Basques not indoeuropeans?

My proposal of invention is:
Imagine that all am?rindians of North America disappears or is crossed, and then they find strange people who does not speak English, with a strange physical appearance, and their name also is strange, it is the Scotsmen.
Therefore savant a little more brilliant than the others, decrees that they are the am?rindiens true, and that their language is the genuine Paleolithic language.


the 19th century was an epoch when they had classified of language under IE the name of and it was the running for whom will discover the first, the Paleolithic population, and a language which did not belong to the latin or Slavonic.....but in reality nobody indeed knows IE and nobody speaks it and has ever intended it to speak.
 
Sorry, but Maju's charts are misleading. The first 'proven' samples of Haplogroup H in Europe are in the Late Neolithic "Rossen Culture" in Central Europe only. And the Rossen Culture shows clear signs of early "Indo-Europeanesque" ingression it their burial habits and agricultural package.
Not saying they were Indo-European, but a diffusion of IE people or pre-IE people and ideas were making their way into Europe at that time.

H1 has its highest diversity, basically everywhere but Spain and France. H3 has its highest diversity in North Africa and the Middle East.

Maju's contention that R* samples in the Magdalenian are actually H just doesn't work given the divesity and age of H - from another place.


If a red well recently on a forum that were found 1 mt-U BUT ALSO 2 mt-H in madgalenian Spain!
as a whole, 50% of last paleolithical Iberia would have been mt-H, giving a 44% at neolithical time... could someone confirm it?
 
If a red well recently on a forum that were found 1 mt-U BUT ALSO 2 mt-H in madgalenian Spain!
as a whole, 50% of last paleolithical Iberia would have been mt-H, giving a 44% at neolithical time... could someone confirm it?

No !
and I find nothing in the sense of it or what pretends Maju. mtDNA-H1-H3-map.jpg

H1 and H3 never was found in the m?solithique either Paleolithic, but on earlier at the end of neolithique, or then I missed a lot of information.
mtDNA-L-map.jpg
being can he blends with MtDNA L ?
 
My proposal of invention is:
Imagine that all am�rindians of North America disappears or is crossed, and then they find strange people who does not speak English, with a strange physical appearance, and their name also is strange, it is the Scotsmen.
Therefore savant a little more brilliant than the others, decrees that they are the am�rindiens true, and that their language is the genuine Paleolithic language.


the 19th century was an epoch when they had classified of language under IE the name of and it was the running for whom will discover the first, the Paleolithic population, and a language which did not belong to the latin or Slavonic.....but in reality nobody indeed knows IE and nobody speaks it and has ever intended it to speak.

I am not sure of what you mean here about I-E, P-I-E or ...?
What I'm sure of is all the classified I-Ean languages share or had shared a lot of basic words, syntax, morphologic traits - there is no "complot" here I think -
basque language is very very different, as for basic words as for syntax, showing just some peculiarities that could have survived as substrata heritage among new celtic languages (a few traits) - but we find more syntaxic affinities I think between semitic or hamitic languages with new celtic ones, whatever the caution we have to take concerning some possible covergences -
I made the hypothesis (a try, no more) of proto-basque speaking tribes coming along with early I-Eans through Northeast Europe and then central Europe, and sharing by geographical origin a lot of common genetic traits - only one of several possibilities - maybe they spoke a language that participated to the proto-I-E language formation, along with a more southern group of languages from S-E Caspian???
I think we lack yet more data to be sure of our judgment and to be more precise
I 'm amazed by the self security of some opinions concerning this interesting but confusing problem of opposed languages with akin genetic basis

 
I put here some thoughts about autosomals poolings - it concerns in some part the Basques and the Celts and others peope and aspects...because as we know whatever the angle of analysis we choose all our threads concern mankind History or are linked to it - so I hope I shall be excused!

