How did the Basques become R1b

vandalorum said:
R1 (or R1b) came to India and return home to Europe. Not all were traveling. R1a is a result of this journey to east as R1b can be, but R1b is more this "Aryan" than R1a people. For example "sanskrit" was written by local people (r1a) in their language - indo-iranian with trace in "slavic" language, which still exist, the first R1b can be Basque language, which is almost extinct (exist only in Basque community).
Click to expand...

I don't think "Aryan" means what you think it means. The Aryans were the Iranian speaking invaders of India 3500 years ago, and they were probably mostly R1a.
 
vandalorum said:
R1 (or R1b) came to India and return home to Europe. Not all were traveling. R1a is a result of this journey to east as R1b can be, but R1b is more this "Aryan" than R1a people. For example "sanskrit" was written by local people (r1a) in their language - indo-iranian with trace in "slavic" language, which still exist, the first R1b can be Basque language, which is almost extinct (exist only in Basque community).
Click to expand...
"Unwanted" sons = R1a of R1 fathers were able to speak only local - "mother" tongue. Childrens always learn mother language. And when there is no "father", they constantly speak indo-iranian. Of course not all r1a are "sanskrit" speaking, for example Pasthuns. But they met other ethnicity and religion.
 
vandalorum said:
I mean I (i) Y-DNA
Click to expand...
Haplogroup I:
Time of origin: 25,000-30,000 years BP
Possible place of origin: Europe
Frequency: represents nearly one-fifth of the population of Europe. It can be found in the majority of present-day European populations with peaks in Northern and South-Eastern Europe. Haplogroup I-M170 Y-chromosomes have also been found among some populations of the Near East, the Caucasus, Northeast Africa and Central Siberia.

Exclusive to the "Hebrews" how?
 
John Doe said:
Haplogroup I:
Time of origin: 25,000-30,000 years BP
Possible place of origin: Europe
Frequency: represents nearly one-fifth of the population of Europe. It can be found in the majority of present-day European populations with peaks in Northern and South-Eastern Europe. Haplogroup I-M170 Y-chromosomes have also been found among some populations of the Near East, the Caucasus, Northeast Africa and Central Siberia.

Exclusive to the "Hebrews" how?
Click to expand...

1. Possible place - yes, possible but notproven.
2. Because when they started http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus they go to many territories
 
vandalorum said:
And how sounds names in Sweden? something like Johans son, Issak son, we have land of Dan - Danmark... it is a big hidden story
Click to expand...
The etymology of Denmark according to Wikipedia:
"The etymology of the word Denmark, and especially the relationship between Danes and Denmark and the unifying of Denmark as a single kingdom, is a subject which attracts debate.[21][22] This is centred primarily on the prefix "Dan" and whether it refers to the Dani or a historical person Dan and the exact meaning of the -"mark" ending. The issue is further complicated by a number of references to various Dani people in Scandinavia or other places in Europe in Greek and Roman accounts (like Ptolemy, Jordanes, and Gregory of Tours), as well as mediaeval literature (like Adam of Bremen, Beowulf, Widsith, and Poetic Edda).Most handbooks derive the first part of the word, and the name of the people, from a word meaning "flat land",[23] related to German Tenne "threshing floor", English den "cave", Sanskrit dhánuṣ- (धनुस्; "desert").[23] The -mark is believed to mean woodland or borderland (see marches), with probable references to the border forests in south Schleswig.[24]
The first recorded use of the word Danmark within Denmark itself is found on the two Jelling stones, which are runestones believed to have been erected by Gorm the Old (c. 955) and Harald Bluetooth (c. 965). The larger stone of the two is popularly cited as Denmark's baptismal certificate (dåbsattest),[25] though both use the word "Denmark", in the form of accusative ᛏᛅᚾᛘᛅᚢᚱᚴ "tanmaurk" ([danmɒrk]) on the large stone, and genitiveᛏᛅᚾᛘᛅᚱᚴᛅᚱ "tanmarkar" (pronounced [danmarkaɽ]) on the small stone.[26] The inhabitants of Denmark are there called "tani" ([danɪ]), or "Danes", in the accusative."

