Black Irish come from R1b Iranians?

[Drac II]

They compared them to "Iberians" because the Aquitani where more similar in culture and in line with northern Spain's basque people; there is no evidence or reason for them to have been darker than celts across either the rest of France or Spain. These "separate" Belgae you mention where most deffinetly celts too. There is no way that the non-indo European Iberians proper (possibly Phoenician or Ancient Greek colonizers) could have represented the genetic bulk of the Irish. Answer this question: how the bloody he_ _ could the Romans have known that these black Irish you speak of that apparently are found all over Ireland, would have come from Iberia? Even if they did migrate from northern Spain or something towards Ireland/British isles, it's more that R1b-P312 Celtic variety that I would be looking for. I guess these black Irish are represented by the Neolithic lineages, wether the extremely rare in British isles J,E3b,G,T etc. men or the mtdna J,K etc. women that represent in reality a definite minority of lineages in the British isles.

No, the physical traits of the Aquitanians were also distinguished from that of the "Gauls". The Gauls were stereotyped as a blondish-pigmented people, the Aquitanians as a brunet-pigmented people.

The Iberians were not Phoenician or Greek. They were descendants of prehistoric Europeans, not Semitic or Indo-European arrivals from later times. The Iberian language, much like Basque, has no relation to either Semitic or Indo-European languages.

The Romans did not know much about Ireland, since they never managed to establish enclaves there, but they became acquainted with Britain. They pointed out that the darker tribes in Britain, like the Silures, were similar to Iberians and speculated that they were descendants of Iberians who had moved north in remote times. The 19th and 20th century British writers on the subject pretty much agreed with these ancient opinions, and kept referring to these earliest inhabitants of Britain & Ireland as "Iberians" or "Iberian Britons". They held them to be the basal population of those islands, onto which has been superimposed later Indo-European arrivals.

You are trying to attach phenotypical attributes to haplogroup markers, which is not quite correct since they are only a small part of the DNA. No geneticists have ever done such a thing as attributing "dark" or "light" features to haplogroups, that I know of.

 

[adamo]

The Tartessians and Turdetanians where similar to Phoenicians; the Iberians could have been pre-indo-Europeans; then there were the celts that largely invaded Spain. So what, the basque didn't speak an indo-European tongue and they have 90% R1b; explain the drastically high R1b frequencies across Aquitania then. Prove in one way or another that the Romans were around long enough to correctly decide that these Britons came from Iberia. YOUR trying to attribute different phenotypes to populations that share the same haplogroups and relative genetic profiles.

 

[adamo]

In fact, the northeastern Iberians where considered levantines; and the eastern and southern coasts of Spain were heavily colonized by both Greeks and Phoenicians. The proto-basques were the same people as the aquitanians just on the other side of the Pyrenees.

 

[adamo]

The Turdetanians and Tartessians, similar to the Lusitanians may have been celts or pre-indo-European Y-DNA I men.

 

[American Idiot]

And those dark skinned Celts being from Gallia should have been speaker of Continental Celtic,which is different branch of Celtic from Insular Celtic,to which Irish,Scottish and Welsh belongs to.
Gallia did not included Great Britain,but you do not think is possible that Insular Celtic speakers have mixed with some Continental Celtic speakers?

actually Welsh, Cornish, Cumbric, and Old British as well as Pictish were all P-Celtic languages and were related to Old Gaullish, also a P-Celtic language.

The Brythonic dialects if the Isles were related to Gaulish.

 

[adamo]

I agree with the above statement, an ancient R1b-P312 link.

 

[Drac II]

In fact, the northeastern Iberians where considered levantines; and the eastern and southern coasts of Spain were heavily colonized by both Greeks and Phoenicians. The proto-basques were the same people as the aquitanians just on the other side of the Pyrenees.

There never was any "heavy colonization" by either Greeks or Phoenicians in Iberia. They only had some coastal enclaves.

Northeastern Spaniards were not "Levantines" either. They were Basques and Iberians.

 

[Drac II]

The Tartessians and Turdetanians where similar to Phoenicians; the Iberians could have been pre-indo-Europeans; then there were the celts that largely invaded Spain. So what, the basque didn't speak an indo-European tongue and they have 90% R1b; explain the drastically high R1b frequencies across Aquitania then. Prove in one way or another that the Romans were around long enough to correctly decide that these Britons came from Iberia. YOUR trying to attribute different phenotypes to populations that share the same haplogroups and relative genetic profiles.

The Iberians were definitely pre-Indo-Europeans, like the Basques or the Etruscans. The Iberian language confirms this.

R1b is not necessarily "Indo-European". It is in fact found in its heaviest concentrations in Western Europe (Spain, France, British Isles), all of which had old pre-Indo-European populations long before the Indo-Europeans arrived.

I never said anything about phenotypes and haplogroups, you are the one who is trying to attach fixed phenotypical values to haplogroups, which, like I said, it's just not done by any genetic study I have ever seen.

 

[Knovas]

True. The Basques are the most similar to those pre-Indo-European inhabitants. And as we see in admixture experiments, both Aragonese and Catalans, appear to be much closer than the average Spaniards. So definitely no levantines in Northeastern Iberia, not at least something representative.

I also have my doubts on R1b being "Indo-European". Let's assume they were Indo-Europeans who just failed to impose their language among Basques. Why then the Basques still cluster apart? Obviously they were less affected by other genetic influences, which makes quite difficult to state R1b was responsible of this.

 

[Wilhelm]

In fact, the northeastern Iberians where considered levantines; and the eastern and southern coasts of Spain were heavily colonized by both Greeks and Phoenicians. The proto-basques were the same people as the aquitanians just on the other side of the Pyrenees.