Sometimes I am surprised by some analysis of countries autosomals distributions, from one way of pooling to another – I know (or I believe I know) these poolings are in a big part arbitrary – but I would have prefered, as the subpopulations numbers were increasing, that the previous groupings (unless they were proved to be very inadapted) were kept and just broken down, without remove too much their first borders with other groupings – but it is not the way things are running (I speak for the most about Dodecad, I have red very little about details of other poolings as made by Britains DNA (spite I am client), by Eurognes...
by instance, I made (and others also did) some speculations about the 'gedrosia' component in Dodecad, but the poor component disappeared from later more detailed analysis of Dodecad, or appeared very lowered down – all that could question the worth of this kind of analysis even if we can take some valuable conclusions from it -
I was astonished by the Dodecad K9 or 10 (I don't find my notes) where we found 'basque' and 'sardinian' almost «pure» components: is that possible? Surely not – sometimes the new «components» formed upon a greater ancient one can be finer grained, sometimes they seem a new mixture without any homogeneity – When we find a 'basque' population (not component) firstable broken into 'north-european' and 'south-european' and after the same population with only 1 component (almost) and we look at the distribution of this «pure» basque component among other populations, we see some interesting results; the question is: these 'basque' %s we see by instance in the Isles or Scandinavia are they genuine basque component or an undetermined component common to 'basque' population and northwestern populations??? the same reasoning with 'sardinian' or other typical population where «population» is almost equal to «component»... -
when I put the distributions of 'mediterranean' opposed to 'west-asian' I see a western + northern geographic distribution for the former, being Sard people on this side -
when I put the distributions of 'basque' opposed to 'sardinian', it is 'basque' which takes this western and northern place but here the population of Sardinia is «centered» with South-East -
when 'gedrosia' component is in the game (but I recall it varies according to K...') its distribution as opposed to 'caucasian' is less simple: we see high %s in Basque country, Norway, Sweden, Cornwall, Ireland, Western Scotland and Orcades, but the opposed is not exactly in South-East (comprised into it Iran, Near-Eastern, Caucasus and Anatolia populations) but in Sardinia, Greece, Bulgaria and more surprising Lithuania, Russia, Belarus and Poland: as if (at first sight and speculation) 'gedrosia' would be more akin to 'basque' than to 'sardinian' and as if a wave from the Steppes would have erased 'gedrosia' in Eastern Europe, North and South... - even putting 'mediterranean' along with 'gedrosia' and 'caucasian' does not change the order of things, only 'gedrosia' has lower %s -


I think we can imagine something as:
a small component, we can find very far in North and North-East of Europe lands, is common to Basques, Scandinavians and Finnic people: I think in a paleolithical population that went northwards after LGL, surely of 'cromagnon' affiliation – evidently, other surrounding close regions have this old component, but less visible – the basque population has too an other northern component found among the 'north-europe' or 'northwestern european', at low level, as have almsost all the countries of Europe and even countries from Western Asia or Caucasus – the principal component among Basques is a western 'mediterranean' one, maybe there before Neolithic (we could thing in a Brünn-Capellid direct phylum, but it is very unsure and would be scarce; maybe a first wave of same phylum as 'sardinian' but isolated there little time before, gracilized descendants of an 'eurafrican' type of Eastern Mediterranea, of a more remote same origin as 'brünn-combe-capelle' but came there through South and not through North, and very distinct from 'cromagnon' concerning bones -
Sardinians have it, at very lower levels – the 'sardinian' component contains an other sub-component I would name 'central-mediterranean', but that was rather 'pan-mediterranean' at some stage of history – maybe more evolved lower statured form of the «basque mediterranean» I spoke about just before. -
&: the 'chancelade' type played surely a big role in the formation of western 'mediterraneans' of variable statures (1m65 to 1m72 I think) but all of them with common features: high narrow faces spite broad enough cheekbones (bizygoma), very narrow jaws, the height been linked to the upper facial part for the most, high narrow skulls, high and large enough orbits (higher and narrower than the «cousins» of 'capelle-brünn' phylum) and a forehead (frontal) a bit steeper than these last «cousins» too, as well as for the brows ridges: in short, more «evolved» or «gentler»: the descendants of this 'chancelade' (partly mixed with previous people more cromagnoïd) could be linked to Tardenoisian spread, and coming from East Mediterranea (I reserve my opinion concerning possible Y-HG link) – the same type, mixed with more 'arabian'-like types same of remote origin but more gracilized) came again during early Neolithic, I think – It seems having reached Basque country at maritime Megalithics times? I have some difficulty to «analyse» the La Braña crania 1 (7000 BC in Leon, NW Spain) because I have only a picture, almost taken from face but not totally, and from the top: at first sight, and I believe it presents a strong 'cromagnon' network of features and maybe something else akin to the 'c-capelle-brünn' phylum or to the 'chancelade-like' tardenoisian people, hard to say, but very different as a whole from the Loosbourg mesolithical skull... were all of them Y-I people? I have some doubt... the autosomals mixture I can read give a 71,9% 'north-european', a 24,8% 'mediterranean' and a 3,2% 'paleo-african' components for La Braña 1: which could be the 'cromagnon' aspect linked to? 'N-Euro' or 'Med'??? I choose 'N-Euro' - all the way if this 'Med' is not the 'basque' component, the 'Med' admixture proves very well gene flow from South or South-East was already efficient at Mesolithic times unless there had been some exchanges of females with agricultors? - the 'paleo-african' seems to me linked to 'Med'... (but it recalls me also the «negroid» modification upon a 'cromagnoid' basis among the 'grimaldi' types who still had descendants in Mediterranea at Eneolithic-Chalcolithic times: when came first this negroid features? I do not know for now)


