PDA

View Full Version : Y-DNA and mtDNA frequencies in Proto-Indo-European cultures



Maciamo
17-06-15, 10:27
I have added the samples from Allentoft 2015 and updated the haplogroup frequencies in the section Haplogroups of Bronze Age Proto-Indo-Europeans (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/haplogroups_of_bronze_age_proto-indo-europeans.shtml).

Sile
17-06-15, 11:36
I have added the samples from Allentoft 2015 and updated the haplogroup frequencies in the section Haplogroups of Bronze Age Proto-Indo-Europeans (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/haplogroups_of_bronze_age_proto-indo-europeans.shtml).

thanks

I do not see Haak 2015................. 69 ancient samples...........are they included in your ancient dna link?

Maciamo
17-06-15, 12:16
thanks

I do not see Haak 2015................. 69 ancient samples...........are they included in your ancient dna link?

Yes, they are included. Please check the pages for each culture for the details.

Rethel
17-06-15, 12:28
Great, finally are Y.

But if in Yamna were only R1b, then
in which culture at that time was R1a?:thinking:

Tomenable
17-06-15, 12:35
then in which culture at that time was R1a?

All samples of Yamnaya so far come from one specific area, IIRC.

So R1a could be in another subdivision / region of that culture.

Or maybe they were located more to the north than the Yamnaya.

Maciamo
17-06-15, 14:37
Great, finally are Y.

But if in Yamna were only R1b, then
in which culture at that time was R1a?:thinking:

This is the map I made five years ago to show the division between the R1a forest-steppe zone (in yellow) and the R1b steppe zone (in red) within the Yamna culture. All the Yamna samples tested so far come from the red zone (of the grey Volga-Ural region following the R1b arrow on the right).

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/late_neolithic_europe.gif

Sile
17-06-15, 20:13
Yes, they are included. Please check the pages for each culture for the details.

I must be going blind, your combined neolithic Ydna numbers = 34 the numbers and some Ydna markers are missing plus notes refer to Haak 2005 and 2010 papers only

Sile
17-06-15, 20:19
This is the map I made five years ago to show the division between the R1a forest-steppe zone (in yellow) and the R1b steppe zone (in red) within the Yamna culture. All the Yamna samples tested so far come from the red zone (of the grey Volga-Ural region following the R1b arrow on the right).

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/late_neolithic_europe.gif

one must ask oneself, ...did R1a and R1b arrive in modern russia and the steppes at the same time , if so, then how did R1b dominate western europe and R1a eastern Europe?

IMO, R1b was always to the west of R1a and entered Europe first in great numbers, the eastern european R1b was eventually diluted in numbers by the late arrival of R1a into europe, ..........maybe there is another scenario

Tomenable
17-06-15, 21:58
IMO, R1b was always to the west of R1a and entered Europe first in great numbers, the eastern european R1b was eventually diluted in numbers by the late arrival of R1a into europe, ..........maybe there is another scenario

This would be contra-factual reasoning. We have samples of both R1a and R1b from the same period - the Bronze Age.

But samples of Bronze Age R1a from Central Europe and Scandinavia found so far are usually older than samples of R1b.

So it seems like during the Iron Age R1b expanded eastward, pushing R1a actually more to the east during that period:

ybp = approximate age of each sample in years before present

http://s8.postimg.org/67u7kqtb9/R1_samples_C.png

Check also the new paper on the spread of R1b - it seems that R1b was originally not to the west, but to the south of R1a:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg2015114s1.html

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/fig_tab/ejhg2015114f1.html

R1b expanded from South-Eastern Europe, according to their map (R1a came from North-Eastern and Eastern Europe):

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2015114f1.jpg

LeBrok
17-06-15, 22:51
This would be contra-factual reasoning. We have samples of both R1a and R1b from the same period - the Bronze Age.

But samples of Bronze Age R1a from Central Europe and Scandinavia found so far are usually older than samples of R1b.

So it seems like during the Iron Age R1b expanded eastward, pushing R1a actually more to the east during that period:

ybp = approximate age of each sample in years before present



Check also the new paper on the spread of R1b - it seems that R1b was originally not to the west, but to the south of R1a:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg2015114s1.html

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/fig_tab/ejhg2015114f1.html

R1b expanded from South-Eastern Europe, according to their map (R1a came from North-Eastern and Eastern Europe):

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2015114f1.jpg

According to Anthony, around 4,000 BC Bulgarian/Balkan farming society collapses and at the same time we see evidence of first invasions from the Steppe on horses. Horse riding hunter-gatherers. These invasions last a very long time and Balkan neolithic settlements stay empty for 5-7 hundred years. This could be the first source of M269 from the Steppe into the rest of Europe. Pre Yamnaya times.

bicicleur
17-06-15, 23:01
This is the map I made five years ago to show the division between the R1a forest-steppe zone (in yellow) and the R1b steppe zone (in red) within the Yamna culture. All the Yamna samples tested so far come from the red zone (of the grey Volga-Ural region following the R1b arrow on the right).

