Haplogroup I and Germanic people

[how yes no 2]

Again, the type found in Poland, Russia etc is largely in M458. That is absent in Germanic/Scandinavian lands. There is a difference...

really?
read the table from supplement info of that paper...
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v18/n4/extref/ejhg2009194x4.pdf

west Netherlands - out of 4.3% R1a, all is M458
southeast Denmark - 4.3% is M458, 8.7% other R1a
east Germany - 10.6% of 29.8% R1a is M458
central Germany - 10.5% out of 15.8% is M458
south Germany - 6.6% out of 11% is M458
....
west Poland - only 6.7% out of 26.7% is M458
east Poland - only 15.4% out of 46.2% is M458
central Ukraine - only 5.4% out of 46.4% is M458
central Belorusia - only 4% out of 42% is M458
south Russia - only 11.9% out of 62.2% is M458
Serbia - only 3.5% out of 15.9% is M458
Croatia mainland - only 2.8% out of 26.9% is M458
....

in fact, looking at data, your statement is laughable attempt to separate R1a of west Europe from R1a of east Europe... while it is obviously same area of influence of R1a with few streams of subbranches thoroughly mixed across Europe...

and btw. Underhill never speaks of different R1a in west and east Europe, but about differences between R1a in Europe and the one in Asia.....issue is that R1a in Iran, India, Pakistan...does not have M458....which makes M458 very European development.... thus, completely opposite from yours and Maciamo's claim in that thread...

next time read the paper and not Maciamo's post about the paper...

 

[Yorkie]

I am not prepared to engage in debate with you if you 'dare' me to prove things, and refer to my argument as 'laughable'. Usually, you and I get on fine so I am surprised at your change of attitude. The forum is for debate not 'life or death' battles.

I stand by what I said. The type of R1a1 found in Germany and Scandinavia is different to that found in the 'eastern' lands of Poland and Russia. The R1a1 in Germany and Scandinavia was already there in the Corded Ware period, and was not from Poland. The recent Eulau remains show this- the R1a1 found was near the German modal, with close matches to west Europeans.

 

[how yes no 2]

I am not prepared to engage in debate with you if you 'dare' me to prove things, and refer to my argument as 'laughable'. Usually, you and I get on fine so I am surprised at your change of attitude. The forum is for debate not 'life or death' battles.

I stand by what I said. The type of R1a1 found in Germany and Scandinavia is different to that found in the 'eastern' lands of Poland and Russia. The R1a1 in Germany and Scandinavia was already there in the Corded Ware period, and was not from Poland. The recent Eulau remains show this- the R1a1 found was near the German modal, with close matches to west Europeans.

this is not about you, in general I do respect a lot your reasoning on this forum....
this is about this particular unargumented claim that you keep making and that is laughable as it is based on reading Maciamo's post and not on paper that Maciamo has misinterpreted....Maciamo is knowledgable person, but as most other people he tends to see what he wants to see...and in this case he has just misinterpreted that paper.... that is not really a problem, as everyone can misinterpret something... problem is that you have read his misinterpretation and taken it for granted, and as a result you keep claiming something that is just not based on facts...

R1a1 in Germany, Poland and Scandinavia cannot be separated based on paper of Underhill, because neither the text, nor the supplement data of that paper, indicates such a split.... from that paper you can only conclude that there is difference between spread of R1a in Europe and in Asia, and that difference is that M458 is lacking in Asia....... now, it is very laughable when you say that you agree with Underhill in something that he never said... It is as if I would say that I agree with you that elephants are animals whose skin color has pattern of white stripes on pink background...