concerning 'gedrosia', left aside a slight element of 'south-asian', it could be a more archaïc and extended wave of 'westasian' before a «sister» branch knew some new mutations and selection around Caucasus-Zagros, this late version coming maybe with some agriculturalists but maybe more peri-Black Sea people with some kind of Bronze Age Indo-Europeans?; so we could economize a special northern route for Y-R1b+'gedrosia'?!? (I confess this explanation by an archaïc unchanged form is very dubtful)... - at first sight 'gedrosia' in northern and western Europe seems independant from the neolithical revolution, and the question is «when?» - its paucity in northeastern Europe (even very more striking when compared to 'caucasian') seems showing an erasing by Steppic people from East – but Finns have no 'gedrosia', then??? Either a maritime megalithic introgression or an early introgression with the first Indo-Europeans (+ some indo-europeanized tribes? Y-R1b?), came from lands closer to Caspian??? all of them achieved their long travel in north-atlantic Europe!
The first scenario could confirm 'gedrosia' was maybe more largely spred in ancient time around South-Caspian, South-Caucasus, before demic introgressions came from the very Caucasus region, spreading or reinforcing an akin but yet differenciated component ('caucasian' << drift in mountains) southwards – History tell us about these colonizations from North in Near-Eastern after Neolithic – why not a 'gedrosia' taste among Elamits and even Sumerians?
I confess I prefer the northern route!

have a good evening all of you - I'm sorry, it is my aperitive time!
 
MOESAN you have good one ideas there!
And I top up in your idea that all DF27 group can be language IE was speaker of a prototype language of Basque, and as forms around Kuban (maikopka), then according to your idea they could think that a part of the group migrant R1b would be crossed out of this zone of influence. and this group shall then have become DF27. Therefore this language which is also with form ouralic as language IE avoids the indo-Europeanization and rest in its initial form or has evolve in another way; while other personness are subjected influence and harmonization and goes towards a different evolution. Why not?
And even if we seem ridiculous, I find very interesting and credible idea.

Chance! it was found ?tzi (the homo-findus) and he is an old Sardinian of 3500 years or 3000 years (I forgot) and here is of the poor for theory of basco-Sardinian, and therefore since this theory take water gravely, further to analyses genetics: Nonexistent G2a1b and K1 of markers as much to the basques (see basques ancient, Aldaita necropole) as to Finnish, who have nothing commune there also!
Very as you I am unseated when Eutest de Eurogens classifies basques customer genetic analyzes: half German/ Basque half. They can wonder where they took their reference Basque, Basque standard.

I think that there is confusion between Basque and iberian and if it arrives within the same business company of statistics then c " a suffering is for us the customers.
Iberian is I2a1 as 30 % of Sardinian are I2a1 and 30 % still of Sardinian are G2a3.
 
There is a difference between Slavs and Slavic language. In Mozambique they speak portuguese for example. Russians only speak slavic, or only they are real Slavic (i do not know). Now some new for You, old for date of birth article: type on searcher engine: "LINGUISTIC CONNECTIONS BETWEEN BASQUES AND SLAVS (VENETI) IN ANTIQUITY " I am not allowed to post links.
btw. I don't speak english, I just can read it.
 
There is a difference between Slavs and Slavic language. In Mozambique they speak portuguese for example. Russians only speak slavic, or only they are real Slavic (i do not know). Now some new for You, old for date of birth article: type on searcher engine: "LINGUISTIC CONNECTIONS BETWEEN BASQUES AND SLAVS (VENETI) IN ANTIQUITY " I am not allowed to post links.
btw. I don't speak english, I just can read it.