You sir are misinformed. Catalans are near 80% R1b, and have like only 2-3% of haplogorups J and E (similar levels as Sweden or Northern Germany).

The iberian language had nothing to do with levantines, it was related with Basque. And it's not true that greeks and phoenicians "heavily" colonized, they had only a few coastal towns, that were used as trading ports. Thieir population numbers was ridiculously low and their influence is cultural, not ethnic.

 

[Alan]

https://www.google.com.tr/url?sa=t&...=sqxnYy2oVZzHhFeGrx598w&bvm=bv.57752919,d.bGQ

Even the area proposed by this study to be the place of R1b origin (Kazakhstan, South- Southeastern Russia and Central Asia) was Iranian or Indo European in general to begin with. The last to appear in this area were Turkic tribes. So how does prove that R1b is Turkic when the Turkic ethno-linguistic family is not much older than 2000 years. Also R1b is virtually absent in almost all Turkic tribes, expect Turkmanistanis which are, by aDNA and history as well, most likely turkified Dahaeans.

That R* in general has not much to do with Turkic tribes but is the relict of Iranian admixture is also indicated by the fact that the oldest attest R* individual in the World (from Siberia) has virtually no sign of East or Northeast Asian Autosomal admixture! But what he has is West-Central Asian, South Asian, North European, Amerindian and Southeast Asian admixture. Three of these common in Iranians and/or Indo Aryans.

The only Autosomal admixture in modern Turkic tribes, which can be connected to R1, are West_Central Asian, North European and South Asian. All three which are common in Iranian and/or Indo-Aryan tribes from South_Central Asia.

East Asian/"Siberian" component, which is the most common and only admixture associated with Turkic origin, is absent from this ancient R1* individual.

So it is very unlikely that R1b or R1a has Turkic origin. R* would have more in common with Amerindians than Turkic people.

 

[adamo]

You failed the moment you classed the basque with the Etruscans. YOU are misinformed; I never said Catalans where Levantine, everyone here knows I wouldn't make such a claim; I am the one that has constantly postulated the massive presence of R1b all across Iberia; stop trying to twist my words. The Catalonian and southern Iberian coast though saw both Phoenician and Greek colonizing outposts along its coasts, and the Iberians proper where said to have been of non-indo-European origin. Linguistic affiliation proves absolutely nothing as the basque are 90% R1b and have NOTHING to do with the Pelasgian Etruscans. Quote on basque genetics: "Autosomal genetic studies, on the one hand, confirm that Basques have a very close relationship with other Europeans, especially with the rest of Spaniards, who have a common genetic identity of over 70% with Basques." I hope this puts some of your garbage theories to rest.

 

[adamo]

The basque have a pre-indo-European LANGUAGE, but they are heavily bombarded with the same genetics found across most of Western Europe, indicating they may have been culturally isolated for a very long time. Catalonians have 75-80% R1b and yet the Iberians were none the less of NON-indo-European origin. The only thing that unites the basque and Etruscans is that they where "pre-indo-European" according to you, but genetically these two people would have varied from one another tremendously.

 

[adamo]

Comments on the language of the Iberians spoken in northeastern Spain: "There is no agreement on this, but some researchers conclude that it is linked to the Phoenician alphabet alone, whilst others believe the Greek alphabet also had a role." I honestly believe the Iberians where either Phoenicians or came from the Caucasus region with some J-M67 and were predominantly Neolithic lineages.

 

[Aberdeen]

Comments on the language of the Iberians spoken in northeastern Spain: "There is no agreement on this, but some researchers conclude that it is linked to the Phoenician alphabet alone, whilst others believe the Greek alphabet also had a role." I honestly believe the Iberians where either Phoenicians or came from the Caucasus region with some J-M67 and were predominantly Neolithic lineages.

I'm curious as to why you couldn't have put your three posts into one, but whatever. What I really want to know is who you're quoting there.

 

[adamo]

Dont fret the small things Aberdeen; write my quotes into google and track them; they are basic knowledge at this point. I am currently using a finger-touch IPad is why.

 

[Wilhelm]

Comments on the language of the Iberians spoken in northeastern Spain: "There is no agreement on this, but some researchers conclude that it is linked to the Phoenician alphabet alone, whilst others believe the Greek alphabet also had a role." I honestly believe the Iberians where either Phoenicians or came from the Caucasus region with some J-M67 and were predominantly Neolithic lineages.

You are the one with crazy bullshit theories. We have ancient DNA from Iberians, and If the iberians were phoenicians, then how on earth their mtDNA tested to be similar to modern iberians.

 

[adamo]

Okay so the Iberians where similar to modern Iberians; I guess they WERE indo-Europeans then? Tell me Wilhelmina, what were they?

 

[Wilhelm]

Okay so the Iberians where similar to modern Iberians; I guess they WERE indo-Europeans then? Tell me Wilhelmina, what were they?

They were not indo-european, but PRE-indoeuropean similar to Basques, we have told you that already.

 

[Aberdeen]

Dont fret the small things Aberdeen; write my quotes into google and track them; they are basic knowledge at this point. I am currently using a finger-touch IPad is why.

Small things such as hallucinating that the Basque language came from Phoenician or a mixture of Phoenician and Greek? Modern Basque is a language isolate, regardless of whether it did or didn't pick up any Phoenician or Greek loan words back in the day. Whether or not Basque-like languages were widely spoken across western Europe in the pre-IE era is a subject for debate, but Basque is definitely not an IE or a Semitic language.