J2b2-L283 (proto-illyrian)

TaktikatEMalet said:
What do people here make of the 2 j2b l283 samples from tunisia 500bc?
Click to expand...

You have already been banned on Anthrogenica for your off topic and non sense trolling. If you don't like genetic evidence or the thread's topic then don't repeatedly troll this thread and go somewhere else.
 
TaktikatEMalet said:
What do people here make of the 2 j2b l283 samples from tunisia 500bc?
Click to expand...

It was already explained to you here in two different posts. Simply, their Y phylogeny (as well as autosomal clustering) strongly suggests they are not native to the Tunisian coast, and their more distant origins likely lie in the (eastern) Adriatic, before any recorded Phoenician or Greek colonies.

I would kindly ask you to please stop derailing threads with off topic and nonsensical posts. I see you just got banned at the other forum..

For some reason, you have a long history of not accepting evidence as is with regards to J2b-L283, as user Polska summed it up pretty well a couple of pages ago:

Polska said:
All of his posts are basically the same, in case you haven’t noticed.

“We should be careful about calling the L283 Z38240 kid from Veliki Vanik an Illyrian because this sample is too old.” Even though the thread mentions proto Illyrians. Fair enough, let’s wait for more samples.

”We really need Messapian samples from Italy, that will settle this.” Daunian paper is released with several L283 guys who are Daunian. Panic sets in. Need another excuse.

“We really need samples from Iron Age west Balkans, that’ll really seal the deal.” Patterson paper hits with tons of Iron Age L283 from western Balkans. That’s when full blown insanity took the wheel. “That’s too far west/too far north.”


It’ll never stop. And this would be one of the things that can be difficult about DNA testing, especially with ancient DNA. Sometimes people are taught something through the generations that turns out not to be the case. Happens all the time. This causes something called expectation bias. As a result, it can sometimes be difficult to come to terms with hard data, even if it’s staring one right in the face. Some people can see things for what they are, others will continue to deny reality no matter what.
Click to expand...
 
Trojet said:
It was already explained to you here in two posts. Simply, their Y phylogeny as well as autosomal clustering) strongly suggests they are not native to the Tunisian coast, and their origins likely lie in the (eastern) eastern Adriatic.
I would kindly ask you to please stop derailing threads with off topic and nonsensical posts. I see you just got banned at the other forum..
Click to expand...

Do you have the other samples found in that tunisian study or was it just these 2?

Phoenicians nor ancient greeks were not native to the tunisian coast either so not sure what you suggest with this. How is it off topic when I am talking about j2b l283 samples?
 
mount123 said:
You have already been banned on Anthrogenica for your off topic and non sense trolling. If you don't like genetic evidence or the thread's topic then don't repeatedly troll this thread and go somewhere else.
Click to expand...

What is off topic about my post exactly? You keep bringing up WHG lines in every topic you post in, try to not go off topic here too
 
Riverman said:
A second language is not the same. In Central Europe there were many places in which people could speak more than one language, at least a bit, but they still defined themselves by what primary/mother tongue they spoke and under normal, non-modern state/civilisation conditions, language is a primary marker for ethnic identity.
Click to expand...

Central and Southern Germany as an example always spoke a Celtic language.............these celts where eventually replaced by Germanic people from the north by the time imperial Rome started .........Germanic is the second language here
 
Olti27 said:
Does mother tongue relate to ethnicity? You know that people aren't born bilingual.
Click to expand...


it is called mother tongue, because it is what the mother spoke being with the young children everyday.......what the mother spoke the child spoke ..............it is not father tongue because he was not always around, be it hunting or at war
 
Archetype0ne said:
The more I think of this, the bigger deal it seems. Given TMRCA and everything, assuming its not a mislabel, this can really be the key to the whole L283 if its indeed a progenitor... After which point we might as well talk about deep history, since all that would be left would be pre civilization HGs.
Click to expand...

Kapisa said:
These are different samples
Supplementary Table VII. Ancient genomes dataset
NEO283 Kotias Klde Georgia_UpperPaleolithic thisStudy 25,635 XX
NEO281 Kotias Klde Georgia_Mesolithic thisStudy 9,723 XY J2b
KK1 Kotias Klde Georgia_Mesolithic Jones_NatureCommunications_2015 9,720 XY J2a
SATP Satsurblia Georgia_Mesolithic Jones_NatureCommunications_2015 13,255 XY J1


NEO281 has a coverage of 3.61 vs 11.83 of KK1 and 1.18 of Satsurblia. Latitude and Longitude coordinates are also different.
Click to expand...

