like to discuss.

but not in Illyria thread,

could we open another thread?

ElHorsto
02-07-12, 18:40
Then these groups of R1a/R1b gangs invaded Western Europe populated mostly by R1b guys spreading Caucasus component and IE language. It looks like Basques were not involved in this process since they did not gain Caucasus component. No Caucasus component no IE language.

I agree more or less, except with this.
According to Dodecad K12b, the Scandinavians, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, North-Germans and North-Spaniards don't have Caucasus component either. The Basque don't differ by lack of Caucasus component, just by lower North_euro component. To me R1b clearly correlates with Gedrosia component (the French and North-Italians R1b have both, Gedrosia and Caucasus), but not Caucasus component. And excluding the Basque obstacle, I think R1b/Gedrosia correlates very well with centum languages. Further, even far to the east, there is that tocharian centum pocket in Central asia, where also the easternmost gedrosia admixture extension is found, close to the Altai mountains, Uyghurs and Tadjiks. Today, these folks have Caucasus component in addition, and therefore probably more R1a, but in the past it might have been R1b only. Still today there is absence of R1a among Bashkirs and northern Kazakhstan.

Taranis
02-07-12, 19:35
that is something I like to discuss.

but not in Illyria thread,

could we open another thread?

Done. I've moved the relevant posts to a new thread.


I guess the Balkans is the best choice taking into account distribution of R1a clades in Europe especially Z93*, Z94* and Z283*.

Take a look at the map for Z93*, Z94* and Z283* found in Europe:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/?uploaded=1&magic_cookie=5a7e159599d85ec93a4a7f334696848b

Red pins - R1a-z93*
Green pins - R1a-z283*
Blue pins - R1a-z94*

As you can see we have abnormal amount of Z93*, Z94* found in Brittan. The majority of all Z283* was found in UK and Germany. At the same time we have more Z93*, Z94* and Z283* in Anatolia than in Eastern Europe. As far as I remember distribution of M198- and M417- clades roughly resembles distribution the above illustrated distribution of Z93*, Z94* and Z283*. Furthermore, the oldest R1a clades were found in the Balkans. And do not forget about R1a-L664 (downstream from M417) found mostly in UK.
I can not imaging how we could get such distribution of R1a clades in Europe if R1a migrated from Pontic steppes.

Honestly, I can't say I wholly can follow your conclusion here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but L664 is the first major subclade of M417 to branch off and it's mostly (North-) Western European. If anything, in my opinion that would point to a more northern origin of R1a, rather than southern. Part of the problem is, I think that we have no ancient data from either Eastern Europe or the Balkans. We know that R1a was absent in Central Europe in the Neolithic, which in my opinion raises the question where it was before.

Also, if you say Balkans, which archaeological culture would you associate with early R1a?

GloomyGonzales
02-07-12, 19:54
According to Dodecad K12b, the Scandinavians, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, North-Germans and North-Spaniards don't have Caucasus component either.

You are wrong Scandinavians, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, North-Germans and North-Spaniards have Caucasus component. It's small ~3-5% but still present. Check it up yourself here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/7488436304/



Still today there is absence of R1a among Bashkirs and northern Kazakhstan.

You are wrong again Bashkirs and Northern Kazakh have a lot of R1a.

Malsori
02-07-12, 20:34
I don't think N haplogroup has anything to do with Northern European component.It is more likely I haplogroup who is considered to be a Mesolithic lineage among Europeans.

