If R1b comes from the east why it didn't bring I2a2 with it?

[iapetoc]

It's a well-known fact that the Semitic languages originated in some subclades of haplogroup j1.

I believe that the very first Semites were J1 & E1 people.

both semitic and Hattians languages meet in Akkadian

the one that moved south is semitic branch
the one stayed is Hattian
and the one moved west is Pelasgian
in fact Hattian could be language of J2a and G2a
while semitic could be a language of semitic j1 (compare with no semitic J1 in caucasus)

 

[Goga]

both semitic and Hattians languages meet in Akkadian

the one that moved south is semitic branch

Yes, when J1 folks moved south-westwards they met and mixed with E people and maybe that's how they evolved into Arabs and other modern Semites.

 

[Taranis]

both semitic and Hattians languages meet in Akkadian

the one that moved south is semitic branch
the one stayed is Hattian
and the one moved west is Pelasgian
in fact Hattian could be language of J2a and G2a
while semitic could be a language of semitic j1 (compare with no semitic J1 in caucasus)

No, Akkadian is the oldest attested Semitic language. It's clear however that it is very distinct amongst the Semitic languages - it may have been the first branch of Semitic to branch off, and it was considerably inluenced by Sumerian.

Hattians clearly spoke a non-IE language, which is however too poorly attested to make any better statements about it's exact relationship.

I have absolutely no idea who these Pelasgians are that you keep talking about? Minoans? Eteocretans? Mycenean Greeks (the people who spoke the language recorded in the Linear-B inscriptions)?

 

[Maciamo]

I can't imagine that R1b people lived thousands of year near cities like Catalhöyük without having contact and mixing with the cities'inhabitants

I can, because towns like Catalhöyük (not really "cities" as they held barely 10,000 people) were few and far between. Anatolia is a huge expanse of land to roam, even today, so imagine on foot, without horses, without roads, with more forests than today and on such hilly terrain. North-East Anatolia in particular is so rugged that small tribes of hunter-gatherers could have lived there pretty much undisturbed and unaware of what was happening beyond the mountains until farmers popped up one day in search of arable land to colonise.

Çatalhöyük is in South-Central Anatolia. It is about 900 km away from Trabzon in the North-East. It would take three weeks to hike from one place to the other tramping 9 hours a day with good walking shoes and knowing exactly where you are going. Without maps or roads or any idea of where you are and where you are going it could take months for Mesolithic/Neolithic people to cover such a distance. Hunter-gatherers were not particularly nomadic in regions where food was abundant like northern Anatolia. They would be rather sedentary and territorial, avoiding as much as possible to stray too far away from their prized land. Things were very different in the steppes or in deserts, but not in northern Anatolia. Farmers were naturally sedentary and territorial, with the difference that they could sustain more population growth and constantly advance to colonise new lands. It was just a few kilometres each year, but they would eventually have reached northern Anatolia, and perhaps forced the local R1b to move north across the Caucasus.

 

[Maciamo]

It's a well-known fact that the Semitic languages originated in some subclades of haplogroup j1.

I believe that the very first Semites were J1 & E1 people.

I first thought too that Semitic languages originated among J1 people, but it is fairly clear that Semitic languages are just an offshoot of Afro-Asiatic languages, which originated in North-East Africa (like E1b1b) and spread to North-West Africa and the Middle East (also like E1b1b). Therefore I think that the J1 people of South-West Asia as well as J2 people of West Asia progressively lost their original languages to the profit of Semitic languages. Eventually only Arabic and Hebrew survived.

 

[Maciamo]

Yes, the Proto-Semitic speakers were very likely J1, but the actual proto-speakers of the greater Afro-Asiatic language family (which, in addition to the Semitic family, includes the Berber languages, Egyptian, Chadic, as well as a few other language families at the Horn of Africa) were not. Haplogroup E1b1b is a far better candidate for Afro-Asiatic as a whole.

Besides, in my opinion, (Western) European R1b is not originally from Anatolia. What speaks heavily for this is the fact that the outgroup of R1b-M269 (which, after all, makes up virtually all Western European R1b) is R1b-M73, which is the Central Asian branch of R1b. In my opinion, the origin of R1b, at least of R1b-P297 (which is the combined clade of both the Western European and Central Asian branches of R1b) is most likely the Caspian-Uralic region.

Then how do you explain that R1b1c (V88) is found in Africa, and R1b1c1 (M18) is pretty much limited to the Middle East, especially the Levant ? These are very old subclades that attest that R1b were in the Middle East region rather than in Central Asia at the end of the last Ice Age circa 12,000 years ago. The Middle East would have been much greener back then. As the climate warmed up, they would have moved north to Anatolia to escape the hot weather, the desertification and tropical diseases (like malaria) that were advancing northward, and perhaps also to follow the game they were used to hunt as new unfamiliar animals from Africa penetrated the Middle East when it started getting hotter. Only a minority of R1b stayed behind, and were soon met by E1b1b and T people moving north with global warming.