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/late_neolithic_europe.gif

maybe there were 3 zones : R1a, R1b and I2a (at least some I2a tribes)
and the biggest mystery zone remains Maykop

bicicleur
17-06-15, 23:17
This would be contra-factual reasoning. We have samples of both R1a and R1b from the same period - the Bronze Age.

But samples of Bronze Age R1a from Central Europe and Scandinavia found so far are usually older than samples of R1b.

So it seems like during the Iron Age R1b expanded eastward, pushing R1a actually more to the east during that period:

ybp = approximate age of each sample in years before present

http://s8.postimg.org/67u7kqtb9/R1_samples_C.png

Check also the new paper on the spread of R1b - it seems that R1b was originally not to the west, but to the south of R1a:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg2015114s1.html

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/fig_tab/ejhg2015114f1.html

R1b expanded from South-Eastern Europe, according to their map (R1a came from North-Eastern and Eastern Europe):

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2015114f1.jpg

the paper is behind a paywall but the supplementary info of Allentoft suggest 3 groups into Europe : Corded Ware (R1a) , Bell Beaker (R1b) and Unetice followed by Tumulus cultures
Unetice seems more multi-ethnic and involving some I2 tribes too

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7555/extref/nature14507-s1.pdf

bicicleur
17-06-15, 23:21
According to Anthony, around 4,000 BC Bulgarian/Balkan farming society collapses and at the same time we see evidence of first invasions from the Steppe on horses. Horse riding hunter-gatherers. These invasions last a very long time and Balkan neolithic settlements stay empty for 5-7 hundred years. This could be the first source of M269 from the Steppe into the rest of Europe. Pre Yamnaya times.

I still favour this theory of Anthony except for the horseriding part 4000 BC.
It is also not clear whether these people where the Anatolians.
Neither Haak nor Allentoft mention the Anatolian branch in their study.
It seems like nobody dares to take position about that branch any more.

Fire Haired14
18-06-15, 00:15
This is the map I made five years ago to show the division between the R1a forest-steppe zone (in yellow) and the R1b steppe zone (in red) within the Yamna culture. All the Yamna samples tested so far come from the red zone (of the grey Volga-Ural region following the R1b arrow on the right).

It's very impressive that you got that right 5 years ago!!

BTW, Ancient West Eurasian Y DNA.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12G2cfjG0wHWarsl5bB99ridFmvUWzqlZfZ6_e_R6oIA/edit

Tomenable
18-06-15, 00:50
Iberia is the region where Non-Indo-European languages were widely spoken until the Roman conquest of Iberia.

And Iberia is also one of the most M269-rich regions of Europe, most of this R1b appears to be of DF27 subclade.

So I am wondering that perhaps not all of M269 which came to Europe from the steppe, were Indo-Europeans:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31311-Evolutionary-History-of-R1b-M269-based-on-modern-Iberian-data?p=460116&viewfull=1#post460116


Speakers of Non-IE Iberian languages - who continued to live in Iberia until historic times (though they were intermingled with Celtic-speakers and with Non-Celtic IE speakers in the region, such as the Lusitanian-speakers) - could already have that R1b DF27 haplogroup.

Here are examples of already extinct, but recorded in history, Non-IE languages of Iberia:

Iberian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_language
Tartessian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartessian_language
Aquitanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquitanian_language
Turdetanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turdetani

Turdetanian was closely related to Tartessian.

And already extinct Non-Celtic IE languages spoken in ancient Iberia included for example:

Lusitanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusitanian_language
Sorothaptic - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorothaptic_language

And of course there were also Celtic languages in Iberia, which also got extinct later:

Celtiberian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtiberian_language
Gallaecian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallaecian_language

So despite having a hodge-podge of Non-IE, Celtic, and Non-Celtic IE languages, we have a surprising Y-DNA homogeneity.

In any case, it seems that DF27 is the most native of all R1b lineages in Iberia.

So it would seem that DF27 was the lineage of Non-IE speakers, and modern frequency among the Basques confirms it.