Yetos
02-07-12, 22:58
ok my opinion

N HG
at least some parts of it are totally European
I believe is connected with Suomi-Saami and mainly with far North European cultures which are not considered as IE

I HG
is the only HG that seems to follow a reverse road to the conquest of Europe
by the analysis that I read in many threads seems to be a Central-European that expand East (mostly from areas around Deutschland that spread to East and Black sea and from there south to Balkans, as normal has it 'shares to West but not as a reverse road)

probably I GH carriers knew IE languages already when they spread,

I am Leaving T and J1 out of IE

so what we have rest is R1b R1a G2 and J2

before we check each some Hypothesis lets see some 'strange'

R1b is strong in Basquez which is not IE language
R1a exist also in Turkish populations and in some like Cabardinians reach high frequencies
R1a has big diversity in Balkans which might be an alternative starting point, but is it due to 'founder effect' or due to a 'sink'?
R1a to some is Scythian IE DNA (roaming hunters)


now lets start some some thoughts and hypothesize


IE according 'tumuli'

most possible is North Caucas and North parts of Black sea
IE did not exist in Europe and enter from North parts of Caucasos to Kurgan Cucuteni etc adopting their habbits and spreading them to Europe, mostly a 'warriors - rulers'

alternative to the above could be a south Part of Black sea (Colhis) which moved to North parts of Black sea via Balkans and from there spread
R1b mostly as also some R1a might be connected with that theory



IE according 1rst agriculture

that is the spread of IE much before the tumuli
in minor asia we know that IE were spoken at least before Hettites
in minor asia we know that first domestication of pets was done
so we probably speak about the spread of G HG with or with out the help of R1b (L23) and not R1a at that time
we speak that Otzi was IE speaker since Choirokoitia culture which we consider the basic form of a habitation of 1rst agricultural is older than 9 000 years
so probably that culture expand to Alps by Otzi's friends



IE as 2nd agriculture

observing J2a and J2b we see that they knew 3 major things
1) irrigation so they were strong farmers in comparison with G2
2) naval merchandise
3) chalkolithic techology


IE as out of India

that is theory that is based mainly in R1a


IE as South Caucasus and inland

that is a theory that mainly connects IE with R1b mostly
Armenians and Thracians are the same people etc


personally for me it seems that first 3 might have the truth or part of it but each has its own questions

the first might be connected with Kurgan but as I already said we see high Frequencies populations of R1b and R1a that did not speak IE languages but Danae-Turkic

the second fits well with Anatolian hypothesis but I wonder why today mostly G2 people are living in mountain areas,
fits well with archaiology since G has been found in many ancient tombs and Otzi in big numerals,

the 3rd fits mostly to IE languages that exist in the soft climate, from Celtic to Sanshqrit but not to Germano-Balto-Slavic languages
that is making IE language to spread around 3000 BC to after Alexander's times even at Hellenistic period and early Roman Empire.

by watching grammar and syntax in IE in Europe we see 3 major families and one that is lost
the Greek which is an exelixis of Greco-Aryan
the Latino-Celtic family
the Germano-Balto-Slavic
the lost Getan-Thracian might be a family of its own, a Greco-Aryan family since isotones with Greek, or Germano-Balto-Slavic one
The unknown Illyrian which for me they were towards Celtic


by spliting to Centum and Satem we see
the Centum to be
Germanic Latino-Celtic Greek Illyrian
and the Satem Slavic Albanian and probably Thracian-Getan

considering that Hettites were not satem or Centum
that means that IE language major split was done 3500 - 4000 years before
I wonder how much time before that was 'united' so to estimated when it was 1rst expanded?
I mean Otzi's language is giving IE as 7-9 000 years old
Tomps are giving it as 5-7 000 years old
Chalkolitic and first irrigation and non stone tools giving it as 4-5 000 years old


PS
my question to Gonzales
Balkars-Cabardinians have strong R1a %
If Balkars also have Caucasos component mark then why they are not IE speakers?


PS2
I believe that Sesklo-Dimini case has many to do on our search for IE expansion than Kurgan's tumuli
since we see 2 different cultures at least 2000 years before kurgan I

probably one of them (Sesklo or Dimini) was G2 and the other R1b or R1a since I believe that J2 is younger and I am sure that I Hg is much much younger

Malsori
02-07-12, 23:32
Yetos what are you talking about?R1a1a spread reflects well the spread of IE languages from Central/Eastern Europe.