Basque, I-E Veneti, Slavs


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Vandalorum: There is a difference between Slavs and Slavic language. In Mozambique they speak portuguese for example. Russians only speak slavic, or only they are real Slavic (i do not know). Now some new for You, old for date of birth article: type on searcher engine: "LINGUISTIC CONNECTIONS BETWEEN BASQUES AND SLAVS (VENETI) IN ANTIQUITY " I am not allowed to post links.
btw. I don't speak english, I just can read it.
[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Thanks for the title: I found the text and red it – interesting but full approximations -[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]It has been written by Petr Jandà[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]č[/FONT]ek about a book «Veneti, na[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]š[/FONT]i davni predniki» by Bor, [FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Š[/FONT]avli, Toma[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ž[/FONT]ik (I did not red it!) - [/FONT]




[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]the short text's author wrote he made a list of basque, czech and slovenian modern words, avowing it lacks ancient forms of these languages - [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I respect the effort made to understand history of languages and every try deserves respect but we have to be very cautious in our tries - [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I glanced at this list, where words of every language (almost) are supposed to illustrate common roots, whatever the phonetic evolution; as very often in this kind of «work» where a person tries to prove a prejudicated thing I find a lot of incoherences - [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]first remark, some basque signs (letters) are compared to numerous different signs in this two slavic languages, without explanation about the phonetic apparent discrepancies – I tried to find out the parts of the words which were to be compared because it was not explained by the author - for instance, basque z «corresponds» here to k / d / s / [FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ž / z / h < g [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](czech-)[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]basque [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]x [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]corresponds here to [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]z / č / s -[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Do not forget words have very often prefixes and suffixes which can abuse us very easily...SO it is useful to do with some «???» when comparisons are only intuitive so unsure - [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I shall put here some «correspondances» I find very dubious, sorry for the boring aspect of my amateur «intervention»:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif] &: the underlinings are of my own! (trying to understand the links)[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° belly, Cz = Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]život [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]–[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zi[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]l[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]bot [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]no explanation for the basque[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]'L' [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif].[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif].. the slavic[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Ž[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]comes from *G, what about the basque [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Z [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]???[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° knee, Cz = Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]koleno[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]belaunue[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: no explanation, I suppose the [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]L-N [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]part is in play here for him – but the slavic words came surely for the root [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]KoL- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]germ- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]*KhwiL[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: wheel (rotule: *RoT-, fr- «roue») - so, for me, NO link with basque[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° back, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zad[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]a[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]od[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zad[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]aj -[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]atzealde[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: what kind of phonetic link, whatever the word part?[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° limb, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]hnata << gnat-, [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ud -[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]hanka [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: what link?- the basque word could be a romance << germanic loan, fr- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]hanche[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif],[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]haunch – all the way, no link between the words provided here - [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° leg, foot,[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]noh[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]a[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]nog[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]a -[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]za[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ng[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]a [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]possible? Have we traces in ancient basque of a reduction [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]*nog-/nag-/neg- (?) >> *-ng- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]or an inversion [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]*nag- >> *ang-[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]:very acrobatic indeed -[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° elbow, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]loket[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]komolec (laket)[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ukondo[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] : what link???[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° blackbird, Cz = Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]kos[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zozo [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: what link???[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° to dig a hole, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]dol[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ovati –[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]kopati (zajcmati?) [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]- Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zul[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ato [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]dol = zol [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]???[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]hole, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]dol, dul[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]jama (luknja) –[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zulo[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] : same ???[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° toad (frog), Cz = Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]žaba[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zapo [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: the slavic words come surely from *[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gab- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]/ Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zapo [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]could have some link with spanish [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]sapo [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](toad)...[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° saddle, Cz = Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]sedlo[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zela [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: spanish [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]silla[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], an I-E root? the root [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]*sed- i[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]s very common among I-E languages with derivated meanings as «seat», «to sit», «sleep» fr- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]sedatif[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], «peace» (welsh [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]hedd[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif])... the basque word could very well be a new enough loanword?[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° fat, grease, tallow, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]sadlo[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]salo –[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ziho[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] : what link???[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° sign, Cz = Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]znak [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]– Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]zeinu[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: the spanish (castillan) has [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]seña / señal[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] from whom the basque could be a loan – the slavic forms seems based upon I-E [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]*g-n [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](to [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]kn[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ow, [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]kn[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]owledge: kennen...)[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° stool, Cz = Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]stol[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]taula [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: the slavic words are loans from germanic, and the basque one seems a loan to a romance dialectal form of [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tabla << tabula [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](Fr- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]table, taule, tôle[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif])...[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° aspect, appearance, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tvar –[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]način [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]– Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]taxu [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: what link???