It does not mean that it did not come from the steppe, though. Question is if those were originally Indo-Europeans, or not.
Iberia is an interesting case because it was one of places where Non-IE languages survived for a very long time.

Non-IE languages in Iberia survived until the Roman conquest and until the adoption of Latin by its people.

(...) we do know that until the very Roman conquest in Iberia there lived at least as many Non-IE speakers as IE speakers.

Does it mean that not only Indo-Europeans came from the steppe, and that not all of R1b M269 people spoke Indo-European?

Or do we really believe that all those Non-IE Iberians, Tartessians, Aquitanians and Turdetanians were Non-R1b peoples?

In Iberia Indo-European languages did not displace Non-IE languages completely until all of them were replaced by Latin.

But Latin expanded in Iberia through cultural transition. The Romans did not bring DF27 to Iberia, it was there before.

So it is very likely that all those Non-Indo-European speakers in ancient Iberia had DF27 subclade of R1b.

Vukodav
18-06-15, 14:25
Only a Pole could have made such a wrong map.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2015114f1.jpg

Oldest U152 has been found in Bavarian Bell Beaker, while oldest U106 has been found in Swedish Battle Axe.

Tomenable
18-06-15, 14:58
Only a Pole could have made such a wrong map.

Thanks, but it is not my map. :)

It is from the new study on Iberian R1b. It was made by the following people:


Laura Valverde, Maria José Illescas, Patricia Villaescusa, Amparo M Gotor, Ainara García, Sergio Cardoso, Jaime Algorta, Susana Catarino, Karen Rouault, Claude Férec, Orla Hardiman, Maite Zarrabeitia, Susana Jiménez, Maria Fátima Pinheiro, Begoña M Jarreta, Jill Olofsson, Niels Morling and Marian M de Pancorbo

Typically Polish surnames! You were right! At least Orla Hard-i-man must be Polish. :)

Angela
18-06-15, 15:19
Iberia is the region where Non-Indo-European languages were widely spoken until the Roman conquest of Iberia.

And Iberia is also one of the most M269-rich regions of Europe, most of this R1b appears to be of DF27 subclade.

So I am wondering that perhaps not all of M269 which came to Europe from the steppe, were Indo-Europeans:

In Iberia Indo-European languages did not displace Non-IE languages completely until all of them were replaced by Latin.

But Latin expanded in Iberia through cultural transition. The Romans did not bring DF27 to Iberia, it was there before.

So it is very likely that all those Non-Indo-European speakers in ancient Iberia had DF27 subclade of R1b.

You apparently really want to believe this, but there is absolutely no way that you can reach that conclusion based on the evidence we have so far, and most particularly not about DF27.

See post #15: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31311-Evolutionary-History-of-R1b-M269-based-on-modern-Iberian-data?p=460168#post460168

"If some steppe R1b people did not speak Indo-European languages, then it would make sense of it all neatly, but that would be turning everything on its head. Where would they have come from that they didn't speak a form of Indo-European? If they stayed on the steppe until 3,000 BC or so how could they have avoided speaking Indo-European? Maybe they were in Cucuteni or somewhere else in the Balkans where they adopted the languages of the Neolithic farmers? Or maybe they moved to certain areas in the Balkans before Indo-European was really established and then got pushed out? This is just wild, idle speculation though, unsupported by any evidence. Then there's the question of how did they get to eastern Spain, although we could speculate it was by sea. Might they have been connected with Or were those people J2? If the ancestors of the Iberians were R1b they would presumably carried upstream clades though, yes?

Of course, there's always Koch out there who purports to think that Tartessian is Celtic, and that Celtic developed out of the Atlantic Bronze Age, but he doesn't seem to have convinced many people, and it doesn't explain all the R1b in the eastern parts of Spain.

In terms of other explanations for the route of the Celtic languages into Iberia, there does seem to be a definite "western" tilt to them,yes? So, if they came into Iberia from central Europe relatively late, did they come through the Pyrenees at the western end, or did they wind up there because the areas further east were more densely populated? Or, might the western areas have been more suited to cattle herding than the east? I don't know enough about land use in ancient Iberia to have a definite opinion, but it seems possible. Someone you quoted speculated that the high DF27 in the Basques proves that was the route. I don't see that as necessarily the case given how young the Basque clades are and the fact that this looks so much like a pretty recent founder effect.