Yetos
02-07-12, 23:44
Yetos what are you talking about?R1a1a spread reflects well the spread of IE languages from Central/Eastern Europe.

why G2 does not?

ElHorsto
03-07-12, 13:27
You are wrong Scandinavians, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, North-Germans and North-Spaniards have Caucasus component. It's small ~3-5% but still present. Check it up yourself here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/7488436304/


That's too less in my opinion, especially when compared to Gedrosian admixture.
And my nubers are from K12b, where Caucasus admixture is
0.1% for Norway,
1.2% for Sweden,
0.2% for Ireland,
0.0% for Orcadian,
even the non-IE Finnish have some 1.3%, which is noise in my opinion.

Only the English have a bit more (3.1%), but in my opinion this can be better explained by neolitic near-eastern admixture, which increases even further towards the south (France, Spain, Italy).



You are wrong again Bashkirs and Northern Kazakh have a lot of R1a.
[/QUOTE]

Well, according to Lobov, cited in Wikipedia, Bashkirs amount of R1b is 86% which dwarfs the little 9.3% R1a in my opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_by_ethnic_groups

Taranis
03-07-12, 13:35
I don't think N haplogroup has anything to do with Northern European component.It is more likely I haplogroup who is considered to be a Mesolithic lineage among Europeans.

Haplogroup N is certainly both Mesolithic (or lacking that, at least, synchronous to the Neolithic) and an immigrant to Europe. The main argument for that comes from genetics: Haplogroup N is found all along the Taiga zone in northern Eurasia, and additionally, the brother clade of Haplogroup N is Haplogroup O, which is dominant in East Asia (especially with the Han Chinese and Koreans). It's thus most likely that Haplogroup N originated somewhere in Northeast Asia and migrated westwards along the Taiga zone. The arrival of Haplogroup N, in my opinion, coincides with the arrival of Proto-Uralic peoples.

GloomyGonzales
03-07-12, 17:30
That's too less in my opinion, especially when compared to Gedrosian admixture.
And my nubers are from K12b, where Caucasus admixture is
0.1% for Norway,
1.2% for Sweden,
0.2% for Ireland,
0.0% for Orcadian,
even the non-IE Finnish have some 1.3%, which is noise in my opinion.
Only the English have a bit more (3.1%), but in my opinion this can be better explained by neolitic near-eastern admixture, which increases even further towards the south (France, Spain, Italy).


Low values for Norway and Sweden are very indicative they show that R1a-284 guys moved further to the North than the rest R1a and lived for a long time in communities with high percentage of R1b and I1 guys and as a result lost almost all their Caucasus component.

Low values for Ireland should not surprise since IE speaking gangs that invaded the Brittan from the Continent consisted of predominantly IE-nized R1b men and they had low values of Caucasus component.

Finns have ~8% of R1a (mostly R1a-Z280) so no surprise that they have some small amount of the Caucasus component.



Well, according to Lobov, cited in Wikipedia, Bashkirs amount of R1b is 86% which dwarfs the little 9.3% R1a in my opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_by_ethnic_groups
[/QUOTE]

Once again Bashkirs have a lot of R1a. For different Bashkirs tribes R1a values range from 9 to 48%. Lobov's data from Wikipedia is fair only for one very small Bashkir tribe from Perm region (~ 70 000 people).
Full Lobov's table of Y-dna structure for Bashkirs from different regions below:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/7494886666/in/photostream

Yetos
06-07-12, 19:59
I am returning my shelf with few questions

how late is the split among Thracian and Getan?
how late is the split among the Northern languages?
especially among Baltic ones and Germanic, and Baltic ones and Slavic?

if the splits is very young, then by watchnig Hettit language we probably have a IE laguage expansion much younger than Kurgan 1
or last forntier of IEuropaisation the Baltic.

zanipolo
06-07-12, 21:40
That's too less in my opinion, especially when compared to Gedrosian admixture.
And my nubers are from K12b, where Caucasus admixture is
0.1% for Norway,
1.2% for Sweden,
0.2% for Ireland,
0.0% for Orcadian,
even the non-IE Finnish have some 1.3%, which is noise in my opinion.