R1a in Europe are people of same origin...we can debate about timelines when they settled certain areas, we can divide them in subbranches and subbranches of subbranches, and try to trace their voyage...we can debate about their original culture... e.g. my opinion is that their original culture was not Slavic, as I am pretty sure that Slavic language and culture is due to spread of I2a2...I associate R1a with Scythians, Sarmatians, ancient Macedonians....in later period some of those people became Germanic, some Slavic....

we can debate about many things....but it makes no sense if you keep insisting that Underhill claimed something that he did not claim... if you claim someone claimed something, you need to be able to prove that...otherwise your argument is worthless... than we can as well make discussions of type: I agree with Churchill that all English are liers... or I agree with Charles Darwin that English people are distinguished from other people by their skin that is green colored and decorated with big blue and red rotating spots...

btw. considering attempts to see R1a as Slavic and haplogroup I as Germanic, and R1b as Celtic, important thing to keep in mind is also that split of proto-Indo european language to Slavic, Celtic and Germanic was much much more recent in time compared to timeline of splits of those haplogroups...
those cultures and languages are relatively recent development...

however, tribal names might be preserved for longer times, and I think that tribal name Germans (which is something completelly different from Germans of today or even from Germanic people/languages/cultures) might be related to haplogroup I, because I believe that province of Kerman (also Kermania, Germania, Zermanya) in Persia, Iran, is the location of original source of haplogroup I (the shape of province matches haplogroup I* spread and looks as very likely place of origin for haplogroup I).... this Germania/Kerman related name was still preserved in Gomer people of Asia minor whose last settlement in Cappodocia and traditional location north of Black sea do match spread of I2a2...

my guess is that I* came to existence in Persia, that branch of it settled areas around Black sea and that from there a branch went towards Scandinavia... I1 probably developed somewhere on way from Black sea to Scandinavia, while I2 developed around Black sea.... I2 has later spread as indicated by jdanel in thread http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26211
in two directions: I2b2 and I2a2-Isles developed and spread along northern route following Dniester, while I2a2-Dinaric settled southern route along Danube.... those spreads were for long time physically separated by Carpathians which resulted in separate spreads......and I guess I2a1 is earlier spread to south

 

[jdanel]

R1b didn't arise in Anatolia. It just spread to Europe from there. It isn't sure where exactly it first appeared, but in my opinion the most likely place between Central Asia and Mesopotamia around 20,000 years ago. Have a look at this supposed migration map of R1b through the ages. R1b is still present in the northern Caucasus nowadays, and its subclades are all older than those found in Western Europe. So it is not a back migration. Same for the Middle East and Central Asia.

How it is that the R1b went from the Ukraine Refuge, up the Danube through the middle of the I2a2a, and out the west end of the basin, leaving the I2a2a in situ and uneffected?.

 

[how yes no 2]

How it is that the R1b went from the Ukraine Refuge, up the Danube through the middle of the I2a2a, and out the west end of the basin, leaving the I2a2a in situ and uneffected?.

It may be that I2a2 was above Black sea at the time and still not along Danube... R1b went around them (see how R1b is absent in area north of Black sea) and than along the Danube... I2a2 spread later along Danube... but more likely the R1b that went through Caucasus took northern path, while Danube path was taken by R1b that entered Europe from Asia minor...

 

[how yes no 2]

I2a in north Africa is I2a1...

but who could have spread it there?

I think it might be Garamantes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garamantes

tribal name is very alike to Germans

In the 1960s, archaeologists excavated part of the Garamantes' capital (modern Germa, about 150 km west of modern-day Sebha) and named it Garama (An earlier capital, Zinchecra, was located not far from the later Garama.). Current research indicates that the Garamantes had about eight major towns, three of which have been examined as of 2004. In addition they had a large number of other settlements.
....
The Garamantes were farmers and merchants. Their diet consisted of grapes, figs, barley and wheat. They traded wheat, salt and slaves in exchange for imported wine and olive oil, oil lamps and Roman tableware. According to Strabo and Pliny, the Garamantes quarried amazonite in the Tibesti Mountains.
....
The ruins include numerous tombs, forts, and cemeteries. The Garamantes constructed a network of underground tunnels and shafts to mine the fossil water from under the limestone layer under the desert sand. The dating of these foggara is disputed, they appear between 200 BC to 200 AD but continued in use until at least the seventh century and perhaps later.[1] The network of tunnels is known to Berbers as Foggaras. The network allowed agriculture to flourish, but used a system of slave labor to keep it maintained.