Speaking of the Basques, Aquitanian looks as if it's related to Basque, and I've seen speculations that the Basques are descended from Aquitanians who retreated into the Pyrenees. Then supposedly men from the surrounding area, R1b men, and downstream DF27 at that, married into the community but adopted the language of their wives. It could happen, I'm sure, but we're talking about huge swathes of the Iberian peninsula where we would have to hypothesize that this happened. Of course, we don't have good data or at least extensive data from Aquitaine in France, so maybe DF7 is very concentrated there as well. If it is, then we've got a whole other large area where steppe people adopted other languages.

I don't know about Iberian either. It used to be speculated that the Ligures and the Iberians were related peoples, both being descendents of the Cardial Neolithic. Then linguists started saying the ancient Ligurian language (not the modern Ligurian variant of Italian) was an Indo-European language from before Italo-Celtic differentiated. Nothing like that is claimed for Iberian however. So perhaps it's true for both the ancient Ligurian and Iberian peoples, but the Ligurians mixed with an Indo-European group arriving from the area of modern France, and later "Celtic" speakers once again arrived in the first millenium BC, creating the documented Celt-Ligurians, and that nothing similar happened with the Iberians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligures

Maybe, until very late in the game, R1b was more frequent in the west but everything got mixed because of the planned population relocations during the Reconquista. I've always felt that given that fact it's very difficult to figure out the movement of R1b into and around the Iberian peninsula. "

Vukodav
18-06-15, 16:35
That map makes no sense. Highest diversity of P312 is near the Alps, not on the French/Spanish border. Also U152 has been found among Bavarian Bell Beakers, so it spread North to South.

It looks like people keep thrwowing guesses around, just like with the out of India R1a theory.

Sile
18-06-15, 20:20
thanks

I do not see Haak 2015................. 69 ancient samples...........are they included in your ancient dna link?

on page 25 of Haak 2015 paper, the following markers are late Neolitihic ( 6000BC - 4500BC )

they are
1 x R1a
2 x R1b
4 x G2a
1 x T1a
1 x F*
1 x H2
4 x I2a
1 x I2c

on a side note, do these I2a+c in sweden have anything to do with the Remedello 3 x I2a found recently?

MOESAN
18-06-15, 20:45
Thanks, but it is not my map. :)

It is from the new study on Iberian R1b. It was made by the following people:



Typically Polish surnames! You were right! At least Orla Hard-i-man must be Polish. :)


Grmblgargle! Don't moke people like that! Maybe they are not Polish people but they were drunk as Polish people when they made the survey!!! (french racism about Poles, you can put Finns or Bretons in place of it LOL) That said the place of the "bursting" of S116 seems to me a bit to far Southwest.

Tomenable
18-06-15, 23:05
If some steppe R1b people did not speak Indo-European languages, then it would make sense of it all neatly, but that would be turning everything on its head. Where would they have come from that they didn't speak a form of Indo-European? If they stayed on the steppe until 3,000 BC or so how could they have avoided speaking Indo-European? Maybe they were in Cucuteni or somewhere else in the Balkans where they adopted the languages of the Neolithic farmers? Or maybe they moved to certain areas in the Balkans before Indo-European was really established and then got pushed out? This is just wild, idle speculation though, unsupported by any evidence. Then there's the question of how did they get to eastern Spain, although we could speculate it was by sea. Might they have been connected with Or were those people J2? If the ancestors of the Iberians were R1b they would presumably carried upstream clades though, yes?

I was also thinking about the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture. We still don't have Y-DNA samples from this culture, and they lived in the direct and close vicinity of the steppe. Also the new paper by Allentoft claims that there could be a migration from Trypillian culture to the steppe (citation below):


"During the 4th millennium BC, large mega settlements of up to 400 hectares with populations in the ten thousands, known as the Tripolje Culture 2, 9, emerged in the western forest-steppe, bordering the steppe. By the middle of the 4th millennium BC, it seems that such large populations could no longer be sustained and the mega-sites gradually collapsed and were left. The Tripolje populations expanded into the steppe 10 where they encountered Maikop groups and adopted individual burials under barrows and metallurgy. Horse domestication and the development of wheeled vehicles, in the style of later prairie wagons, took place to support a mobile pastoral lifestyle."

So my idea is that the Cucuteni-Trypillian had R1b and spoke a Non-IE, Neolithic language. Later one part of those Trypillians migrated to the steppe, where they became Indo-Europeanized adopting PIE language. Another part of them, however, migrated in the opposite direction, to Iberia, where they continued to speak Non-IE. This would make sense and that culture definitely had the demographic capacity to colonize Western Europe (they had towns with up to 10,000 or more inhabitants, after all).

