PDA

View Full Version : Natufian E1b1b1 spoke proto Afroasiatic



bicicleur
02-07-16, 10:20
Afroasiatic is considered the oldest known language group. Estimates go up to 18 ka.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroasiatic_languages

ca 24.1 ka E1b1b1-M35/M243 split into E1b1b1a and Eb1b1b

https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-M35/

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/E1b1b-tree.gif
E1b1b1b has been identified among Natufians, and later among Levantine PPNB



Natufian
Israel
Raqefet Cave, Mount Carmel [I1072 / Nat 9]
M
11840-9760 BCE
E1b1b1b2 Z830 (xE1b1b1b2a, E1b1b1b2b)
CTS8182+, CTS11781+ (E1b1b1b2), (CTS1652-, CTS11051-, CTS11574-)
N1b ?
Lazaridis 2016 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Lazaridis2016)


Natufian
Israel
Raqefet Cave, Mount Carmel [I0861 / Nat 10]
M
11840-9760 BCE
E1b1b1b2 Z830 (xE1b1b1b2a, E1b1b1b2b)
L336+ (E1b1b), M5108+, CTS3637+, CTS7154+, PF1755+, L796+ (E1b1b1), CTS11781+ (E1b1b1b2), (L857-, Z865-)


Lazaridis 2016 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Lazaridis2016)






Eb1b1a has been identified in Levantine PPNB and in Catalunia Cardial



PPNB
Jordan
Ain Ghazal [I1710 / AG 83_6]
M
7733-7526 calBCE (8580±60 BP)
E1b1b1 (xE1b1b1b1a1, E1b1b1a1b1, E1b1b1a1b2, E1b1b1b2a1c)
M5041+ (CTS5819-, L618-, CTS5479-, V23-)
T1a2
Lazaridis 2016 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Lazaridis2016)

I1710 Levant PPNB E1b1b1a1-CTS675 calls (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-i1710/)





Epicardial
Spain
Avellaner cave, Catalonia [Ave 07]
M
5000 BC
E1b1b1a1b1a
M35.1, V13, Ei in STR table (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnastr.shtml)
U5
Lacan 2011b (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Lacan2011b)





So, we can assume that E1b1b1 arrived in the Levant at the onset of LGM.

The PPNB/C Levant neolithic spread to Africa, probably starting right after the 8.2 ka climatic event.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_B

Work at the site of 'Ain Ghazal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Ain_Ghazal) in Jordan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan) has indicated a later Pre-Pottery Neolithic C (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_C) period which existed between 8,200 and 7,900 BP. Juris Zarins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juris_Zarins) has proposed that a Circum Arabian Nomadic Pastoral Complex developed in the period from the climatic crisis of 6200 BCE, partly as a result of an increasing emphasis in PPNB cultures upon animal domesticates, and a fusion with Harifian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harifian) hunter gatherers in Southern Palestine, with affiliate connections with the cultures of Fayyum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faiyum) and the Eastern Desert (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Desert) of Egypt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt). Cultures practicing this lifestyle spread down the Red Sea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea) shoreline and moved east from Syria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syria) into southern Iraq (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq).[12] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_B#cite_note-12)

The spread of some subclades of E1b1b1 is very clear :

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-E-M81.gif

E-M81

7825

E-V32, a subclade of E1b1b1a-V68

We can assume that R1b-V88 adopted Afroasiatic (Chadic) when it arrived in the Levant and from there spread to Africa.

7826

these are the Afroasiatic languages spoken 1000 - 2000 years ago :

7827

Berber is asociated with E-M81, Kushite with E-V32 and Chadic with R1b-V88.
Arabic spread later, ca 4 ka. It was spread by J1-P58, a tribe that adopted their language in the Levant and started to spread into Arabia 5 ka.