[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° shot, Cz[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] s[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tr[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ela –[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]s[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tr[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]el –[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tir[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]o [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: ? the basque is surely a loan from spanish [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tiro [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]-[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]°to pull, to yank, to tug, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tahati (<< tagati)[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tirati –[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]tiratu [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: basque and slovene seems loanwords, the czech one could be (perhaps) a loan to some germanic root [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](to take, tag)[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]-[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° small boat, Cz [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]člun [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]- Slov[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] čoln[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] – Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]txalupa [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: the basque is very close to Fr-[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] chaloupe[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], the slavic forms could be from an I-E [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]*k-l- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](a lot of derivated meanings!)[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° old, Cz = Slov [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]star –[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Bsq [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]xahar [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: the slavic forms could be from ?**[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]k-t--r [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](Celt-Britt- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]coth, kozh[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]) or from a ??? [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]*s-t (s-d) : [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]see breton [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]dia[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]sez[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]et [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]= Fr- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ras[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]sis[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] speaking about old bread ...? [/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I shall° keep on if necessary this answer of mine which is a bit destructive I avow, but sometimes we need some «fixings», do we not?[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Here under, some explanation of the author where he seems a bit naive:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][«Allowing ourselves one more bit of speculation regarding Roman writings, we lool at the words Druids, or the wood people who worshiped tree on the British Isles[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif].[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] Since the Romans generally used the printed letter V wheneever a U is called for, it is very likely that they wrote DRVIDES for Druides. But might it not be so that in this particular case they really wanted to use the letter V? In that case we are talking about Dr[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]v[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ides, which immediately suggests the word [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]drva[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] or [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]drevo[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. The connection between the name Druids and the tree worship then becomes much more logical. Granted this is stretching things a bit, but it is food for thought.] [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]here the writer conceeds some «stretching»: it is true that I before thought this link 'druid' <> 'tree', 'drvo' (same I-E root) was evident (in celtic languages the comparison was even closer: 'derw', 'doiri' (?'doirbhi') = 'oak'), but 'druid' seems rather derivated from *[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]dru-wid[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]: 'wid' is the well known «idea»/ «video»/ «visu»/ «wise» (to see/to know and 'dru-' could be an intensive prefix according to some scholars; it is true we cannot exclude a 'dr°w' = «tree» («oak» among Celts)...but the 'V' is not the slavic ending for 'drvo' ...[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][... Most of the comparisons in the appendix are self-explanatory. One could write a story about many of the words but it is not our intent to belabor these. We xould include one, howevern namely the word for knee [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](be[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]launue[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]) [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]whic*h bears only a[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]slight resemblance to the Slovenian word [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ko[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]leno[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](underlined by author)[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. The interesting fact is that in both Basque [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](be[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]launaldi[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif])[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] and in Slavic [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]poko[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]lenje[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] the word for generation stems from the root word for knee. While this occurs in Latin as well where [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]genu [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](knee) and [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]genus[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] (ancestry) are related, one must ask just who borrowed what from whom. Ancient pre-Roman Venetic inscriptions clearly indicate that the word for wife (or woman) is [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gena[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] later softened into the Slovenian word [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ž[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ena[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](a clear reference to ancestry)...] -[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Here we see the result of false-cuts in etymology: the root in slavic languages is [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]kol- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]and not[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] -len [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]see germanic [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]*hwîl- [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]«wheel», «wiel» for the phonetic cognate and french [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]rotule[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], castillan spanish [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]rodilla [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]«keecap», «patella» («small wheel») for the meaning... a digest of the two I-E words for wheel, by the fact - so there is NO link here between basque and slavi languages![/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]My debuking job is not finished and I shall keep on, maybe – but I avow some comparisons are more amazing like the ones comprised in the text under:[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][... «Our initial attention was particularly focused on the word [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gori[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] and its combinations, which in Basque describe many items dealing with heat of burning, as well as items dealing with elevation, highest praise, high passion, and higher authority. Strangely enough, or perhaps not so strangely, this is identical to what is used in the Slovenian language? The idenfinite verb «to burn» is in Basque actually[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]erraustu[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], while words derived form[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gori[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] refer perhaps more to heat. Nonetheless, the similarity is stunning. The word for flame is [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gar[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], which in Slovenian has been softened to [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ž[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ar [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](not found in any dictionary by myself)[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. While [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gori[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] is an adjective describing a burning item more correctly called [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gore[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]č[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]i[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] in Slovenian, the adjective [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]goren[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] has the Slovenian equivalent of [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]najgorj[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]š[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]i[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] (supreme, exalted, most high), the iindefinite verb [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]goritu [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]= [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]ogreti [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif](to heat)...][... In Slavic languages the word [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gora[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] also refers to mountain which, like a fire, rises upward to the sky...][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif] &: it derserves more attention: some loanwords could have travelled between ancient languages, we know that; a pre-I-E *gar-/*kar seems present among a lot of languages roots in the whole Europe and outside it – Celt-britt- carreg/karreg «rock», «stone»! + karn/cairn?(I don't go farther to I-E *k-r >> krugell : «tumulus», «barrow» where the meaning of «circle», see hring/ring seems more evident than the one of «stone» (even if a stones circles could very well be figured out!) - maybe it will remain some positive founds in these comparisons even if a rapid glance to the remnants of the list did not secure me at all...[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]just for the fun[/FONT]
 
this answer could be transferred to a linguistic thread?
 