Only the English have a bit more (3.1%), but in my opinion this can be better explained by neolitic near-eastern admixture, which increases even further towards the south (France, Spain, Italy).




Well, according to Lobov, cited in Wikipedia, Bashkirs amount of R1b is 86% which dwarfs the little 9.3% R1a in my opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_by_ethnic_groups[/QUOTE]

Latvians and estonians have nearly 5% of the caucasus marker. Can you check this admixture or as some people (gene firms ) call it convergence.

my theory is R1a developed in anatolia and the builk of it went through the caucasus picking up other HG there

ElHorsto
06-07-12, 23:12
Well, according to Lobov, cited in Wikipedia, Bashkirs amount of R1b is 86% which dwarfs the little 9.3% R1a in my opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_by_ethnic_groups

Latvians and estonians have nearly 5% of the caucasus marker. Can you check this admixture or as some people (gene firms ) call it convergence.

my theory is R1a developed in anatolia and the builk of it went through the caucasus picking up other HG there

Maybe. I have no idea, where R1a originated. I was just denying that Caucasus component was brought by R1b peoples, because R1b correlates instead with Gedrosia component (centum, (turcic?, basque?)), if any. The only R1b I can imagine to be related to Caucasus instead of Gedrosian component are possibly the Bell-beaker's R1b, who were dinaric looking, and the Romans.
Regarding european R1b, I have the theory that it had multiple differing origins, partly non-IE: for instance some might have come by the sea (Bell-beakers?, Megaliths, maybe even early Mesopotamians or even part of Basques?, ...), others by Land route (Northern IE horse riders). Regarding the Northern R1b I have the theory that they likely were Indo-European tribes which originated somewhere from much more east than commonly believed (between Mongolia and Caspian sea). Subjectively, part of Tatar and Afghan peoples often look more like West Europeans than East europeans and they are often blond. Bashkirs could also be related, but it is less visible. The mongolic and oriental influences in these folks are much more recent and coincide with the age of turkic languages (2000 years). Remarkably, the North_euro component stretches very far to the east as well.

GloomyGonzales
07-07-12, 13:31
Regarding the Northern R1b I have the theory that they likely were Indo-European tribes which originated somewhere from much more east than commonly believed (between Mongolia and Caspian sea). Subjectively, part of Tatar and Afghan peoples often look more like West Europeans than East europeans and they are often blond. Bashkirs could also be related, but it is less visible. The mongolic and oriental influences in these folks are much more recent and coincide with the age of turkic languages (2000 years). Remarkably, the North_euro component stretches very far to the east as well.

Some small parts of people from any not closely neighboring countries resemble each other there‘s nothing strange in it but believe me your idea that Tatars and Afghans look more Western European than Eastern Europeans do is incredible BS. By the way Afghans have from 52% (North) to 68% (South) of R1a and almost zero of R1b. If we talk about Asian people resembling Western Europeans I’d point out Uzbeks. They have ~ 30% of R1b and some of them really look Western European. For example the guy from CSI Las Vegas (George Eads) could easily pass for Uzbek.
Or compare Robert Gates and the President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/7519801466/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/7519800720/in/photostream

They look like brothers.

ElHorsto
07-07-12, 14:40
Some small parts of people from any not closely neighboring countries resemble each other there‘s nothing strange in it but believe me your idea that Tatars and Afghans look more Western European than Eastern Europeans do is incredible BS.


No BS, just a subjective impression from some videos I've seen. Nevermind.



By the way Afghans have from 52% (North) to 68% (South) of R1a and almost zero of R1b.


