Definition of Haplogroup J1

Specifically, I would be interested in what exact subclade Tuscan J1 is, and if it is also possible to link it to the Caucasus or Anatolia. This would make a very strong case that the Etruscans indeed came from Anatolia.

Unfortunately I don't know. I checked the FTDNA projects for J, J1*, and J1c3 and there are members of various clades in Italy, but no member specified from Tuscany. A lot of the Sicilian and Campanian J1 is J1c3 though.

Regarding J1 as a "Semitic" or even "Arab" marker, it should be clear that it isn't exclusively that, even though without a doubt the conquests of the Umayyad Caliphate in the 7th and 8th centuries helped the spread of the Haplogroup. Also, it's been clear that J1 isn't the original "Semitic" Haplogroup either, because the Semitic language family is part of the greater Afro-Asiatic family (which includes the Berber languages, Egyptian and a few African language families such as the Chadic languages), and it seems far more likely that the original Proto-Afro-Asiatic speakers were predominantly carriers of Haplogroup E.

I totally agree with that. What I meant was that J1c3(d) was especially common among speakers of Semitic languages, but I do not doubt that the origin of Semitic languages lies within haplogroup E1b1b. Actually both Hebrew and Arabic originated in the southern Levant, near the Sinai, where the percentage of E1b1b is the highest in the Middle East.
 
Unfortunately I don't know. I checked the FTDNA projects for J, J1*, and J1c3 and there are members of various clades in Italy, but no member specified from Tuscany. A lot of the Sicilian and Campanian J1 is J1c3 though.

That is most unfortunate indeed. I still hope that eventually we will find out.

Also, it shouldn't be really surprising if you find a lot of J1c3 in Sicily, given how it was Muslim-ruled/influenced for a considerable time, and the concentration/distribution of J1 in Sicily seems to correlate with that. With regard for Campanian J1, I am a tad surprised though.

I totally agree with that. What I meant was that J1c3(d) was especially common among speakers of Semitic languages, but I do not doubt that the origin of Semitic languages lies within haplogroup E1b1b. Actually both Hebrew and Arabic originated in the southern Levant, near the Sinai, where the percentage of E1b1b is the highest in the Middle East.

Yeah, I see. But don't forget about Akkadian. It is the oldest attested Semitic language (and after Ancient Egyptian, the oldest attested Afro-Asiatic language), but it is in quite some respects the most abberant branch of the Semitic languages, sort of mirroring the situation with Hittite inside Indo-European.
 
We live in a very strange and nasty world.

I think most people in Europe, West Asia and Caucasus don't like the idea to be in J1 haplgroup, because they don't want to be associated with the Arabs or Turks. So what do they do? They rename it. And make it very special and very different to the Arabic subclade.

But in Africa (like North Sudan or Ethiopia) people are very proud if they are allocated in J1 haplogroup. Because according to them J1 is a 'Caucasoid' haplogroup from the Middle East.
 
We live in a very strange and nasty world.

I think most people in Europe, West Asia and Caucasus don't like the idea to be in J1 haplgroup, because they don't want to be associated with the Arabs or Turks. So what do they do? They rename it. And make it very special and very different to the Arabic subclade.

But in Africa (like North Sudan or Ethiopia) people are very proud if they are allocated in J1 haplogroup. Because according to them J1 is a 'Caucasoid' haplogroup from the Middle East.

I am a proud son of an endangered branch of Cro-Magnon who demands Europe be returned to its original inhabitants!

Er... I mean... how silly it is to be proud of a haplogroup. Even if an individual has an Arabian subclade of J1, it doesn't make them Arabian, and they can go on being white nationalists or whatever it is that people who are proud of their haplogroup do.
 
I am a proud son of an endangered branch of Cro-Magnon who demands Europe be returned to its original inhabitants!

Er... I mean... how silly it is to be proud of a haplogroup. Even if an individual has an Arabian subclade of J1, it doesn't make them Arabian, and they can go on being white nationalists or whatever it is that people who are proud of their haplogroup do.
Some time ago I was searching for some info on google and I opened a forum from Africa were some individuals from an African country were very pleased that their nation had some J1 or something like that.
 
Every system of classification is a political attitude. We could have some of the major European haplogroups just classified as [IJ], [PQR], [E]. Some people had a shock of reality when they discovered that the R haplogroup was not the "Old Paleolithic European Man" or the "Indo-European Maker" but they could be only a lost Asian branch that came from the depths of Asia as members of the node K (xLT) M526 (formerly MNOPS) seen only as recent latecomers to Western Europe. So everything can be relative and the different types/clades/SNPs of J1 can be as different as the different types of R1 or E found in Africa and in Europe, for instance.
 
We live in a very strange and nasty world.

I think most people in Europe, West Asia and Caucasus don't like the idea to be in J1 haplgroup, because they don't want to be associated with the Arabs or Turks. So what do they do? They rename it. And make it very special and very different to the Arabic subclade.