LeBrok
02-07-16, 21:53
I had this thought before but thanks to Taranis argumentation I understood that it is not that easy to assume. If Natufians or Levant Neolithic spoke proto-Afroasiatic then first farmers definitely would have spread this language to Europe and it would become language of Old Europe, the Neolithic Europe. The oldest civilization in Europe is Minoan and I don't recall them speaking Afroasiatic. Possibly Basque language is of Old Europe, but then again it is doesn't belong to Afroasiatic family. Same with Etruscan Language or all Anatolian languages. There is no trace of Afroasiatic language North of Jordan or in Europe in written history.
Afroasiatic could have started to spread in Bronze Age together with Semitic People out of Arabian Peninsula or Egypt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Afroasiatic_language

Taranis
02-07-16, 22:38
I had this thought before but thanks to Taranis argumentation I understood that it is not that easy to assume. If Natufians or Levant Neolithic spoke proto-Afroasiatic then first farmers definitely would have spread this language to Europe and it would become language of Old Europe, the Neolithic Europe. The oldest civilization in Europe is Minoan and I don't recall them speaking Afroasiatic. Possibly Basque language is of Old Europe, but then again it is doesn't belong to Afroasiatic family. Same with Etruscan Language or all Anatolian languages.

There are five (relatively) unconventional sub-branches of Afroasiatic: Berber, Chadic, Egyptian, Kushitic and Semitic. Of these only one branch (Semitic) is found in Asia, and only two branches (Egyptian and Semitic) have ancient attestations. Minoan for sure was not an Afroasiatic language (the usage of a syllabic script, rather than an abjad, should be an indicator). I have the same opinion of the so-called "Eteocypriot" language.
Back to Proto-Afroasiatic, there is no agreement on the age of the language: you also have a "hunter-gatherer" position (if it is as old as bicicleur suggested, it obviously can't be the language of the first farmers), and in addition you have a "farmer" position. Or, as an alternative, you assume that only a sub-branch of Afroasiatic (no agreement here, either) that had farming vocabulary.


There is no trace of Afroasiatic language North of Jordan or in Europe in written history.
Afroasiatic could have started to spread in Bronze Age together with Semitic People out of Arabian Peninsula or Egypt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Afroasiatic_language

You mean, north of Syria? 'Geographical' Syria, that is (including parts of modern southern Turkey). And we have a number of relatively ancient Semitic languages from that area (notably, Eblaite, Ugaritic and Aramaic). Also, more accurate would be to say, "prior Phoenician colonization in the Mediterranean", because these for sure visited parts Europe (Sardinia, Iberia).

Dinarid
03-07-16, 02:10
I would like to examine the relationship between E1b1b, J1, J2, and E1b1b in forming the Afro-Asiatic family; as well as J1 and J2 interacting with Indo-European based on Indo-Aryan/Iranic branches.

Sile
03-07-16, 02:48
You mean, north of Syria? 'Geographical' Syria, that is (including parts of modern southern Turkey). And we have a number of relatively ancient Semitic languages from that area (notably, Eblaite, Ugaritic and Aramaic). Also, more accurate would be to say, "prior Phoenician colonization in the Mediterranean", because these for sure visited parts Europe (Sardinia, Iberia).

I do not know what you are trying to say.............but, the phoenician bought no semitic language to any of their colonies in the med.

bicicleur
03-07-16, 06:14
I had this thought before but thanks to Taranis argumentation I understood that it is not that easy to assume. If Natufians or Levant Neolithic spoke proto-Afroasiatic then first farmers definitely would have spread this language to Europe and it would become language of Old Europe, the Neolithic Europe. The oldest civilization in Europe is Minoan and I don't recall them speaking Afroasiatic. Possibly Basque language is of Old Europe, but then again it is doesn't belong to Afroasiatic family. Same with Etruscan Language or all Anatolian languages. There is no trace of Afroasiatic language North of Jordan or in Europe in written history.
Afroasiatic could have started to spread in Bronze Age together with Semitic People out of Arabian Peninsula or Egypt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Afroasiatic_language

Lazaridis 2016 says the Natufians were not the only first farmer population, the Iran neolithic were different people.
Furthermore he says Natufians didn't bring farming to Europe. Natufians spread farming only to Africa.