Yes, also Tatars have a lot R1a. I know that, and I can't explain it for now. But Baskirs for instance, who are neigbors of Tatars, have more R1b than R1a and today they look more asian than Tatars (correct me if I'm wrong, never been there). These are single lineages anyway, which can drastically change as we know, thus sometimes can be totally misleading. If R1-lineages originated in Asia then it is quite normal to see more mosaic patterns there than in distant europe, where only few subsets of these lineages migrated by much fewer migration events.

zanipolo
07-07-12, 21:38
Maybe. I have no idea, where R1a originated. I was just denying that Caucasus component was brought by R1b peoples, because R1b correlates instead with Gedrosia component (centum, (turcic?, basque?)), if any. The only R1b I can imagine to be related to Caucasus instead of Gedrosian component are possibly the Bell-beaker's R1b, who were dinaric looking, and the Romans.
Regarding european R1b, I have the theory that it had multiple differing origins, partly non-IE: for instance some might have come by the sea (Bell-beakers?, Megaliths, maybe even early Mesopotamians or even part of Basques?, ...), others by Land route (Northern IE horse riders). Regarding the Northern R1b I have the theory that they likely were Indo-European tribes which originated somewhere from much more east than commonly believed (between Mongolia and Caspian sea). Subjectively, part of Tatar and Afghan peoples often look more like West Europeans than East europeans and they are often blond. Bashkirs could also be related, but it is less visible. The mongolic and oriental influences in these folks are much more recent and coincide with the age of turkic languages (2000 years). Remarkably, the North_euro component stretches very far to the east as well.

but in the recent bell-beakers thread it was stated in the link that R1b-I-T-J was found in the graves, they all come from the caucasus area via north of the black sea and along the danube river to this Bell beaker creation point.
This only means, that the balkans was impassable and the HG there, as an example, E moved northward later, while the R1b and I moved southward after the bell beaker creation. The T branch is said to be perfectly divided by
worldwide distribution of haplogroup T is spotty with some small areas of greater-than-average concentrations. T1a has a more southerly bias from the Near East to Europe and North Africa. T1b has a more northernly bias from the Near East through the Russian plains to Northern Europe.
and so T1b originated in northwest Iran, kurdish area and azaberijan and moved with the other HG as I noted above
conclusion is that R1b was earlier than R1a in europe

ElHorsto
08-07-12, 15:45
No BS, just a subjective impression from some videos I've seen. Nevermind.

568356845685

Yetos
08-07-12, 21:10
as proto IE language we considerer a reconstructed language mainly in chariots. war items etc.
I don't know if an effort was done uppon agriculture.

for example I take the Horse wich is a war and chariot item
Greek ικκος and ιππος ikkos and hippos
Latin equum
Germanic Hest horse
Slavic kunj konya kon
to Celtic languages we see Caval Cheval and Hephew (compare greek ippos)
Iranian aspa
Albanian kale
etc
so we reconstruct by following some laws to something like /eqwue/

on the other hand lets try something with agriculture
lets take the pear

Greek αχλαδι and απιδι achlad-ahlad and apid
Latin pirum
Germanic languages pear birne paron
Slavic languages hruska kruska kriauses
Celtic languages pera poire piora
Albanian dardhe

can we create a proto IE language?
we see that latino-Celtic cognates with Germanic and Greek with both but Greek also can cognate with Slavic if we change λυγρα (r->l)


on the other hand lets take the goat as a domesticate animal, and not as a war item
Sanshqrit i Think is aiwa
Greek is αιγα aiwha (wh as in why)
Germanic goat ziege ged gefr
Slavic koza ozka
Armenian ayts
Celtic capral chevre
Albanian dhi

as we see here we have an agricultural word that fits in agricultural

Yetos
08-07-12, 21:15
The problem of the Hettite language

the main problem of the hettit language is that has no genders and lacks some gremmatical forms that exists in others

so after thought I am am wondering
if Hettit was not IE language but learn IE when passed from caucasus to minor Asia,
if Hettit were IE and they are connected with Kurgan, then could early IE be a primitive language comparing Hattian or some others.