Basque language is Non-IE, but it is considered to be descended from one of languages of Neolithic farmers (maybe farmers of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture were mostly R1b).

It is not the language of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers.

=========================================

Question is where was R1a in all of that, and was that R1a who Indo-Europeanized R1b.

Another question is what haplogroups did Maikop groups have.

Fire Haired14
18-06-15, 23:14
DF27 in German Bell Beaker according to Richard Rocca. Remember U152 was also just found. P312 must have expanded around Bell Beaker times or shortly afterwards.


Genetiker found that the RISE560 Bell Beaker sample is M12124+, which is below DF27 as per Underhill 2015. Source: https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...asian-genomes/

Tomenable
18-06-15, 23:15
The frequency distribution of DF27 subclade in Iberia definitely correlates with areas in Iberia where Non-IE speakers lived in Antiquity, before the adoption of Latin language. Basques and Aquitanians lived near the Pyrenees; Iberians lived in the east; Tartessians and Turdetanians lived in the south:

http://s8.postimg.org/3s0xn53ol/DF27.png

From the new study on Iberian R1b subclades:

http://s30.postimg.org/qac8xhszl/Iberia_R1b.png

Tomenable
18-06-15, 23:20
Genetiker found that the RISE560 Bell Beaker sample is M12124+, which is below DF27

Is there also autosomal data of admixtures for RISE560 ???

How old is RISE560, when did he live ???

Tomenable
18-06-15, 23:30
I don't see that as necessarily the case given how young the Basque clades are and the fact that this looks so much like a pretty recent founder effect.

OK but now I am not talking only about the Basques, but about all those Non-IE speaking groups in Ancient Iberia. DF27 in Iberia is surely older than lineages of DF27 found among modern Basques. Founder effects among the Basques result from fact that they are only remnants of the much larger Non-IE population of Iberia in Ancient times. Those Non-IE speakers could be also largely DF27, but different lineages. Just like vast majority of Native Americans are Q - and this is not due to post-1492 founder effects! Some tribes can have very young lineages of Q due to bottlenecks in recent history. Yet Q is still Q.

So Ancient Basques could also have mostly DF27, just a greater diversity of lineages of DF27.

Even Early Medieval Basque-speakers were a larger (more widespread) population than today - as you can see Basque-speaking area has constantly been shrinking since the 1st century BC:

http://s3.postimg.org/3v8y11c5f/Basque.png

Was it shrinking due to assimilation of the Basques by their neighbours, or due to extinction of Basque population. IMO mostly assimilation rather than physical elimination of the Basques.

Greying Wanderer
19-06-15, 13:09
one must ask oneself, ...did R1a and R1b arrive in modern russia and the steppes at the same time , if so, then how did R1b dominate western europe and R1a eastern Europe?

IMO, R1b was always to the west of R1a and entered Europe first in great numbers, the eastern european R1b was eventually diluted in numbers by the late arrival of R1a into europe, ..........maybe there is another scenario

It seems likely to me it was either R1b moved (or was pushed west first) or there were strong R1b founder effects along the Atlantic coast (or both).

The distribution maps of some of the R1b clades suggest to me it was at least *partly* founder effects along the Atlantic coast.

Greying Wanderer
19-06-15, 13:37
That map makes no sense. Highest diversity of P312 is near the Alps, not on the French/Spanish border. Also U152 has been found among Bavarian Bell Beakers, so it spread North to South.

It looks like people keep thrwowing guesses around, just like with the out of India R1a theory.

It could have come east to west (hence the lower diversity) and then had very strong founder effects along the Atlantic coast (hence the youth of those clades and the homogeneity and how their distribution seems to center on the coast).

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-DF27.gif

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-L21.gif

https://thecampblogbymike.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/haplogroup-r1b-s21.gif

Also if the BB originally came from the same source but had spread along different trade networks in different directions they could have arrived at the coast by different routes leading to some clades being centered in the south and some in the north.

MOESAN
19-06-15, 22:40
OK but now I am not talking only about the Basques, but about all those Non-IE speaking groups in Ancient Iberia. DF27 in Iberia is surely older than lineages of DF27 found among modern Basques. Founder effects among the Basques result from fact that they are only remnants of the much larger Non-IE population of Iberia in Ancient times. Those Non-IE speakers could be also largely DF27, but different lineages. Just like vast majority of Native Americans are Q - and this is not due to post-1492 founder effects! Some tribes can have very young lineages of Q due to bottlenecks in recent history. Yet Q is still Q.