And yes, spreading of Semitic came later.

bicicleur
03-07-16, 06:21
Back to Proto-Afroasiatic, there is no agreement on the age of the language: you also have a "hunter-gatherer" position (if it is as old as bicicleur suggested, it obviously can't be the language of the first farmers), and in addition you have a "farmer" position. Or, as an alternative, you assume that only a sub-branch of Afroasiatic (no agreement here, either) that had farming vocabulary.


IMO E1b1b1 was allready in the Levant 24 ka, but they started spreading to Africa only 8 ka. If several HG Afroasiatic languages developped before the Natufians, only the language of the Natufians themselves survived and the others went extinct.

LeBrok
03-07-16, 09:59
You mean, north of Syria? 'Geographical' Syria, that is (including parts of modern southern Turkey). And we have a number of relatively ancient Semitic languages from that area (notably, Eblaite, Ugaritic and Aramaic). Also, more accurate would be to say, "prior Phoenician colonization in the Mediterranean", because these for sure visited parts Europe (Sardinia, Iberia).I'm so glad we have you around to correct my imperfect memory. :)

LeBrok
03-07-16, 10:03
Lazaridis 2016 says the Natufians were not the only first farmer population, the Iran neolithic were different people.
Furthermore he says Natufians didn't bring farming to Europe.
Sure, there is a chance that Natufians spoke Afroasiatic, but Neolithic Europeans had in most had their genes. Therefore most likely their language too. Yet, no trace of Afroasiatic in Europe.

bicicleur
03-07-16, 10:56
Sure, there is a chance that Natufians spoke Afroasiatic, but Neolithic Europeans had in most had their genes. Therefore most likely their language too. Yet, no trace of Afroasiatic in Europe.

acording to Lazaridis 2016 European neolithic had more Iran neolithic than Levant neolithic

Taranis
03-07-16, 14:37
I do not know what you are trying to say.............but, the phoenician bought no semitic language to any of their colonies in the med.


Any of their colonies? Do you think people in Carthage - Hannibal Barca included - were mute (hint: they spoke Punic, the evolved form of Phoenician)? Sorry but the Phoenicians spoke a Semitic language, more accurately a Cana'anite language.

LeBrok
03-07-16, 19:59
acording to Lazaridis 2016 European neolithic had more Iran neolithic than Levant neolithicAccording to Lazaridis this modeling is very uncertain. Also PCA shows Anatolian and European Neolithic close to Levant and Natufians but very far from Iranian Neolithic.

bicicleur
06-07-16, 21:21
According to Lazaridis this modeling is very uncertain. Also PCA shows Anatolian and European Neolithic close to Levant and Natufians but very far from Iranian Neolithic.

it doesn't prove they would have spoken the same language

LeBrok
07-07-16, 05:59
it doesn't prove they would have spoken the same languageWho?
I'm not sitting in your head, be more precise.

bicicleur
07-07-16, 09:31
Who?
I'm not sitting in your head, be more precise.

please clarify because I have no clue what you're truing to say

oh I mean

it doesn't prove European farmers would have spoken the same language like Natufians

LeBrok
07-07-16, 09:48
please clarify because I have no clue what you're truing to say

oh I mean

it doesn't prove European farmers would have spoken the same language like NatufiansYes, it doesn't prove it. However European Farmers spoke certainly Anatolian Farmer language, possibly Levant Neolithic language and possibly Natufian. If in the future it is confirmed that indeed Anatolian Farmer had majority Iranian Farmer admixture it could mean that they spoke possibly their language.