One can't date this word beyond the 9th-10th century C.E, and obviously not all the way to the 13th century B.C.E.
 
John Doe said:
The etymology of Denmark according to Wikipedia:
"The etymology of the word Denmark, and especially the relationship between Danes and Denmark and the unifying of Denmark as a single kingdom, is a subject which attracts debate.[21][22] This is centred primarily on the prefix "Dan" and whether it refers to the Dani or a historical person Dan and the exact meaning of the -"mark" ending. The issue is further complicated by a number of references to various Dani people in Scandinavia or other places in Europe in Greek and Roman accounts (like Ptolemy, Jordanes, and Gregory of Tours), as well as mediaeval literature (like Adam of Bremen, Beowulf, Widsith, and Poetic Edda).Most handbooks derive the first part of the word, and the name of the people, from a word meaning "flat land",[23] related to German Tenne "threshing floor", English den "cave", Sanskrit dhánuṣ- (धनुस्; "desert").[23] The -mark is believed to mean woodland or borderland (see marches), with probable references to the border forests in south Schleswig.[24]
The first recorded use of the word Danmark within Denmark itself is found on the two Jelling stones, which are runestones believed to have been erected by Gorm the Old (c. 955) and Harald Bluetooth (c. 965). The larger stone of the two is popularly cited as Denmark's baptismal certificate (dåbsattest),[25] though both use the word "Denmark", in the form of accusative ᛏᛅᚾᛘᛅᚢᚱᚴ "tanmaurk" ([danmɒrk]) on the large stone, and genitiveᛏᛅᚾᛘᛅᚱᚴᛅᚱ "tanmarkar" (pronounced [danmarkaɽ]) on the small stone.[26] The inhabitants of Denmark are there called "tani" ([danɪ]), or "Danes", in the accusative."

One can't date this word beyond the 9th-10th century C.E, and obviously not all the way to the 13th century B.C.E.
Click to expand...

Now everyone is mixed. And one word could have different meanings.
 
vandalorum said:
And accidentally I1 is about 5000 years old http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I-M253#Origins
and compare it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_calendar
Click to expand...
I1 according to Eupedia:

Haplogroup I1 is the most common I subclade in northern Europe. It is found mostly in Scandinavia and Finland, where it typically represent over 35% of the male Y-chromosomes. Associated with the Norse ethnicity, I1 is found in all places invaded by ancient Germanic tribes and the Vikings. Other parts of Europe speaking Germanic languages come next in frequency. Germany, Austria, the Low Countries, England and the Scottish Lowlands all have between 10% and 20% of I1 lineages.

Again, seems unlikely to be connected to an ancient near eastern population. :-/
 
vandalorum said:
Now everyone is mixed. And one word could have different meanings.
Click to expand...
You got a point there, but the world wasn't that mixed 1,200 years ago, or indeed, 5,000 years ago.
 
John Doe said:
I1 according to Eupedia:

Haplogroup I1 is the most common I subclade in northern Europe. It is found mostly in Scandinavia and Finland, where it typically represent over 35% of the male Y-chromosomes. Associated with the Norse ethnicity, I1 is found in all places invaded by ancient Germanic tribes and the Vikings. Other parts of Europe speaking Germanic languages come next in frequency. Germany, Austria, the Low Countries, England and the Scottish Lowlands all have between 10% and 20% of I1 lineages.

Again, seems unlikely to be connected to an ancient near eastern population. :-/
Click to expand...

I1 never was near eastern population, but J are/were. J is Semitic = half Hebrew and fully Jews. Because Jews/Semites are one, Hebrews are second (or first) and Khazars (some R1a) are third.
German language (and ethnicity) is a mix of I1 (+I2a), R1b and R1a people.
Old Norman (not todays Scandinavian) language has many similarities with "slavic" language. Places (towns) like Złotów, Złotniki etc. which have złoto - gold in name have nothing to do with gold but with Old Norman and todays Scandinavian word "slott" - castle. I have many more examples for this.
The real Slavs are mix od I2a and R1a (Scythian Z-280 and Sarmatian M-458) people.
Germans (and Scandinavians) are more R1b, I1 and R1a (Z-284) mix.
And english (german) language is in use in Great Britain and Ireland as portuguese language is in use in Mozambique. But people in British Isles have to much R1b to be called "germanic".
 
