Y-DNA haplogroups of ancient civilizations

There was a fairy-tale saying that Turks(ottoman, so their ancestor's uyghurs) are Troyans who emigrated into the asia after greek invasion. When i saw Uyghur Y-DNA results, it seemed a little reasonable to me. What do you think? Where did uyghurs come from?
After conquering Constantinepole,
Ottoman Sultan II. Mehmet says: "Now we took Troy's revenge."
 
There was a fairy-tale saying that Turks(ottoman, so their ancestor's uyghurs) are Troyans who emigrated into the asia after greek invasion. When i saw Uyghur Y-DNA results, it seemed a little reasonable to me. What do you think? Where did uyghurs come from?


Turkiçized Tokharians, the lot of 'em.
 
Dealing again with the myth of hg=language=race=culture. The assumption that when turkic languages -or others- were developed turkic peoples were mainly of a common race/phenotype and hg is legendary.

At least, in this case, nobody is deffending the "male extermination" theory, supported here in relation to the IE dilemma. Perhaps turkic riders were more humanitary than IE "centauros"...

I'm not denying that uygurs have IE ancestors -yes, tocharians are the best candidate-, I'm saying that the "same hg" can be involved in the genesis of different cultures and languages. Hgs don't carry an exclusivity label.
 
Dealing again with the myth of hg=language=race=culture. The assumption that when turkic languages -or others- were developed turkic peoples were mainly of a common race/phenotype and hg is legendary.

Absolutely. Turkic languages originated in Mongolia nearly 2000 years ago. Turkish people are mostly descendants of the ancient Anatolian population. Turkish culture is a melting pot that has absorbed Central Asian, Middle Eastern and European (especially Greek) cultural elements.
 
You minimize J1's frequency amongst Semitic Na7rainids.

Modern studies on Assyrians show that at least 60% of them belong to J1c3d (L147+).

Please refer me to the studies to which you make reference.

The following distribution of modern Assyrian Y-DNA is the most reliable, as of this moment:

R1b 28.00%
J1 16.00%
J2 12.00%
T 12.00%
E1b 8.00%
G 8.00%
R1a 6.00%
R2 4.00%
F 2.00%
N 2.00%
Q1 2.00%

n=50
Assyrian FTDNA Project: 41
R2 FTDNA Project: 1
23andMe: 7
Lebanon Study: 1
 
Please refer me to the studies to which you make reference.

The following distribution of modern Assyrian Y-DNA is the most reliable, as of this moment:

R1b 28.00%
J1 16.00%
J2 12.00%
T 12.00%
E1b 8.00%
G 8.00%
R1a 6.00%
R2 4.00%
F 2.00%
N 2.00%
Q1 2.00%

n=50
Assyrian FTDNA Project: 41
R2 FTDNA Project: 1
23andMe: 7
Lebanon Study: 1

Wow! Thanks for that very informative post, Humanist. I was not aware of the relative high frequency of R1b1b2 in the Assyrian DNA Project. Looks like most of it is P310-, which is not surprising, but it is another piece in the M269+ puzzle.

Fascinating!
 
Please refer me to the studies to which you make reference.

The following distribution of modern Assyrian Y-DNA is the most reliable, as of this moment:

R1b 28.00%
J1 16.00%
J2 12.00%
T 12.00%
E1b 8.00%
G 8.00%
R1a 6.00%
R2 4.00%
F 2.00%
N 2.00%
Q1 2.00%

n=50
Assyrian FTDNA Project: 41
R2 FTDNA Project: 1
23andMe: 7
Lebanon Study: 1


Check Yonan's study (60% actually referring to M304+, not L147; my bad).

L147's frequency actually turns out to be superior to that of M269 and M17 combined.
 
I found this study of Assyrian Christians by Yonan et al from 2009. It found 41% J1 (M267) and 23% R1b1b2 (M269), among other things.

Interesting that R1b1b2 was the second most frequent group among Assyrian Christians and had a much higher frequency among them than among Iraqi Muslims (who had 4.3% R1b1b2).

I couldn't find another study with the name Yonan in it, but I might have missed it.
 
Hello Gentlemen,

The Yonan study, from all indications, is a hoax. Believe me, many folks have attempted to locate the actual study, and all have failed. The individuals responsible appear to have chosen the name of the Assyrian Project Administrator, Mary Yonan (a librarian by trade), as the study's author, to lend some legitimacy to the purported findings.

Please refer to discussions on this topic on the various forums, including the DNA-Forums, and Anthropology Biodiversity Forum.
 
Hello Gentlemen,

The Yonan study, from all indications, is a hoax. Believe me, many folks have attempted to locate the actual study, and all have failed. The individuals responsible appear to have chosen the name of the Assyrian Project Administrator, Mary Yonan (a librarian by trade), as the study's author, to lend some legitimacy to the purported findings.

Please refer to discussions on this topic on the various forums, including the DNA-Forums, and Anthropology Biodiversity Forum.

It does look rather suspicious, since there is only a rather strange abstract and no link to any actual study.

Hmmm . . .
 
Where on the latter?!

I attempted to post a link to the thread, but received the following error message: "You are only allowed to post URLs to other sites after you have made 10 posts or more."

Therefore, if you will bear with me, I will paste one of the relevant responses from the thread in question, below.

