New dedicated page for Y-haplogroup N1c

That Hong Shi map is rubbish. :) I am pretty sure it will be refuted when we get ancient yDNA from the relevant areas as their map goes against all subgroup information and ancient yDNA evidence we have.

Bicicleur, “that means Yakuts probably never made it as far west as Europe”
Read this PDF “The European Relatives of the Yakuts” (http://rjgg.molgen.org/index.php/RJGGRE/article/viewArticle/157)
They identified three N-M2019 lines: B182 branch, “Eur1” branch and Yakut branch, so Yakut branch is in no way ancestral to European N-M2019. Apart from Yakut branch, other N-M2019 lines are not Arctic and Yakut branch is not only Arctic.

Many of you are confident that N1c is Comb Ceramic, although we lack all ancient Comb Ceramic yDNA. I would expect a bit more hard evidence in support of the yDNA theories.
 
For some reason my post is not showing up. Basically I just offered to delete that paragraph altogether.
 
That Hong Shi map is rubbish. :) I am pretty sure it will be refuted when we get ancient yDNA from the relevant areas as their map goes against all subgroup information and ancient yDNA evidence we have.

Bicicleur, “that means Yakuts probably never made it as far west as Europe”
Read the PDF “The European Relatives of the Yakuts”. It is freely available on Internet.
They identified three N-M2019 lines: B182 branch, “Eur1” branch and Yakut branch, so Yakut branch is in no way ancestral to European N-M2019. Apart from Yakut branch, other N-M2019 lines are not arctic, and Yakut branch is not only arctic.

Many of you are confident that N1c is Comb Ceramic, although we lack all ancient Comb Ceramic yDNA. I would expect a bit more hard evidence. However, this map on the spread of pottery is interesting:

PreNeolithic pottery dispersal.jpg

I am wondering where you would like to place yDNA N with respect to pottery. Comb Ceramic started in Finland c. 4200 BC and N-Z1925 which is frequent in Eastern Finland formed c. 2500 BC and N-CTS10760 which developed into VL29 formed c. 2500 BC.
 
Yay, my rant post appeared.
As to N, I believe they did arrive with Comb Ceramic and probably spoke some Uralic related language (but only in very limited area it they spoke direct ancestor to all survived Uralic languages, that limited area must have developed close to PII, all other dialects and related Ys went extinct).
Net Ware expansion I believe was responsible for modern VL29 spread and also for spread of Baltic Finnic languages (either it was already Baltic Finnic or part of it became Baltic Finnic, part Mordvinic later, I am not sure yet). Probably later, since Baltic Finnic languages are as close to each other as Slavic languages are, so it is relatively modern phenomenon.

Baltic (Balto - Slavic) N patriarch was born 600 bce in population that seems to be founded in West Finland/ East Sweden (future Kwens?) and it seems arrived directly into Lithuania from where it spread around (Latvian 80% N is just one subbranch of Baltic N; Lithuanians have all of them).
 
Sure, N1c in Finland (c. 2500 BC) is too young to be Corded Ware (3200 - 2500 BC) but not too young to be Combed Ware (5000–2000 BC).
 
Sure, N1c in Finland (c. 2500 BC) is too young to be Corded Ware (3200 - 2500 BC) but not too young to be Combed Ware (5000–2000 BC).

Could be, but is doubtfull.

Guy could be yet born on Syberia. And there had to be
some group of 100% mongoloid people who settled in
Österland in ~1/10 proportion to local people or 50%
momngoloid in ~1/5 propotion. So, it need some time.
2500BC originated, and create some small tribe... 500
years seems to be enaugh and is a good reason to change
the culture of region after arriving. IT could be the reason,
of the end of Combed Ware.
 
It was irony.

According to yfull, none of the Finnish N lines is old enough for Comb Ceramic. N-Z1934 has a TMRCA of 4500 years, so it could only go back to Corded Ware. N-VL29 is even younger. The TMRCA of the oldest existing N-P43 line everywhere is only 4100 years. Even if it is older, I would not think that it could be that much older to have existed in the Finnish Comb Ceramic.

However, it is possible that (one of) the Finnish Comb Ceramic yDNAs is an extinct branch of the Volgaic N-Y9022 which formed 7200 years before present or an extinct branch of N-P43 which formed 7600 years before present.

The oldest branches of TAT are in Volga-Ural, Altai and North China, so the oldest TAT lines should be found in the area between Volga Ural and North China. The midpoint is in Kazakhstan.
 
Last edited:
.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit–Comb_Ware_culture


Previously, the dominant view was that the spread of the Comb Ware people was correlated with the diffusion of the Uralic languages, and thus an early Uralic language must have been spoken throughout this culture. However, another more recent view is that the Comb Ware people may have spoken a Paleo-European (pre-Uralic) language, as some toponyms and hydronyms also indicate a non-Uralic, non-Indo-European language at work in some areas.[4]



It perfectly has sense.
 
It was irony.

According to yfull, none of the Finnish N lines is old enough for Comb Ceramic. N-Z1934 has a TMRCA of 4500 years, so it could only go back to Corded Ware. N-VL29 is even younger. The TMRCA of the oldest existing N-P43 line everywhere is only 4100 years. Even if it is older, I would not think that it could be that much older to have existed in the Finnish Comb Ceramic.

However, it is possible that (one of) the Finnish Comb Ceramic yDNAs is an extinct branch of the Volgaic N-Y9022 which formed 7200 years before present or an extinct branch of N-P43 which formed 7600 years before present.