But in Africa (like North Sudan or Ethiopia) people are very proud if they are allocated in J1 haplogroup. Because according to them J1 is a 'Caucasoid' haplogroup from the Middle East.

The difference between J1c3-J1b-J1a is as big as the difference between R1a-R1b-R2a. So it is as important to be mentioned as the difference between other Haplogroups.
 
Every system of classification is a political attitude. We could have some of the major European haplogroups just classified as [IJ], [PQR], [E]. Some people had a shock of reality when they discovered that the R haplogroup was not the "Old Paleolithic European Man" or the "Indo-European Maker" but they could be only a lost Asian branch that came from the depths of Asia as members of the node K (xLT) M526 (formerly MNOPS) seen only as recent latecomers to Western Europe. So everything can be relative and the different types/clades/SNPs of J1 can be as different as the different types of R1 or E found in Africa and in Europe, for instance.
You're absolutely right. And I do 100% agree with you.

The only thing I hope is that people don't mix politics and subcutaneous feelings with true science! Also some corrupted politicians use science in a very evil way. Haplogroups are a great 'tool' for the sincere scientists to 'investigate' history but a dreadful weapon in the hand of some individuals.
 
J1 is passion and war (as every haplogroup is but J1's can be more sectary in my opinion). In the last Millenium different types of J1's with different religions and political projects fought different sectarious wars. In Portugal the Christian J1 fought the Muslim J1 and the Jewish J1, the last one not only in Iberia but also in Brazil because part of the Portuguese Jewish community, a notable community, went to Amsterdam and they decided to attack Brazil with the help of the Dutch WIC and they lost the war in Brazil too, so nobody can be a J1 without a kind of agenda related to a historical form of "identity politics". The ethno-national clusters can be quite important here.
 
The difference between J1c3-J1b-J1a is as big as the difference between R1a-R1b-R2a. So it is as important to be mentioned as the difference between other Haplogroups.

It is difficult to compare J1 subclades to R1. R1b is much more defined and is similar to measuring in cm whereas R1a is less defined and is similar to measuring in meters. J1a/b/c are poorly defined and are like measuring in km. R2a doesn't come close yet..
 
J1 is passion and war (as every haplogroup is but J1's can be more sectary in my opinion). ..............so nobody can be a J1 without a kind of agenda related to a historical form of "identity politics". The ethno-national clusters can be quite important here.


You sound like a J1. :wink:
 
It has recently been found that some parts of the Caucasus have the highest percentage of J1 in the world (nearly 100% in some ethnic groups) and that the greatest genetic diversity of J1 was around Kurdistan and the Caucasus, not Arabia. This changes completely our understanding of J1's origins.

The Caucasus is actually a region of low YSTR diversity as far J1 is concerned and we can see quite clearly a bottleneck effect linked to endogamy which led to J1*'s high frequencies amongst North-east caucasian speakers.
The two places where diversity is found are the Zagros and Ethiopia [100% of Oromo J1 is J1* and 29% of Amharic J1 were J1*] (as pointed out by Chiaroni and Tofanelli's papers).
And there was no such thing as "Kurdistan" at the time...
I should also remind you that Oman has relative diversity too...

I totally agree with that. What I meant was that J1c3(d) was especially common among speakers of Semitic languages, but I do not doubt that the origin of Semitic languages lies within haplogroup E1b1b. Actually both Hebrew and Arabic originated in the southern Levant, near the Sinai, where the percentage of E1b1b is the highest in the Middle East.

There is only one E1b1b1 subclade which seems involved with the Semitic language family and that is E1b1b1c1 (M34+), a marker whose frequency follows neatly that of J1c3 (though being much less common, it peaks amongst Dead Sea Jordanians [bottleneck effect is likely to have played its part] and Ethiopian Semitic speakers while being found homogeneously amongst other Semitic populations)... Yet you forget one crucial element: Frequency doesn't provide a clue towards a marker's initial source.

As for Semitic being some sort of E1b1b1 product, you must also consider that languages are products not only of isolation but most certainly of interaction... And when addressing a language spoken by nomads, pastoralists and herder-hunters, you must take into consideration the fact that interaction is a fundamental part of its survival (isn't most of humanity speaking a nomad-derived language? Indo-european? Turkic? Semitic? Austroasiatic? With the notable exception of Chinese, most of the languages spoken nowadays were first spoken by nomads!), which is why Akkadian (first semitic language attested) also shares features with North-east Caucasian languages such a Chechen.

In proto-semitic vocabulary, we find many words for hills, mountains, bitumen and naphta (which are only found in the northern Levant)... A word for ice too, which suggests that PS probably has something to do with mountaineous areas... Like the Zagros where J-P58 and E-M34 have their greatest diversity.

