Fatherland
Ned Stark the Boromir
- Messages
- 389
- Reaction score
- 63
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Gheg Albanian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- J2b2-L283
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H
They carry the R1b-clade not associated with Indo-Europeans/Yamnaya.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
offtopic
I don't have this conflict, simply because I do not believe the consensus of the linguists, that there was only one principal proto-IE language. My thinking is lazy and simple, so I dislike a top down proto language, which can't even produce a proper tree; can't answer the pre-Big Bang question; gets a ridiculous accumulation of linguistic components (and therefore is almost impossible to learn),when converged back in time; and only tongue acrobats can form even simple sentences out of these hmpf-grmbl-mrks PIE constructs; and has no explanation why some base vocabulary is almost strictly conserved and others is not, without any understandable pattern; and best of all needs to dig Missis Gimbutas out of her grave, shove her in a time-capsule and send her to the folks, which separated before the building of the protoIE language (but today speak IE despite their great separation to the other IE-speakers), throw an IE-dictionary onto them and tell them "From now on you speak IE! Basta!"
So in my view it didn't need R1a and R1b clashing together, founding PIE and then off they go. For me IE was an oligocentric language group from the beginning, never a single language.
/offtopic
The fact is that Basque was spoken not only in nowadays Basque country but all of the Pyrinees and Catalonia mainland, at least, where you can still find places with Basque names or the influence on Occitan/Gascon phonotactics (where, as in Basque, no word can begin by R sound) You will also find some toponymic similarities with names of mountains in Germany with the Eib- root, which may have easily kept a pre-IE name.
Also an interesting exercise is to google “strawberry”, closely linked to the land, found in the wild -thus disconnected from farming-, an ideal word to find substrates...
- Fresa, fraise, fragola in most Latin languages, different forms of -berries in Germanic languages...
- Marrubi/a in Basque,
- Maduixa in Catalan, majuixa in Occitan,
maybe even...
- Maasikas in Estonian,
- Mansikkaa in Finnish
- Martsqvis in Georgian...?
If you combine that with the fact that R1b seems to be more concentrated on the western coast of Europe -with the exception of Catalonia (at least for subclade DF27) which is the other end of the Ebro river “highway”- it looks as if R1b were gradually pushed to the edges in the same way that Gaellic were pushed to Cornwall and current Wales in Britain.
Could it be that R1b and IE languages are not related indeed? Might it be the origin was just the same IE population but with a different culture? What if, instead of having Basques resist IE influence, the last IE population waves had been lately influenced by what we know as IE languages, by the same means that have been used to explain the influence on Basque populations...In fact, Catalan population, sharing many traits with Basque one and being Iberian seemingly related to Euskara, adopted Latin easily.
View attachment 9607
Not only the Catalans, the entire Turdetana_Iberica area adopted Latin very easily.
It could be that in the Iberico_tartesica zone some of the Indo-European languages of the peninsula were spoken at the popular level, being the Iberian a cult and Mediterranean language of the elites, that having its own writing with origin seems to be Phoenician is what has been transmitted?
If it is true that Tartesica_Iberica_Vasco_Aquitana pre-Roman toponymy have quite similar.
I also think that the seafaring abilities of people 5000 years ago would have been sufficient for them to travel long distances across the Black Sea and Mediterranean. However the size of the ships would have been small and they could never have launched a massive migration or invasion by sea. Neolithic farmers certainly used ships to colonise the Mediterranean coast and islands, but I seriously doubt that the Indo-Europeans from the Pontic Steppe did, apart maybe for moving along the Black Sea coast. A small contingent of immigrants landing in France or Iberia would never have been able to take over the whole of Western Europe in a few centuries. That is just not possible. Additionally the archaeological record doesn't show any new Bronze Age or steppe culture springing out of nowhere in France or Iberia, but clearly shows a slow progression from Ukraine and Romania along the Danube, then from Germany to all Western Europe. There is not the slightest doubt about that in my mind.
Autosomally,
Basques = WHG + ENF (fairly restrictively).