vandalorum said:
I1 never was near eastern population, but J are/were. J is Semitic = half Hebrew and fully Jews. Because Jews/Semites are one, Hebrews are second (or first) and Khazars (some R1a) are third.
German language (and ethnicity) is a mix of I1 (+I2a), R1b and R1a people.
Old Norman (not todays Scandinavian) language has many similarities with "slavic" language. Places (towns) like Złotów, Złotniki etc. which have złoto - gold in name have nothing to do with gold but with Old Norman and todays Scandinavian word "slott" - castle. I have many more examples for this.
The real Slavs are mix od I2a and R1a (Scythian Z-280 and Sarmatian M-458) people.
Germans (and Scandinavians) are more R1b, I1 and R1a (Z-284) mix.
And english (german) language is in use in Great Britain and Ireland as portuguese language is in use in Mozambique. But people in British Isles have to much R1b to be called "germanic".
Click to expand...

I Y-DNA people were enslaved by Egypt, then they escaped to Europe as 10 Lost Tribes of Hebrew, because Judah and Beniamin are Semites other are true Hebrews.

These are just my hypothesis of course
 
vandalorum said:
I1 never was near eastern population, but J are/were. J is Semitic = half Hebrew and fully Jews. Because Jews/Semites are one, Hebrews are second (or first) and Khazars (some R1a) are third.
German language (and ethnicity) is a mix of I1 (+I2a), R1b and R1a people.
Old Norman (not todays Scandinavian) language has many similarities with "slavic" language. Places (towns) like Złotów, Złotniki etc. which have złoto - gold in name have nothing to do with gold but with Old Norman and todays Scandinavian word "slott" - castle. I have many more examples for this.
The real Slavs are mix od I2a and R1a (Scythian Z-280 and Sarmatian M-458) people.
Germans (and Scandinavians) are more R1b, I1 and R1a (Z-284) mix.
And english (german) language is in use in Great Britain and Ireland as portuguese language is in use in Mozambique. But people in British Isles have to much R1b to be called "germanic".
Click to expand...

"never" is bad word, sorry, but i never learned english at school, I meant that all I (Y-dna) population was enslaved and all escaped to Europe. And J Y-DNA --> sons of I haplogroup stayed in near east and began argue.
 
vandalorum said:
I meant that all I (Y-dna) population was enslaved and all escaped to Europe. And J Y-DNA --> sons of I haplogroup stayed in near east and began argue.
Click to expand...
In parallel universe. ;)

Hg I is about 20-30 thousand years old. Exodus if happened, happened 4-5 thousand years ago. Where was hg I hiding for first 20 thousand years?
 
vandalorum said:
"never" is bad word, sorry, but i never learned english at school, I meant that all I (Y-dna) population was enslaved and all escaped to Europe. And J Y-DNA --> sons of I haplogroup stayed in near east and began argue.
Click to expand...

K1, K2a and k2b evolved 30000 plus years before R even formed.............and I haplogroup was another 6000 years older than that

Considering R had to wait for its parent P to form first ...........

you need to come to terms with what was recently accepted worldwide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragroup
see link for the new June 2014 groupings
 
LeBrok said:
In parallel universe. ;)

Hg I is about 20-30 thousand years old. Exodus if happened, happened 4-5 thousand years ago. Where was hg I hiding for first 20 thousand years?
Click to expand...
I am not genetic scientist, but all this terms is still changing. And if I is 20-30 years old that I1 in Wikipedia is 5000 years old whereas on Eupedia older. This reminds me soviet time - when fact not pass for theory that is worst for facts. And they changed fact to their theory. I am not against Eupedia, but I do not now who to belive in this I1 case.
Maybe I was born in Europe but I1 started just 5000-6000 years ago and were enslaved? It is just my hypothesis.
 
But as I wrote before. Basques could be the oryginal R1b with original R1b language. Back to the topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 255543 times.

Back
Top