I put here some thoughts about autosomals poolings

An additional piece to the Gedrosia puzzle:

The ANE component further suggests the young age of Gedrosia in West Europe.
ANE is a true component defined by ancient sample (Lazaridis et. al). There was no ANE in Bra1, Loschbourg or Stuttgart, neither was Gedrosia nor any other west-asian sister autosomals detected in ancient west european samples before. So we can be very sure that there was no Gedrosia in West europe at least before Bronze-age (maybe Megalithic, but I think it is probably too old already).
But contemporary Scotland and French Basque show high ANE. Scotland has even a peak next after Estonia and French Basque represent a peak compared to their surrounding populations. ANE in Scotland and Basque can not be very old (as opposed to ANE in NE-Europe and Scandinavia). ANE is also absent in Sardinia just like Gedrosia is.
Therefore it is tempting to conclude a stong link between Atlantic-European ANE and Atlantic-European Gedrosia. Of course ANE is even stronger further east in Finns and Balts, but this is because ANE is much more ancient there (Motala) and because EEF is very sparse there.
The Gedrosia at least in NW-Europe is very likely real. Probably also the Basque one is very real, although possibly with slightly different history than in Britain and less consistent.
 
An additional piece to the Gedrosia puzzle:

The ANE component further suggests the young age of Gedrosia in West Europe.
ANE is a true component defined by ancient sample (Lazaridis et. al). There was no ANE in Bra1, Loschbourg or Stuttgart, neither was Gedrosia nor any other west-asian sister autosomals detected in ancient west european samples before. So we can be very sure that there was no Gedrosia in West europe at least before Bronze-age (maybe Megalithic, but I think it is probably too old already).
But contemporary Scotland and French Basque show high ANE. Scotland has even a peak next after Estonia and French Basque represent a peak compared to their surrounding populations. ANE in Scotland and Basque can not be very old (as opposed to ANE in NE-Europe and Scandinavia). ANE is also absent in Sardinia just like Gedrosia is.
Therefore it is tempting to conclude a stong link between Atlantic-European ANE and Atlantic-European Gedrosia. Of course ANE is even stronger further east in Finns and Balts, but this is because ANE is much more ancient there (Motala) and because EEF is very sparse there.
The Gedrosia at least in NW-Europe is very likely real. Probably also the Basque one is very real, although possibly with slightly different history than in Britain and less consistent.

Really good summary.
 
after a copy-paste I don't find any more the original thread: I put this here because it concerns Basques even if only on the male side -aside this, I AGREE THE ANSWER OF EL HORSTO IS VERY INTERESTING (gedrosia: late evolved stem of partly ANE descendants?)

Doesn't the fact that the Basque R1b clades are so "young", or downstream, make the latter possibility, or even the first , less likely?

The other thing I've wondered about is whether there are matriarchal elements to Basque culture sufficient to explain the adoption of the language by surrounding males who might be incorporated into the community.

Sorry, my poor slow brain needs time to read and understand all what is written in our threads - if late, my way of thinking can help (either received or criticized), maybe, for its general implications concerning downstreams of HGs: the "young" downstreams (true concerning absolute chronology) can be as "old" as older ones concerning the branching (by their form: it's to say, there are not always "daughters" of close upstream HGs, rather their younger "sisters", so not flooding from them - so they can be born by NEW local mutations when the number of older (upstream, common in this case to Celts or Italics or Basques, P312, by example) became high enough in certain region - as you know I have still some doubts about reality of precise datations so ...
a few Y-R1b-P312 bearers, an already long time ago, can have occupied southern lands before gaining number (why? I lost again my cristal bowl) and seeing for that some new branchings - I avow a new SNP has more chances to prosper when conquiring new territories on a border or wave of advance; but also a recent mutation can profit on the cost of precedent ones when a small portion of the group is at play (the "great number law", as everyone knows, is a «no-law» for small numbers)-
&: it seems to me that among Basques, special SNPs %s (the "basque" one and the "catalan one") are denser in front of P312 %s when compared to other Iberic regions: possible implication that only a small number of "foreign" males took foot in today Basque country, being THE Basques or visitors of the Basques ?