Chiaroni cited Kitchen's Bayesian analysis of Semitic language and also mentionned E-M123 (E-M34's parent clade) in these terms: "Although J1e (J1c3) is one of the most frequent haplogroups in the region, haplogroup E-M123 also shows its highest frequency and haplotype diversity in regions of the Fertile Crescent, decreasing towards the Arabian Peninsula. This co-distribution pattern of Y-chromosome haplogroups J1e and E-M123 resembles mtDNA haplogroups J1b and (PreHV)1 distributions that also display low levels of diversity despite their high frequency in Saudi Arabia."
So why the need to speak only of E1b1b?
Why is everyone so unrealistic?
Wasn't J1 found amongst pre-hispanic Guanches (Fregel et al)?
Haven't you wondered why it has high YSTR diversity in Ethiopia?
The concept that E1b1b1 (M35) is the only marker linked to Afroasiatic is kind of shallow as you have to explain R1b1c (V88) and J1's frequencies amongst non-semitic Afroasiatic speakers too.

Not even that, other haplogroups such as T1a* or J2a4h could be linked with the spread of Semitic languages.
 
Last edited:
Here is an interesting question: where was Proto-Semitic spoken? Semitic languages are spoken at the horn of Africa (specifically South Semitic ones, such as Amharic), and with the exception of of the Semitic family, all branches of Afro-Asiatic are only found in Africa. Therefore, one can speculate on the possibility that may be Proto-Semitic was indeed spoken at the Horn of Africa. At least, I do not want to rule out that possibility.

Regarding Akkadian, it is the most divergent branch of the Semitic languages, in many respects mirroring to how the Anatolian language (e.g. Hittite) are most divergent amongst Indo-European.
 
Here is an interesting question: where was Proto-Semitic spoken? Semitic languages are spoken at the horn of Africa (specifically South Semitic ones, such as Amharic), and with the exception of of the Semitic family, all branches of Afro-Asiatic are only found in Africa. Therefore, one can speculate on the possibility that may be Proto-Semitic was indeed spoken at the Horn of Africa. At least, I do not want to rule out that possibility.

Regarding Akkadian, it is the most divergent branch of the Semitic languages, in many respects mirroring to how the Anatolian language (e.g. Hittite) are most divergent amongst Indo-European.

Proto-Semitic has common words for "camel" and "horse", the latter was introduced in Africa when Semitic languages were already being written in Mesopotamia... There are indications of earlier horse domestication in the arabian peninsula but we still need confirmation.

Not only that, there are common words for "bitumen" and "naphta" that are really only found in the northern parts of the fertile crescent... Semitic also shares many characteristics with Nakho-Daghestanian languages (Avar, Chechen, Lezgi, etc...) whose speakers have high J1* (w/DYS388=13 repeats) frequencies.

Last but not least, I advise you to take into consideration Andrew Kitchen's Bayesian analysis of Semitic aswell as Nicholls and Ryder's reanalysis of Kitchen's data which both support an origin in the Levant (the first paper was cited in Chiaroni's paper "The emergence of Y-chromosome haplogroup J1e among Arabic-speaking populations").

Edit: Support for an African origin mainly stems from the highly divergent Gurage and Archeological record (Mushabian and Fayyum connections) as well as the African location of all other Afroasiatic language families (yet they all have ancient Caucasian and Sumerian words).
 
Proto-Semitic has common words for "camel" and "horse", the latter was introduced in Africa when Semitic languages were already being written in Mesopotamia... There are indications of earlier horse domestication in the arabian peninsula but we still need confirmation.

Not only that, there are common words for "bitumen" and "naphta" that are really only found in the northern parts of the fertile crescent... Semitic also shares many characteristics with Nakho-Daghestanian languages (Avar, Chechen, Lezgi, etc...) whose speakers have high J1* (w/DYS388=13 repeats) frequencies.

These are very good points that speak indeed in favour of an origin in the Fertile Crescent, this absolutely convinces me, at least if these words in question are attested in most or all branches of the Semitic languages, and must be assumed to have been present in Proto-Semitic. There remains however the question of how the Semitic languages relate with the other branches of Afro-Asiatic.

I also heard about the possible earlier domestication of the horse. This is indeed significant.
 
What? Is there 25.9% of hg. J1 (Y-DNA) in the States?

87881889.jpg


http://www.cmj.hr/2007/48/4/17696299.htm
 
isn't J1 a jewish marker as well as other levant people or am I wrong

Although there is some native J1 in Europe, I do also think that it's from the Jews and some from other Middle Easterners. Not so many folks from the Caucasus settled in the States, so it is probably from the Near East.

But 25% is just too much. How is it possible when it is estimated that in the States live for about 5 – 6 million Jews?

I just don't get it.
 
What? Is there 25.9% of hg. J1 (Y-DNA) in the States?

That's an old article. The sample was not representative of the entire population of the country/region but it was a biased sample directed towards J1's in some populations. All J1's SNPs and subclades are 458.2, so it can be considered as a kind of general J1 SNP and usually 458.2 is recognized as a J1 marker.
 

This thread has been viewed 59450 times.

Back
Top