Nik
10-07-16, 22:57
Just a hypothesis, but it could be that the Eteocretan, Eteocypriot, Lemnian, Western Anatolian, Pelasgian and Paleo-Balkanic languages formed a language family of their own based on the haplogroup dispersion, but what it could have been similar to I cannot say. And its not like the options are many at that time either.

Taranis made a valid point regarding the use of the syllabic script by the Minoans, but does that really indicate a different language or simply a very early migration and an independent development of a local civilization?

The best scholars can do is focus first Greek and Albanian firstly since they both have a strong non-IE base in order to identify the non-IE words, then do the same with Etruscan, Lemnian, etc.

Taranis
11-07-16, 23:15
Just a hypothesis, but it could be that the Eteocretan, Eteocypriot, Lemnian, Western Anatolian, Pelasgian and Paleo-Balkanic languages formed a language family of their own based on the haplogroup dispersion, but what it could have been similar to I cannot say. And its not like the options are many at that time either.

Taranis made a valid point regarding the use of the syllabic script by the Minoans, but does that really indicate a different language or simply a very early migration and an independent development of a local civilization?

- Eteocretan and Eteocypriot are both scarcely attested languages (though Eteocretan may be a descendant of Minoan, that is the language of Linear A). Lemnian and Etruscan were for sure related, but any relation beyond that is highly speculative.
- What do you specifically mean by 'Western Anatolian'? The Anatolian language family was a branch of Indo-European, after all.
- "Pelasgian" is a poor 'grab-all' term for anything non-Indo-European in Greek, including loanwords from Anatolian and Semitic. There was no single 'Pelasgian' language.
- The so-called "Paleo-Balkan" languages (Liburnian, Dacian, Thracian, etc.) were all Indo-European.


The best scholars can do is focus first Greek and Albanian firstly since they both have a strong non-IE base in order to identify the non-IE words, then do the same with Etruscan, Lemnian, etc.

Albanian does not have a large lexicon of non-IE words, although it has a very large share of loanwords. The influences (in approximate chronological order) in Albanian are ancient Greek, Latin (the largest share), Gothic/East Germanic, medieval Slavic and Ottoman Turkish. Of these, only Turkish is non-Indo-European, and this influence was (obviously) relatively recent.

Garrick
12-07-16, 03:00
Albanian does not have a large lexicon of non-IE words, although it has a very large share of loanwords. The influences (in approximate chronological order) in Albanian are ancient Greek, Latin (the largest share), Gothic/East Germanic, medieval Slavic and Ottoman Turkish. Of these, only Turkish is non-Indo-European, and this influence was (obviously) relatively recent.

What it can be logical. Old Armenian, Ancient Greek, even maybe North Iranian had impact on Proto-Albanian which it is possible emerged somewhere in Anatolia-Southern Caucasus.

Later speakers of Albanian moved over Caucasus and Back sea and steppe region to Romania (mostly Moldavia region, Carpatian mountains), Moldova, Southern Ukraine.

If theory of Romanian scientists is adequate tribes of Free Dacians probably Carpi, it is possible and Costoboci, were Albanian. Free Dacians were not ethnic Dacians, they were Albanian (Carpi, Costoboci?), Sarmatian (Roxolani), Germanic (Bastarnae), Celtic (Anartes, Taurisci), etc. Balto-Slavic tribes were in region, too.

Before Romanization of Dacia Dacian/Thracian languages were main in region. And Albanian received a strong North-Thracian influence.

Albanian tribes lived near to Bastarnae who was Germanic, and they borrowed words from them. Latin words in Albanian came from Romanian, it is logical because Free Dacians lived on the border with Dacia which was Romanized (its inhabitants original language replaced with Latin).

Albainan in this time had contacts with Balto Slavic too. But it should be noted that Balto-Slavic and Thracian have similarity.

Although Albanian received a lot of words from Romanian (eastern Balkan Latin variant) it remained Satem language as Thracian, Balto-Slavic, Armenian, Iranian.