So Ancient Basques could also have mostly DF27, just a greater diversity of lineages of DF27.

Even Early Medieval Basque-speakers were a larger (more widespread) population than today - as you can see Basque-speaking area has constantly been shrinking since the 1st century BC:

http://s3.postimg.org/3v8y11c5f/Basque.png

Was it shrinking due to assimilation of the Basques by their neighbours, or due to extinction of Basque population. IMO mostly assimilation rather than physical elimination of the Basques.

the core area of basque or proto-basque speaking populations seems more Northern: some phonetics traits seems linking basque country to France Gascoyne and even more northernly, until Charentes region and Southern Poitou: So if I'm right and if Basques were a bit more extended southwards, what is not proved yet, this was not going too far in iberia from the present day area. Their links with North seem stronger than the links with South and all over Iberia, even for phonetics traits among basque and some romance subdialects of France. I 've not weighted well enough the surveys about Y-R-DF27 so I cannot for now discuss too deeply the point; DF27 subclades could have reached Spain frim different ways, at different times, even if not in a too broad span of time, and with I-E and not I-E...

Johannes
03-07-15, 12:46
OK but now I am not talking only about the Basques, but about all those Non-IE speaking groups in Ancient Iberia. DF27 in Iberia is surely older than lineages of DF27 found among modern Basques. Founder effects among the Basques result from fact that they are only remnants of the much larger Non-IE population of Iberia in Ancient times. Those Non-IE speakers could be also largely DF27, but different lineages. Just like vast majority of Native Americans are Q - and this is not due to post-1492 founder effects! Some tribes can have very young lineages of Q due to bottlenecks in recent history. Yet Q is still Q.

So Ancient Basques could also have mostly DF27, just a greater diversity of lineages of DF27.

Even Early Medieval Basque-speakers were a larger (more widespread) population than today - as you can see Basque-speaking area has constantly been shrinking since the 1st century BC:

http://s3.postimg.org/3v8y11c5f/Basque.png

Was it shrinking due to assimilation of the Basques by their neighbours, or due to extinction of Basque population. IMO mostly assimilation rather than physical elimination of the Basques.

It was both. During the 7th century the Goths attacked the Basques and defeated them in a serioes of battles. The city of Vitoria -- which lies in the heart of Alava in the Basque Country -- was established and settled by Goths and the Basques were either expelled/exterminated, assimilated, or both. Then in the early 8th century, after the Gohts were defeated by the Berbers, the Basques briefly came down and reoccupied the aread settled by Goths and then retreated when the Gothic leaders in Saragossa (Banu Casi clan) converted to Islam. Then the Basques who had been diluted by then by peoples (mostly Gothic and Celtic) fleeing the Moors, came down during the Reconquista and resettled all the areas shown in the map but lost their language. This was due to the use of Latin which created Castilian and Aragonese during the 9th to 13th centuries.

Johannes
04-07-15, 00:14
The frequency distribution of DF27 subclade in Iberia definitely correlates with areas in Iberia where Non-IE speakers lived in Antiquity, before the adoption of Latin language. Basques and Aquitanians lived near the Pyrenees; Iberians lived in the east; Tartessians and Turdetanians lived in the south:

http://s8.postimg.org/3s0xn53ol/DF27.png

From the new study on Iberian R1b subclades:

http://s30.postimg.org/qac8xhszl/Iberia_R1b.png

Although this map is of recent or modern samples, it clearly shows that the Iberians and Basques were related. I know its too early to tell; however, I bet that the NL/BA inhabitants of Iberia carried mostly R1b-DF27 (and not G, J, I2a, and E1b1) and they came from the east and spoke a proto-Indo-European language. This map shows recent DNA but in ancient times the Basques were located further south of the present area (Navarre and Aragon) -- very close to Iberians. Thus it is further proof that Basques and Iberians were related. Just because the Iberians and Basques did not use the phonecian alphabet -- and thus we cannot descipher their language -- does not mean they did not speak an IE language. Remember that the Greeks borrowed form the phonecians and this how we can understand Greek, Latin, and later other IE languages. But what if IE speakers never adopted the phonecian alphabet??? How will we know what they spoke??? They probably used runes????

Fluffy
06-07-15, 22:29
This is the map I made five years ago to show the division between the R1a forest-steppe zone (in yellow) and the R1b steppe zone (in red) within the Yamna culture. All the Yamna samples tested so far come from the red zone (of the grey Volga-Ural region following the R1b arrow on the right).

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/late_neolithic_europe.gif

Interesting to see G2a3b in Yamna culture.