may I remind you all that we connect a R1b - M23 with Hettits

Taranis
08-07-12, 21:43
The problem of the Hettite language

the main problem of the hettit language is that has no genders and lacks some gremmatical forms that exists in others

so after thought I am am wondering
if Hettit was not IE language but learn IE when passed from caucasus to minor Asia,
if Hettit were IE and they are connected with Kurgan, then could early IE be a primitive language comparing Hattian or some others.

may I remind you all that we connect a R1b - M23 with Hettits

Yetos, what you describe about Hittite also applies for Luwian (or more broadly, the Luwian languages group), so these features must be reconstructed for Proto-Anatolian. Also, it's not quite true that the Anatolian languages had no gender: they have an "animate" and "inanimate" gender, which probably occured by merging the masculine and the feminine into a single gender - in this case the "inanimate" gender would be the same as neuter in other IE languages. The alternative would be to suggest that the male/feminine gender somhow only developed after Proto-Anatolian split from (early) Proto-Indo-European, but I have my doubts about that. For instance, a similar merger of genders (masculine + neuter) occured in the Romance languages. It's possible though that Proto-Anatolian split earlier from Proto-Indo-European than all other branches.

Hattian is only poorly attested, it is only known from a few words, but it appears to have been a non-Indo-European language.

Yetos
08-07-12, 22:33
Yetos, what you describe about Hittite also applies for Luwian (or more broadly, the Luwian languages group), so these features must be reconstructed for Proto-Anatolian. Also, it's not quite true that the Anatolian languages had no gender: they have an "animate" and "inanimate" gender, which probably occured by merging the masculine and the feminine into a single gender - in this case the "inanimate" gender would be the same as neuter in other IE languages. The alternative would be to suggest that the male/feminine gender somhow only developed after Proto-Anatolian split from (early) Proto-Indo-European, but I have my doubts about that. For instance, a similar merger of genders (masculine + neuter) occured in the Romance languages. It's possible though that Proto-Anatolian split earlier from Proto-Indo-European than all other branches.

Hattian is only poorly attested, it is only known from a few words, but it appears to have been a non-Indo-European language.


yes I know about Hattians,
simply I am thinking if Hattians had complex grammar and genders, maybe they input to them,
that gives IE as a very new language.
just a thought. it can not be proven since our knowledge about Hatti is almost zero

MOESAN
09-07-12, 21:35
as proto IE language we considerer a reconstructed language mainly in chariots. war items etc.
I don't know if an effort was done uppon agriculture.

for example I take the Horse wich is a war and chariot item
Greek ικκος and ιππος ikkos and hippos
Latin equum
Germanic Hest horse
Slavic kunj konya kon
to Celtic languages we see Caval Cheval and Hephew (compare greek ippos)
Iranian aspa
Albanian kale
etc
so we reconstruct by following some laws to something like /eqwue/

on the other hand lets try something with agriculture
lets take the pear

Greek αχλαδι and απιδι achlad-ahlad and apid
Latin pirum
Germanic languages pear birne paron
Slavic languages hruska kruska kriauses
Celtic languages pera poire piora
Albanian dardhe

can we create a proto IE language?
we see that latino-Celtic cognates with Germanic and Greek with both but Greek also can cognate with Slavic if we change λυγρα (r->l)


on the other hand lets take the goat as a domesticate animal, and not as a war item
Sanshqrit i Think is aiwa
Greek is αιγα aiwha (wh as in why)
Germanic goat ziege ged gefr
Slavic koza ozka
Armenian ayts
Celtic capral chevre
Albanian dhi