The Garamantes were probably present as tribal people in the Fezzan by 1000 BC. They appear in the written record for the first time in the 5th century BC. According to Herodotus, they were "a very great nation" who herded cattle, farmed dates, and hunted the "Ethiopian Troglodytes", or "cave-dwellers" who lived in the desert, from four-horse chariots.[2] Roman depictions describe them as bearing ritual scars and tattoos. Tacitus wrote that they assisted the rebel Tacfarinas and raided Roman coastal settlements. According to Pliny the Elder, Romans eventually grew tired of Garamantian raiding and Lucius Cornelius Balbus captured 15 of their settlements in 19 BC.


By around 150 the Garamantian kingdom (in today's central Libya (Fezzan), principally along the still existing Wadi al-Ajal), covered 180,000 square kilometres in modern-day southern Libya. It lasted from about 400 BC to 600.
The decline of the Garamantian culture may have been connected to worsening climatic conditions. What is desert today was once fairly good agricultural land and was enhanced through the Garmantian irrigation system 1,500 years ago. As fossil water is not a renewable resource, over the six centuries of the Garamantian kingdom, the ground water level fell.[citation needed] The kingdom declined and fragmented.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garamantes

 

[Yorkie]

The Garamantians are related to Berbers, and I think that any similarity of the name to Germans is highly likely to be a phonetic accident. If they carry M26 I2a1, there may be some connection to Iberia, Spain. The clade appears to have been founded in Iberia, and it does not appear to have any Germanic connection. I can't see one at any rate. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that it is almost certain that this M26 I2a1 came from the Iberian peninsular with no involvement of Germanic peoples whatsoever.

Glad to see that we are talking about I haplogroup again...

 

[how yes no 2]

The Garamantians are related to Berbers, and I think that any similarity of the name to Germans is highly likely to be a phonetic accident.

Garamantes are mixed in Berbers nowdays...
they do not exist as separate people...

and Berbers do correlate with I2a1 spread...

If they carry M26 I2a1, there may be some connection to Iberia, Spain. The clade appears to have been founded in Iberia, and it does not appear to have any Germanic connection. I can't see one at any rate. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that it is almost certain that this M26 I2a1 came from the Iberian peninsular with no involvement of Germanic peoples whatsoever.

Glad to see that we are talking about I haplogroup again...

you do not understand, I never claimed that they are Germanic in culture or language....
what I speak of is that tribal name Germans is being related to ancient history of haplogroup I, same as tribal name Serbs is....

now, as I explained in previous posts Gomer are considered forefathers of Germans... but Gomer/Cimmerian locations in Asia minor and above Black sea are matched with I2a2...now we have Garamantes that were likely I2a1 dominant...... in my opinion this is good indicator of shared tribal name (which doesnot neceserilly indicate same culture and language, as culture and language can change...) Germans accross haplogroup I branches...

on other hand we have Sardinia/Serb/Sarbans/Suebi/Swedes as another stream of names stemming from haplogroup I.... note that this is also not about culture but about preservation of tribal name.....

well, note that modern town nearest to discovered capital of Garamantes bears name Sebha....

I do not think those are coincidences...

anyway, speaking of prehistoric Iberia

look at hotspot of I2a1

hotspot are Carpetani ...but look at position just next to them on south... tribe peculiarry named Germani...now, you may call it coincidence...but in my view, this is yet another indicator of my theory that in ancient history people did tend to preserve tribal names while their cultures and languages were much more easily changed...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Iberia_300BC.svg

 

[kronach]

I speak romanian and I can asure you that there are more similarities between romanian and germanic languages than between italian or spanish and germanic languages. BTW I speak spanish and russian as well.

friend = prieten
dad = tata

The problem of western europens is that you don't know much about East Europe and their languages. Most of easterners visited at least once the West Europe and they can compare better who is who, besides this they know some english, some german, some french and so on, so they can compare western languages with their eastern ones. How much of you know russian, ukranian, romanian and so on? Russian have a lot of common words with all germanic languages, especially with northern brench, it seems like russians are slavonized germanic people. I also visited Spain, France, Italy, Germany and I can say that the most handsome people live in Ukraine, Russia, Belarus.