Then how come their percentage of rh negatives is so much higher than both?
1. The iberoceltic migrants never conquered the Basque country. No conquest, no 'occupation' of the language.
2. The Basques in their Pyreneaen valleys had some hard time living there with lots of disasters - illness, avalanches, floods, hunger , you name it. Regular bottlenecks will be the consequences.
3. Regularly the peopling of the valleys went down and people from the surrouding lowlands migrated into the mountain valleys. This is the way some R1b-farmers came into the Basque country.
4. The isolation of the people there lead to genetic degeneration. Genetic diseases, infertility, you know. The newcomers, (maybe even carrying diseases, with which the indigenous people had some distress) with better genes were certainly procreating more successfully and therefore gradually increase in size, got assimilated within 3-4 generations, and despite their different haplogroup they became Basques, culturally and languagewise. Continued repetition of this lets the percentage of R1b grow until they are by far the most frequent haplogroup. The language is kept intact, but it will be enhanced with a lot of foreign vocabulary imported by the migrants, which obviously is the case with the Basque language.
Autosomally,
Basques = WHG + ENF (fairly restrictively). So, as their language is not IE, it must have been the language of one of those two.
Steppe = WHG +CHG
I understand your point, but that is not very accurate. Steppe is mainly EHG + CHG, and EHG by its turn ia mix of a source very similar - not necessarily identical - to WHG with a relevant contribution of ANE ancestry. Many milennia after that WHG+ANE mix, especially in linguistic and cultural terms, but even genetically, my guess is that EHG weren't very WHG-like at all any longer.
Perhaps R1b folk migrated along the Mediterranean to the Iberian Peninsula and expanded out of there as the Beaker Bell culture, with its most easterly components coming under the influence of R1a IE folks, and adopting IE language as well as IE technology that allowed them to back migrate into territory that was already substantially R1b, spreading the IE language and culture as they went, except in some R1b areas where they were never really dominant, such as Basque country. And I believe some linguists have proposed Gaelic is a Celtic language that has a Vasconic (Basque-like) substratum, which would mean a limited number of R1b Celts taking over a Vasconic R1b Ireland. OKay, that scenario may not be very probable, but neither is any other scenario for R1b, IMO.
Most of Europe became light-skinned without a considerable alteration of the autosomic admixture. The Basques demonstrate that R1b was positively selected for.3.2: The Y chromosome haplogroup has changed without a considerable alteration of the autosomic admixture and mitochondrial haplogroups. This is too difficult to accept because 90% of basques are R1b-P312, which is a too big proportion, but could be explained, for example, by a poligamous celtic ruling class.
can we see ht35 hotspots as earlier spread i.e. spread before L51 subbranches like u106 ,L21, s116 u152 and DF27 developed?
if that is the case then we can see hotspots of ht35 as original settlement points of R1b in Europe?
[...]
sea route was from Asia minor to south Greece and Albania then to south Italy, and sea coasts of France and Iberia as well as in celtic Iberia in Spain
land route was dwelling in Dacia before spreading via Danube route to west Europe
Basques are not hotspot in this original spread. So it is either that Basques were separate wave e.g. DF27 or they were subjugated or infiltretated later in more peacful times which enabled them to keep the language
[...]
If DF27 is original Basque marker, Basques could have originally been spread over all Spain (losing first Celtic Iberia to IE invaders) and France with their teritory shrinking in time due to IE speaking R1b arrivals same as we withness Basque language area shrinking in modern times. This would imply that some branches of R1b spoke non IE language. Etruscans also were non IE speakers and came from R1b rich area of Asia minor. So Asia minor must have had both non IE and IE speaking R1b branches. However DF27 not being present in Asia minor but being already there in south Greece and Sicily implies that the DF27 branch emerged after R1b moved from Asia minor to Europe. So it could be that indoeuropeastion of R1b happened in Asia minor, while DF27 escaped indoeuropisation while being settled in south Greece and Sicily. It would be interesting to investigate links between Basque language and Etruscan.
This thread has been viewed 256894 times.