The oldest branches of TAT are in Volga-Ural, Altai and North China, so the oldest TAT lines should be found in the area between Volga Ural and North China. The midpoint is in Kazakhstan.

OK, that I agree. I think Comb Ware brought now extinct N lines to East Baltics, those lines that survived probably arrived to Finland later. Net Ware or post Net Ware.
 
OK, that I agree. I think Comb Ware brought now extinct N lines to East Baltics, those lines that survived probably arrived to Finland later. Net Ware or post Net Ware.

That can not be assumed until we have samples from neolithic finland. We already know that N1c was present in western russia 5k years ago though.
 
That can not be assumed until we have samples from neolithic finland. We already know that N1c was present in western russia 5k years ago though.
It cant be proven, but it can be assumed. Main modern Finnic lines have age estimates of having TMRCA of 1000 bce or later. So, whatever N lines were there before, they got replaced by expanding ones after 1000 bce.
Of course if age estimates are correct.
 
Hi evryone! Can anyone tell me where and when N1a1a1a1 (P298) originated and where it is likly to find it today?


Gesendet von meinem SM-G903F mit Tapatalk
 
Hi evryone! Can anyone tell me where and when N1a1a1a1 (P298) originated and where it is likly to find it today?


Gesendet von meinem SM-G903F mit Tapatalk

Hello Ordas,

P298, also known as M2126 is the father clade of L1026 and M2019. L1026 makes up the vast majority of N1c in Europe while M2019 is much more rare. If your paternal line is Hungarian you are probably either M2783 which is Baltic or L1034 which was brought to Hungary with the Magyars. With that being said there is a branch of M2019 which has been found in Hungary although IMO it is unlikely that is your branch.

If you’ve tested with FtDNA I recommend you join the N North Eurasia project for more details or take another test to get more resolution.

Edit: I apologize, I have just seen your other posts. If you really are M2019 and L1026 negative I would highly recommend you take another YDNA specific test as you probably belong to a highly divergent unknown branch.
 
Thank you for your answer. I tested with Living DNA. They don't provide their negative maches, so I'm not sure about that. I think I will join some ftDNA project in the future.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G903F mit Tapatalk
 
Hello Ordas,

P298, also known as M2126 is the father clade of L1026 and M2019. L1026 makes up the vast majority of N1c in Europe while M2019 is much more rare. If your paternal line is Hungarian you are probably either M2783 which is Baltic or L1034 which was brought to Hungary with the Magyars. With that being said there is a branch of M2019 which has been found in Hungary although IMO it is unlikely that is your branch.

If you’ve tested with FtDNA I recommend you join the N North Eurasia project for more details or take another test to get more resolution.

Edit: I apologize, I have just seen your other posts. If you really are M2019 and L1026 negative I would highly recommend you take another YDNA specific test as you probably belong to a highly divergent unknown branch.
Could you, or enyone here tell me which snp-s should be tested for further details?


Gesendet von meinem SM-G903F mit Tapatalk
 
Could you, or enyone here tell me which snp-s should be tested for further details?


Gesendet von meinem SM-G903F mit Tapatalk
Just for the understanding: is it necesary to have all the snp-s in the picture to be in this subclade , or are these just different names for the same snp? I'm just not sure I got it right...
6f99f5221d04d7126e9cbf99b4601241.jpg


Gesendet von meinem SM-G903F mit Tapatalk
 
OK, that I agree. I think Comb Ware brought now extinct N lines to East Baltics, those lines that survived probably arrived to Finland later. Net Ware or post Net Ware.
How would you explain the distribution of R1a and N within Latvia? The research was carried out by the University of Latvia, but I can't seem to find it anywhere online right now.

Long story short, R1a correlates with Livonian speaking areas with peaks in Northern Courland, which is mind-boggling and completely counter-intuitive in respect to the traditional understanding of N as being Finnic and R1a as being Baltic. N peaked in Eastern Latvia as well. It 'should' be the other way around.

Could we be talking about a language shift here? Could Livonians actually be much more recent newcomers? Could they possibly be Finnicized Balts/Slavs? Or, more conservatively, is it just a massive bottleneck effect at work? If it's the latter and the effects of the 17th century plague on the Latvian genome are so huge, it really puts things into perspective.
 
I remember that study.
Estonians when compared to East Balts (both LV and LT) have less N %, somewhat more R1a %, increased I1 %.
In former Livonian areas it is similar-ish.
So, my take was historical Livonians were genetically pretty much like Estonians.

And another take - N in Balts had very little to do with Livonians.

Possibly it had to do with some other guys, maybe Selonians. At least former Selonian regions have elevated Baltic N %. Lithuanian NE and Latvian East.
 
No, I believe the R1a rate was much higher when compared to Estonia. And the I1 part is a topic worth a separate discussion.
Vagoth/Gotlander settlements along the Baltic coast, as well as in Courland and the Estonian isles seem to have been permanent. Hybrid Curonian/Gotlander cultures and the West-East I1 gradient are all indicative of that. There's also a clear Norse influence on Livonians.

I don't buy the part about Selonians. It's more likely there were several waves of N migrations towards the Baltic area. But the general share of N is quite similar throughout the Baltics.

It does look like most of Northern Courland was wiped out during the Northern War, though. 99% of the Livonian population there perished. That would probably do it.
 

This thread has been viewed 55389 times.

Back
Top