The new Iranian FTDNA Project Administrator and respected forum contributor, Humata, in reference to the supposed Yonan study, wrote:

[T]he Genetic Atlas itself is a joke.

A bit of sleuthing by members from [DNA-Forums] discovered that it had some sort of connection with Stormfront.

Aside from the above, the site's references to "Eurasid" and "Arabid" Y-Chromosome haplogroups are nothing more than pseudoscience. The chart found there is not attested or displayed anywhere in the scientific community or on intellectual DNA boards. It is merely a fusion of Y-DNA haplogroups with neo-anthropology terms.

Anyone who has a serious interest in genetic genealogy should avoid that site and refrain from using it as a source.
 
The ancient Basques
Although modern Basques belong predominantly to haplogroup R1b with a minority of I2a, there is little alternative but to suppose that Neolithic Basques were I2a, prior to the Indo-European invasions (that brought R1b). Modern Basque would have retained a lot of ancient autosomal characteristics through female lineages. Modern Basque have dark hair and eyes, and it is probable that ancient I2 people from continental Europe were also dark-haired and dark-eyed, although with fairer skin that their closest cousins, the Near/Middle Eastern J2 and J1.
Ancient mtDNA indeed indicate that prehistoric Basques were closer to modern Near Easterners.
Can I play the devil's advocate there? What is the likelihood that R1b arrived in Western Europe before the Indo-European languages (ie, some time in the Neolithic), and that R1b was the dominant Y-Haplogroup amongst the Basques to begin with? This, of course, would mean that the Basques are not aboriginal to Western Europe.

I for one would hence argue, if the above hypothesis is correct, that Indo-European languages did come into the Atlantic region only with the spread of S28/U152.

But, I must admit, I always had a problem with the association of R1b with the Indo-Europeans, on the ground that the Basques, who do not speak an Indo-European language, are predominantly R1b. Now, it should be noted that there's very Basque-specific clades of R1b (M153, specifically).
 
Hungary is predominantly R1a and they don't speak Slavic. They speak Magyar that came, I guess, with N, but N now is negligible in Hungary. The point is that one exception doesn't make a rule, it could be a freaky coincidence.
 
Hungary is predominantly R1a and they don't speak Slavic. They speak Magyar that came, I guess, with N, but N now is negligible in Hungary. The point is that one exception doesn't make a rule, it could be a freaky coincidence.

I see your point, and I agree such a scenario would work. I also know that one must be careful not to overinterprete things in regard for language and haplogroup. ;)

However, the problem is that it isn't just the only exception. Today there is only Basque left, but Antiquity, there was also Iberian (which may or may not be related with Basque, but as I understand it the idea is currently unfashionable by linguists), and there was Tartessian, which was something yet entirely different.

The image that we get in ca. 200 BC is that the Iberian penninsula was only partially Celticized and that there was variety of non-IE languages extant on the penninsula.

The problem is that we get a very different image from the rest of the Atlantic region (ie Gaul and the British Isles), namely that of a region that is firmly Celtic-speaking.

I must admit, I for one am unhappy/unsatisfied with most hypotheses on the time frame of the emergence and spread of the Celtic languages. It can't have been too early, and it can't have been too late, either. The only thing that is basically for certain I would say is that the Hallstatt/La-Tene Celts were carriers of S28/U152.
 
Can I play the devil's advocate there? What is the likelihood that R1b arrived in Western Europe before the Indo-European languages (ie, some time in the Neolithic), and that R1b was the dominant Y-Haplogroup amongst the Basques to begin with? This, of course, would mean that the Basques are not aboriginal to Western Europe.

I for one would hence argue, if the above hypothesis is correct, that Indo-European languages did come into the Atlantic region only with the spread of S28/U152.

But, I must admit, I always had a problem with the association of R1b with the Indo-Europeans, on the ground that the Basques, who do not speak an Indo-European language, are predominantly R1b. Now, it should be noted that there's very Basque-specific clades of R1b (M153, specifically).

There was no time for your U152=Indo-European scenario. Basque R1b1b2 is almost exclusively P312+, and U152 is P312+. The difference in age between U152 and the other P312+ clades (and, in fact, between all of them and P312 itself) is negligible. In fact, the difference in ages of all the divisions of P310+ (which includes U106 and its clades, as well) is negligible. So, chances are, whatever Basque R1b1b2 was originally, U152 was originally, as well. Either Maciamo is right, and R1b1b2 as a whole was the vector of Indo-European in Western Europe, or R1b1b2, including U152, whether Neolithic or otherwise, was non-Indo-European.

There is just no way U152 spread Indo-European languages to Western Europe.
 
. . . The only thing that is basically for certain I would say is that the Hallstatt/La-Tene Celts were carriers of S28/U152.

I don't think that is certain at all. First, Hallstatt and La Tene are two different things. One can say that Hallstatt influenced La Tene, but they are not the same thing.

Equating U152 with Hallstatt/La Tene Celts is a theory, mostly the work of a single enthusiast. It could be right, but it could be wrong, as well. More than one person has pointed out that U152 corresponds fairly well with the expansion of Alemannic German tribes. Others have seen it as primarily Italic, since it seems to be the most frequent R1b1b2 clade in Italy, and not just in Northern Italy, but all over the Italian peninsula.
 

This thread has been viewed 700090 times.

Back
Top