as we see here we have an agricultural word that fits in agricultural

not to criticize your global way of thinking but when we try to reconstruct an ancient "father" language ord by word we can not doing it from a single too strict concept -
when you put some words signifying 'horse' side by side, after having searched them in a dictionary, you risk to forget some interesting roots: it is more gainful to search all the meanings close to this concept: "horse", but also "mare", "fool" or "colt", "filly" and then you see drift s in signification that mask old affinities to us:
celtic *ek-, *ep- + *capal- + *marc- /+/ germanic *hros- << I-E ?*kros-, marc- (>> marhskal = mareschal, marshall, >>,>> mare?), *fol- << *pôl- /+/ slavic *kopila or *kobila ("mare") /+/ latin 'equ-', 'cabal-', 'pul-'
etc...
so let's not deprive ourselves of words that show the links we could pass by them without seeing them because of a too restricted field of meanings - someones, with or without reason, say that the meaning of "horse" 'konj') in slavic is of turkish origin and that it proves that first I-E steppic people learned the horse domestication from Turkic peoples, but we see that 'kobila' is very I-E-like...so hat is sure here?
on the other side, for 'pear' I think some languages loaned the word from latin, and someones (slavic) have an other root?
that tends to prove that the I-E links are tighter as a whole than at a first sight (I know a lot of us know that already!)

bertrand
09-07-12, 22:51
I believe that David Anthony's book (the Wheel the horse and Language) hold many hints with regards to the origins of the IE.
First of all it is relatively obvious from the map of IE languages that both European R1b and R1a where of IE origin.
R1b --> Centum languages (originated in Western steppes)
R1a --> satem languages (eastern steppes)
Exception: Tocharian R1a (migrated before the centum/satem split)

Anthony, clearly hints that the IE languages have more similarities with the uralic language group than with Caucasian or Semitic language groups.
As a result it is more probable that IE (R1b/R1b) migrated from the urals down to Ukraine probably at a time (8000BC) when the Caspian and Black see were connected.

In addition, the studies of Myres et al hints that R1 (ancestor of R1b and R1a) emerged in northern Pakistan.

If this is confirmed, in my opinion, R1, R1a, R1b appeared in Pakistan before 12k ago. From there, some R1b migrated south toward Jordan and African while the majority went north toward the Ural.

For those who can read French my theory is detailed on this link:

www.bertrandjost.com/Francais/Monog-famille/Jost/Steppes/conquete-steppes.html (http://www.bertrandjost.com/Francais/Monog-famille/Jost/Steppes/conquete-steppes.html)

Yetos
10-07-12, 02:12
I see everybody here read a lot about the academic of Gibutas but no one ever try glottochronology of Colin Renfrew,

if Renfrew is right then the only proto-IE speakers are either G2 Hg people or J2 +( R1b m23 + R1a M17)?

every body read about wheel and chariot but how many try to find agricultural words and common life words?

a good example to what I mean
Slavic Babus-ka Old woman - grand Mother
Greek Makedonian βεβη bebi bebe, the midwife, the one who brings the baby in the world
italian Bambino the small baby
Modern Greek παππους papus the old man the grand father,

why the word lost its meaning to a tottaly different form and which is the correct road
from Babus-ka to baby? or from baby to babuska?



everybody is connecting Satem with R1a and Centum with R1b
but did ever notice that in areas that no Turkic speaking population migrate exist the Centum language (except tocharian)
and in areas that Turkic speaking population enter are the satem languages?

remember that exception certify the law, (I am talking about Tocharian)


Glottochronology except the case of the connection with Borean languages (Dene -caucas) give IE earlier than Kurgan 1 ( so no wheels and chariot theory) about 7000 bc and more (expansion of G2 maybe?)
or very late near Hettites time about 3000 BC (expansion of J2 maybe?)