All that is dynamics, but not always in the «long steady river» way -


a-) a small number (males only or not) of Y-R-P312, I-Ean speaking, penetrate a far borderline region, and learn the colonized region language (Basque), being not numerous enough to dominate or impose its language to autochtonous people -
a1) the mutation by time (new downstream) SNP occurs before fusion, but with delay caused by the small previous number – drift (small number too)- but if no differential selective advantage for Y-R-P312 or descendants we cannot explain, as in 'a2' the domination of today Y-R1b in Basque country
a2) the mutation occurs after fusion, by time or favorized by the increasing in number: the problem here is that in this case too if no differential selective advantage for Y-R-P312 or descendants, we cannot explain the overwhelming domination of today Y-R1b in Basque country, if autochtonous Y-HGs increased too, in parallelic way (global demographic increase) ...
b) a borderline subgroup (say P312 proto-Basques) with a language different from the larger group (P312 also but I-Eans -the material culture can be close enough, nevertheless - colonizes a new bordering region, keeping its own language, and, being small at first, knows with delay some mutation (neutral or not) which, occurred in a small starting population, undergoes a drift too – the demic growing comes after -
& the refining of these possible interpretations requires a better knowledge of the respective downstream SNPs of Y-R1b in southern France – Iberia – I'll try to have precise data -
&&: the explanation of dominant already numerous males (Celts I-Eans) adopting the languages of a conquered female population (Basques) is strange to my mind... even if every hypothesis deserves to be taken in account – the famous «maternal language» theory does not hold against historic evidences – other parameters (several) are in play -
sometimes we consider a SNP bearers group as being an homogenous group geographically, but in fact we can have several groups with the same SNP which know different stories, when the iniitial group has known a demographic increase...
 
sorry, but it is the very question: how did Basques manage to keep their language when surrounded by IEans and incorporating "dominant" males, or why did IEans learn a new insignifiant nonIE language when they were the huge majority???
the answer COULD be a first wave of y-R1b come from East met a numerous population of basquic speakers and were assimilated, and only after that came a new wave of Y-R1b IE or IEnized that progressively gained ground on the cost of Basques?... OR the first wave of Y-R1b WAS THE Basques and their more eastern remnants were IEnized!!!

Language changes a lot faster than genes. Basques lack the beduoin component entirely, which may have come with IEs.

In short I don't think that this hypothesis is really true, IE people had the impact of a fart in the wind, and were much more likely to have r1a than r1b anyway.

Until we actually find ancient r1b majority tribe or area in ancient DNA we won't really know of its origins, it's pure speculation. But for every other group they try hard to argue it formed where it currently lies, except the biggest european y-dna group. The bias here is obvious.

They also mark out clades like j1 and j2 and e1b as farmer clades, when clearly they are not. I2a is the biggest early farmer clade, but it is called a hunter gatherer clade. It's obvious that politics are the biggest factor in most anthropological theories.
 
I have been reading that R1b haplogroup and proto-indoeuropean languages came at the same time to west-Europe. Today, one of the highest levels of R1b is found in Basque country, however Basque language is the unique non-indoeuropean language still living in west-europe.

Does it means that R1b came to iberian peninsule (during Paleo-Mesolithic) several centuries before a second wave that finally brought indoeuropean lenguages and Bronze culture?

Thanks you!

the answer lies in the question.
But who decreted the Basque or Euskara is not isa language or IE, in fact a rumor became truth in stone.
The greatest linguist of the 19th century had given rating Basque, concluding that this language was an impossible mess; and thus he left the field open to fanciful.
No serious linguist ventures to classify definitively.
Made it clear that this is not an isolated language, or a genetically isolated people.
The real difference Basque or Euskara with IE in its declination with the excessive use of the ergative, and if one day it turned out that the old IE languages ​​commonly used in ergative then the debate would end .
It is interesting to note that there are common elements between Basque and Tocharian are thousands of miles apart but that is not common linguistic device items between Basque and presue Iberians who live in the same territory
 
Doesn't the fact that the Basque R1b clades are so "young", or downstream, make the latter possibility, or even the first , less likely?

The other thing I've wondered about is whether there are matriarchal elements to Basque culture sufficient to explain the adoption of the language by surrounding males who might be incorporated into the community.