This is as huge as it gets I feel for J2b! and hopefully L283!
 
Polska said:
3.61 for the coverage. Is that good or not so good?
Click to expand...

Trojet would be the one to answer that. But at this point I feel anything helps... especially given 10,000 year bones.

Asked over the other forum
Kale said:
The major branches downstream each have a handful of snps defining them. As such that coverage is good enough that I don't think there will be any problem getting farther than J2b if there's something to find.
Click to expand...
 
Archetype0ne said:
Trojet would be the one to answer that. But at this point I feel anything helps... especially given 10,000 year bones.

Asked over the other forum
Click to expand...

Ok, thanks so much for keeping us in the loop, Archetype! Pretty cool, unexpected development with this NEO281 guy. I’ve been fixating on the Southern Arc paper (who the hell knows when that thing comes out) and the other big paper on the Caucasus for so long now, this one kind of snuck up out of nowhere.
 
Polska said:
Ok, thanks so much for keeping us in the loop, Archetype! Pretty cool, unexpected development with this NEO281 guy. I’ve been fixating on the Southern Arc paper (who the hell knows when that thing comes out) and the other big paper on the Caucasus for so long now, this one kind of snuck up out of nowhere.
Click to expand...

These are the best sorts of papers. Like the Daunian paper etc, out of nowhere full of surprises*.

Hawk said:
Not quite sure, but it looks like it. Southern Arch paper or let's say one of the three split papers from Southern Arch. They split because probably it was too huge of a paper and different contexts to include in a single release.
Click to expand...

This is what happened to the Arch paper :D
3 papers now it seems


PS: Caucasus paper? That ought to be interesting!
 
Archetype0ne said:
These are the best sorts of papers. Like the Daunian paper etc, out of nowhere full of surprises*.



This is what happened to the Arch paper :D
3 papers now it seems


PS: Caucasus paper? That ought to be interesting!
Click to expand...

This is the other study from the Caucasus. It has 68 samples spanning 20 different archaeological cultures:

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/10/coming-soon.html

Henry Shephard, one of the authors of the Southern Arc study (or 3 separate studies now), publishes his resume online for all to see. One thing that seemed weird was that his resume originally listed the journal Science as the publisher. Well, now it shows the journal Nature, not Science. I think they’re 2 different journals. Just seemed interesting that the journal changed. He’s kind of the NW Black Sea expert. I believe he’s from Moldova. Archaeology and linguistics seem to be his specialties. If they’re reworking the entire study and divvying it up into 3 sections, that might explain the delay.
 
What's going on with that J2b sample? I'm hearing they mislabelled it or something?

I think if this is found in those HGs it will pretty much prove J2b2-L283 was a minor lineage in the Indo-European invasions taken from CH-shifted Hunter Gatherers.
 
enter_tain said:
What's going on with that J2b sample? I'm hearing they mislabelled it or something?

I think if this is found in those HGs it will pretty much prove J2b2-L283 was a minor lineage in the Indo-European invasions taken from CH-shifted Hunter Gatherers.
Click to expand...

J2b2-L283 moved from Southern Caucasus to Northern Caucasus, initially arising likely within Late Neolithic Shulaveri-Shomu culture and then probably Leyla-tepe and similar cultures which expanded on Northern Caucasus during Chalcolithic/Early Bronze Age. After that, it's up to speculation how it got IE-zed, whether from North Caucasus or South/Western Central Europe. The Illyrian language per Matzinger and some German linguists can be easily classified as an offshot of Bell Beaker since it is considered as East Alpine Block of languages, it would make sense considering the autosomal affinities of so far Illyrians. So the IE-zation in South/West Central Europe is safe to go, prior to that what language they spoke whether a Yamnaya IE or a North Caucasus-like language, who knows. The Bell Beaker contact in South/Western Central Europe would make sense in a timeline between 2500-1500 B.C approximately.
 
Last edited:
enter_tain said:
What's going on with that J2b sample? I'm hearing they mislabelled it or something?
I think if this is found in those HGs it will pretty much prove J2b2-L283 was a minor lineage in the Indo-European invasions taken from CH-shifted Hunter Gatherers.
Click to expand...

The paper states this is a new sample from Kotias Klde that's J2b. At this point, it's only a suspicion that he may be J2a, as the dating, site, mtDNA, is exactly the same as previously published KK1 which is J2a-Y12379. So it's possible he is some paternal relative of the J2a sample and the software got a false positive for a J2b SNP or something like that. The coordinates are reported a few miles apart but they should be in the same general site, as Kotias Klde cave doesn't cover an area spanning a few miles.