PS 1
sometimes the Devil's advocat makes us think by putting a spell


PS 2
Just to inform you all that Tocharian has Aorist tense, meaning that is closer to Greek and Armenian than some other IE languages,
It is relative to Anatolian languages

MOESAN
11-07-12, 22:13
MOESAN (with humility) to YETOS
I see everybody here read a lot about the academic of Gibutas but no one ever try glottochronology of Colin Renfrew,
the reliability of glottochronology is still matter of hot discussions – an interesting approach but that needs to become more accurate, I believe – valuable on short periods but not so sure when we go far back -

if Renfrew is right then the only proto-IE speakers are either G2 Hg people or J2 +( R1b m23 + R1a M17)?

every body read about wheel and chariot but how many try to find agricultural words and common life words?
I suppose philologists did not wait us to begin this kind of task : of course study of all the lexical categories was done, filiation words and agricultural technical words... and natural environment (animals, plants) words too.



a good example to what I mean
Slavic Babus-ka Old woman - grand Mother
Greek Makedonian βεβη bebi bebe, the midwife, the one who brings the baby in the world
italian Bambino the small baby
Modern Greek παππους papus the old man the grand father,
why the word lost its meaning to a tottaly different form and which is the correct road
from Babus-ka to baby? or from baby to babuska?
These words are apparently based on the first clear articulations that a baby can do, bilabials P or B : the first ones he can pronounce and the first one can heard from him (mother, father, aunt...)
& :that said, what do you try to prove here ?

everybody is connecting Satem with R1a and Centum with R1b
but did ever notice that in areas that no Turkic speaking population migrate exist the Centum language (except tocharian) and in areas that Turkic speaking population enter are the satem languages?
remember that exception certify the law, (I am talking about Tocharian)
I believe there are areas where turkic speaking folks did never enter and where satem speaker nevertheless...
not stupid at first – I thought about that too, after I had red some theories about Siberian and Steppic Bronze civilisations considering them as turkic or proto-turkic and not indo-european... - satemization is for a part a palatization of consonnants and produced fricatives we find in turkic languages too – so you are thinking the east-indo-european speakers are for the most ex-turkic speaking people indo-europeanized ??? -questions :
-where and when do you place the beginning of satemization (I am not a specialist) because it seams having begun in Europe, gradually among populations speaking already I-Ean dialects and for long enough time?was the Thracians, Getians, Illyrians turkic folks by origin ?
-so the bulk of the turkic speaking people was caucasian ?
-so the first I-Eans (centum for you?) was centered more on the central sides of Europe or South Caucasus ? Or had they been pushed westwards from the Steppes to western Europe by Y-R1a turkic speaking tribes before « educating » them in turn ? -
-or the most of Y-R1a bearers would have been turkicized populations males (what language before?) that after began to rule I-Ean people but leave their languages for I-E, transmetting their Y-DNA through the male elite domination but not their language? (it recalls me one of the Basque theories for Y-R1b)
I confess I have thought in this possibility but I am not convinced for now –

Glottochronology except the case of the connection with Borean languages (Dene -caucas) give IE earlier than Kurgan 1 ( so no wheels and chariot theory) about 7000 bc and more (expansion of G2 maybe?)
or very late near Hettites time about 3000 BC (expansion of J2 maybe?)
could you go further on you meaning ? That oldness of I-Ean before the wheel disprove that they discovered and named the wheel ? If they was yet a small population at these dates ?


PS 1
sometimes the Devil's advocat makes us think by putting a spell
???

PS 2 (http://www.amazon.fr/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_19?__mk_fr_FR=%C5M%C5Z%D5%D1&url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=ps%202)
Just to inform you all that Tocharian has Aorist tense, meaning that is closer to Greek and Armenian than some other IE languages,
It is relative to Anatolian languages
And what ? I-E = anatolian by geographic origin ? Why had not been found I-E writings earlier in Balkans if they came with Néolithic agriculture (but the previous matriarcal organization does not fit too well)? Or did they come only at the Chalcolithic ages, speaking I-E when the first agriculteurs did not ? And why wait so long time to invade Europe ?
Maybe have you some answers ?

Eldritch
05-04-13, 17:43
Has R1a L664 ever been found west of Germany or SE of Italy?