No, there is no matriarchal element to justify the contrary; Basque women are concerned and also the feminine elements pose the "mystery".
Basque is unique because it is the only language we could say that it is IE or not IE. Instead the iberian proved not IE but not Basque.

How could anyone believe that a taverse people throughout Europe and cla for many generations and without women, so without reproducing? in this case is that they came with the planes of the U.S. Air Force or charter leaving women and children in an unknown place ... Hahahah ...
 
Oops, I didn't mean to step on your idea, Lebrok. I hadn't read your response when I wrote mine. Sorry about that... by the way when is the last time we both agreed on something? You know it must be true based on this rare event alone. :)
but then why the English, French, German and Scandinavian, do not speak Basque?
 
Do u have any real sources to say Basque culture is matriarchal.
Basque culture is derived from Celt culture and we know Celt culture is matriarchal, all you have to do is read the Celt wikipedia page :)

Gender and sexual norms


Reconstruction of a German Iron Age Celtic warrior's garments


According to Aristotle, most "belligerent nations" were strongly influenced by their women, but the Celts were unusual because their men openly preferred male lovers (Politics II 1269b).[78] H. D. Rankin in Celts and the Classical World notes that "Athenaeus echoes this comment (603a) and so does Ammianus (30.9). It seems to be the general opinion of antiquity."[79] In book XIII of his Deipnosophists, the Roman Greek rhetorician and grammarian Athenaeus, repeating assertions made by Diodorus Siculus in the 1st century BC (Bibliotheca historica 5:32), wrote that Celtic women were beautiful but that the men preferred to sleep together. Diodorus went further, stating that "the young men will offer themselves to strangers and are insulted if the offer is refused". Rankin argues that the ultimate source of these assertions is likely to be Poseidonius and speculates that these authors may be recording male "bonding rituals".[80]
The sexual freedom of women in Britain was noted by Cassius Dio:[81]
... a very witty remark is reported to have been made by the wife of Argentocoxus, a Caledonian, to Julia Augusta. When the empress was jesting with her, after the treaty, about the free intercourse of her sex with men in Britain, she replied: "We fulfill the demands of nature in a much better way than do you Roman women; for we consort openly with the best men, whereas you let yourselves be debauched in secret by the vilest." Such was the retort of the British woman.
Cassius Dio
There are instances recorded where women participated both in warfare and in kingship, although they were in the minority in these areas. Plutarch reports that Celtic women acted as ambassadors to avoid a war among Celts chiefdoms in the Po valley during the 4th century BC.[82]
Very few reliable sources exist regarding Celtic views towards gender divisions and societal status, though some archaeological evidence does suggest that their views towards gender roles may differ from contemporary and less egalitarian classical counterparts of the Roman era.[83][84]
There are some general indications from Iron Age burial sites in the Champagne and Bourgogne regions of Northeastern France suggesting that women may have had roles in combat during the earlier La Tène period. However, the evidence is far from conclusive.[85] Examples of individuals buried with both female jewellery and weaponry have been identified, such as the Vix Grave, and there are questions about the gender of some skeletons that were buried with warrior assemblages. However, it has been suggested that "the weapons may indicate rank instead of masculinity".[86]
Among the insular Celts, there is a greater amount of historic documentation to suggest warrior roles for women. In addition to commentary by Tacitus about Boudica, there are indications from later period histories that also suggest a more substantial role for "women as warriors", in symbolic if not actual roles. Posidonius and Strabo described an island of women where men could not venture for fear of death, and where the women ripped each other apart.[87] Other writers, such as Ammianus Marcellinus and Tacitus, mentioned Celtic women inciting, participating in, and leading battles.[88] Poseidonius' anthropological comments on the Celts had common themes, primarily primitivism, extreme ferocity, cruel sacrificial practices, and the strength and courage of their women.[89]
Under Brehon Law, which was written down in early Medieval Ireland after conversion to Christianity, a woman had the right to divorce her husband and gain his property if he was unable to perform his marital duties due to impotence, obesity, homosexual inclination or preference for other women.[90]



The obvious truth here is that R1b has nothing to do with the spread of Indo-European languages. Indo-European languages were spread by R1a, which is why we see Indo European in India, along with R1a, but not R1b. No scholar anywhere associates R1b with Indo Europeans, but there is a standing theory linking it to R1a. The whole R1b=Indo European thing is just a bullshit fantasy existing only on this site. Its unfortunate as the maps are pretty good otherwise.
 

This thread has been viewed 39455 times.

Back
Top