We've emailed the authors to see if they can provide further clarification, but so far no response. The reported coverage at 3.6x is very good for an ancient sample, even better than NEO806 (the "early Messapian"). So we will know for sure what he is once the raw data are published, along with the deeper classification. I'm personally thinking this is a new J2b sample, perhaps even an "early" M241>L283, but we'll see..
 
Trojet said:
The paper states this is a new sample from Kotias Klde that's J2b. At this point, it's only a suspicion that he may be J2a, as the dating, site, mtDNA, is exactly the same as previously published KK1 which is J2a-Y12379. So it's possible he is some paternal relative of the J2a sample and the software got a false positive for a J2b SNP or something like that. The coordinates are reported a few miles apart but they should be in the same general site, as Kotias Klde cave doesn't cover an area spanning a few miles.
We've emailed the authors to see if they can provide further clarification, but so far no response. The reported coverage at 3.6x is very good for an ancient sample, even better than NEO806 (the "early Messapian"). So we will know for sure what he is once the raw data are published, along with the deeper classification. I'm personally thinking this is a new J2b sample, perhaps even an "early" M241>L283, but we'll see..
Click to expand...
in post # 1315 you stated he ( this sample ) was a Peucetian ,the pot makers .................you now refer him to Messapian .................which is it ?
 
torzio said:
in post # 1315 you stated he ( this sample ) was a Peucetian ,the pot makers .................you now refer him to Messapian .................which is it ?
Click to expand...

In the post you quoted, I simply refered to him as an early Messapian, as in early Iapygian, without specifying a tribal region. See:

"Some ancient sources treat Iapygians and Messapians as synonymous, and several writers of the Roman period referred to them as Apuli in the north, Poediculi in the centre, and Sallentini or Calabri in the south."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iapygians

"Messapic (/mɛˈsæpɪk, mə-, -ˈseɪ-/; also known as Messapian; or as Iapygian) is an extinct Indo-European language of the southeastern Italian Peninsula, once spoken in Apulia by the Iapygian peoples of the region: the Calabri and Salentini (known collectively as the Messapii), the Peucetians and the Daunians."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messapic_language

Ni2zZLr.jpeg


In the original post, I only suspected he would be closer to the Paucetian tribal region, but it's hard to say based on the location as he seems to be in between. The paper doesn't explicitly mention his tribal region.
 
Trojet said:
In the post you quoted, I simply refered to him as an early Messapian, as in early Iapygian, without specifying a tribal region. See:
"Some ancient sources treat Iapygians and Messapians as synonymous, and several writers of the Roman period referred to them as Apuli in the north, Poediculi in the centre, and Sallentini or Calabri in the south."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iapygians
"Messapic (/mɛˈsæpɪk, mə-, -ˈseɪ-/; also known as Messapian; or as Iapygian) is an extinct Indo-European language of the southeastern Italian Peninsula, once spoken in Apulia by the Iapygian peoples of the region: the Calabri and Salentini (known collectively as the Messapii), the Peucetians and the Daunians."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messapic_language
Ni2zZLr.jpeg

In the original post, I only suspected he would be closer to the Paucetian tribal region, but it's hard to say based on the location as he seems to be in between. The paper doesn't explicitly mention his tribal region.
Click to expand...
ok
"In the time of Strabo the territory occupied by the former Peuceti lay on the mule-track that was the only connection between Brindisi and Benevento.[7] Pre-Roman ceramic evidence justifies Strabo's classification of Daunii, Peucetii and Messapii, who were all speakers of the Messapian language. There were twelve tribal proto-statelets among the Peucetii, one of which is represented by modern Altamura.


http://www.asciatopo.altervista.org/apulia.html
 
I hear that J2b got confirmed? This means that J2B2-L283 was a minor-IE lineage then. If someone can elaborate what specific clade it was that'd be great.

Even in 23andme they talk about this being a "farmer lineage" lol. They think only R is IE. I think pretty much all Y-DNA in Europe today is Indo-European. J2B2 down, now EV13 to prove. G/T died out.
 
enter_tain said:
I hear that J2b got confirmed? This means that J2B2-L283 was a minor-IE lineage then. If someone can elaborate what specific clade it was that'd be great.

Even in 23andme they talk about this being a "farmer lineage" lol. They think only R is IE. I think pretty much all Y-DNA in Europe today is Indo-European. J2B2 down, now EV13 to prove. G/T died out.
Click to expand...


it means he went to Italy from modern Croatian lands like the other Daunians
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 494805 times.

Back
Top