When Free Dacian tribes who spoke Albanian moved to territory of today's Albania (5-9 century) they additionaly received Slavic and Greek words, and after mass Islamization they borrowed Turkish and Arab words.

Trojet
15-07-16, 01:34
What it can be logical. Old Armenian, Ancient Greek, even maybe North Iranian had impact on Proto-Albanian which it is possible emerged somewhere in Anatolia-Southern Caucasus.

Later speakers of Albanian moved over Caucasus and Back sea and steppe region to Romania (mostly Moldavia region, Carpatian mountains), Moldova, Southern Ukraine.

If theory of Romanian scientists is adequate tribes of Free Dacians probably Carpi, it is possible and Costoboci, were Albanian. Free Dacians were not ethnic Dacians, they were Albanian (Carpi, Costoboci?), Sarmatian (Roxolani), Germanic (Bastarnae), Celtic (Anartes, Taurisci), etc. Balto-Slavic tribes were in region, too.

Before Romanization of Dacia Dacian/Thracian languages were main in region. And Albanian received a strong North-Thracian influence.

Albanian tribes lived near to Bastarnae who was Germanic, and they borrowed words from them. Latin words in Albanian came from Romanian, it is logical because Free Dacians lived on the border with Dacia which was Romanized (its inhabitants original language replaced with Latin).

Albainan in this time had contacts with Balto Slavic too. But it should be noted that Balto-Slavic and Thracian have similarity.

Although Albanian received a lot of words from Romanian (eastern Balkan Latin variant) it remained Satem language as Thracian, Balto-Slavic, Armenian, Iranian.

When Free Dacian tribes who spoke Albanian moved to territory of today's Albania (5-9 century) they additionaly received Slavic and Greek words, and after mass Islamization they borrowed Turkish and Arab words.

Here we go again with the fairy tales...

But I'm not surprised because it comes from Garrick the Serb who has posted the same fairy tale in every thread at Eupedia regarding Albanians.

Fustan
15-07-16, 01:36
Serbs are Huno-Avaric people. They also hail from the Iranian tribe Serboi which is still classified as a plausible theory on Wikipedia.

Sile
15-07-16, 02:06
Any of their colonies? Do you think people in Carthage - Hannibal Barca included - were mute (hint: they spoke Punic, the evolved form of Phoenician)? Sorry but the Phoenicians spoke a Semitic language, more accurately a Cana'anite language.

They spoke a mix of their language with Luwian ................since the Karatepe and the Cinekoy inscriptions have been found

Taranis
15-07-16, 13:14
They spoke a mix of their language with Luwian ................since the Karatepe and the Cinekoy inscriptions have been found

These are bilingual Phoenician-Luwian inscriptions from southern Anatolia. Is there any evidence of Luwian ever being spoken in Carthage, or anywhere else in the Mediterranean (hint: we have Punic inscriptions from much of the western Mediterranean)? The answer to that is no. Sorry, but Phoenician was a Semitic language, and the statement you made earlier in this thread, I'm quoting you again, is simply false:


I do not know what you are trying to say.............but, the phoenician bought no semitic language to any of their colonies in the med.

Maleth
01-08-16, 18:11
These are bilingual Phoenician-Luwian inscriptions from southern Anatolia. Is there any evidence of Luwian ever being spoken in Carthage, or anywhere else in the Mediterranean (hint: we have Punic inscriptions from much of the western Mediterranean)? The answer to that is no. Sorry, but Phoenician was a Semitic language, and the statement you made earlier in this thread, I'm quoting you again, is simply false:

also there are these from Malta:- Because they present essentially the same text (with some minor differences), the cippi provided the key to the modern understanding of the Phoenician language. In 1764, the French (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_people) scholar Jean-Jacques Barthélémy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Barth%C3%A9lemy) relied on their inscription, which used 17[n 1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cippi_of_Melqart#cite_note-5) of the 22 letters of the Phoenician alphabet, to decipher the unknown language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cippi_of_Melqart