 

[iapetoc]

No, Akkadian is the oldest attested Semitic language. It's clear however that it is very distinct amongst the Semitic languages - it may have been the first branch of Semitic to branch off, and it was considerably inluenced by Sumerian.

Hattians clearly spoke a non-IE language, which is however too poorly attested to make any better statements about it's exact relationship.

I have absolutely no idea who these Pelasgians are that you keep talking about? Minoans? Eteocretans? Mycenean Greeks (the people who spoke the language recorded in the Linear-B inscriptions)?

cut and paste you want to open a thread about them?

 

[Taranis]

Then how do you explain that R1b1c (V88) is found in Africa, and R1b1c1 (M18) is pretty much limited to the Middle East, especially the Levant ? These are very old subclades that attest that R1b were in the Middle East region rather than in Central Asia at the end of the last Ice Age circa 12,000 years ago. The Middle East would have been much greener back then. As the climate warmed up, they would have moved north to Anatolia to escape the hot weather, the desertification and tropical diseases (like malaria) that were advancing northward, and perhaps also to follow the game they were used to hunt as new unfamiliar animals from Africa penetrated the Middle East when it started getting hotter. Only a minority of R1b stayed behind, and were soon met by E1b1b and T people moving north with global warming.

Yes, it's plausible for R1b to have been in the Middle East earlier, but what is critical is the relationship of these R1b clades and also the age of them: according to your own website, R1b-M73 and R1b-M269 are about 9,500 years old (I've seen other values which state an older date). This is near the end of the last ice age. Both are subclades of R1b-P297. It's very clear that R1b-P297 originated in the Caspian-Uralic region at the end of the last ice age, and not in the Middle East.

 

[spongetaro]

they would have moved north to Anatolia to escape the hot weather, the desertification and tropical diseases (like malaria) that were advancing northward, and perhaps also to follow the game they were used to hunt as new unfamiliar animals from Africa penetrated the Middle East when it started getting hotter.

Or to escape the Black sea deluge

 

[Shetop]

I agree that 25% is probably a bit too high and assume something around 20%. But I dont believe that all of it is misprediction because otherwise why only among Kurds? And this in Nebel and Nasidzes studies?

In Nasidze paper, predictions were made from 9 STR markers. From what I know 17 markers is minimum to have a good prediction. Regarding that same study, don't you find it strange there is not even one Kurd with J1?

Nebel study from 2001 I haven't even looked at, I think it is to old to deserve credibility.

 

[spongetaro]

This is also simple. The Reason why Western Europe has less of the "West Asian" component is because the "West Europe" component it self is already like a branch of the "West Asian". The closest component to "West Asian" is indeed the "West European"!

Really? This would mean that people from Turkey or the Caucasus are genetically closer to French and Irish people than to the Greeks?

 

[Maciamo]

I have split the discussion about Kurdish I2a and what derived from it.

 

[Alan]

Really? This would mean that people from Turkey or the Caucasus are genetically closer to French and Irish people than to the Greeks?

No you are mixing things up. I am talking about components not folks. Just because Turks are West Asian this doesent mean they belong pred. to "West Asian" component. The same with South Europeans just because the Mediterranean element is the strongest among South Europeans it doesent mean this is the only represented among them.

See it like this. if we had two Groups. One of them only belonging to "West Asian" component and the other only "Mediterranean" than obviously the Group with "West Asian" would be closer to West Europeans. But in reality their is almost no South European Group which only belongs to "Mediterranean" component. Lets take Spaniards as example. they have almost 40% of the "West European" component.

We are not talking about West Asian Groups. But the West Asian component which is rather representative for Georgians and North Caucasians.

Turks on the other hand belong rather to the West Asian component with strong input by the Mediterranean component(usually between 20-30%)and some South West input while South Europeans mainly belong to Mediterranean component with strong (10-30%) West /East European and West Asian (5-40%) and some smaller South West Asian input.

It is all about frequencies. And not because of the Components. The West Asian component indeed is the closest to West and East European while even more so to the West European. The Mediterranean component on the other hand seems to stand between South West Asian and West Asian-East/West European.

Here a map

 

[spongetaro]

But in reality their is almost no South European Group which only belongs to "Mediterranean" component. Lets take Spaniards as example. they have almost 40% of the "West European" component.

Sardinian people have almost 100% of " south European" component (I guess it means "Mediterranean" to you)

 

[Alan]

Sardinian people have almost 100% of " south European" component (I guess it means "Mediterranean" to you)

Your mixing things up again. I am not talking about the "South European" component of the first dodecad admixture tool but the new V3 tool where there is no "South European" component any more.

Still even the South European component wasnt that close to Northwest European than West Asian.

The Sardinians of the new v3 admixture program have ~30% West European admixture

 

[Knovas]

Sardinians were showed more than 96% Southen European and almost 98% total Europe in the K=10 run. However, this last run changed so much, note first that the average is more or less 85% total Europe, wich is too low compared to K=10. I don't know what to think about this population, since I also saw photos and they can look very different Caucasian types, going from Jewish/Middle Eastern appearence, to a tpycal Central European looking, although this is quite rare in them.