Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 115

Thread: Origin of the Basques

  1. #26
    Regular Member torzio's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,766

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - SK1480
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pax Augusta View Post
    There is only one thing that complicates the question of the origins of the Etruscans: the lack of knowledge of the many studies dedicated to the subject, especially those of archaeology.

    The presence of J2b2a-L283 among the Etruscans does not complicate anything and doesn't cast any doubt, the one found among the Etruscans is decidedly more related to the one found earlier in Croatia than to the ones found in the Nuragics, and archaeologists for years have argued that between the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age in Etruria arrived migrations of male "warriors" from Middle-Danube Urnfield culture (from an area ranging from the northern Balkans to the Danubian plain).

    To be clear, these who arrive from Middle-Danube Urnfield culture are not the Etruscans, which is widely shown to have formed in Italy, but they are simply the migrations of a component, probably of IE languages, assimilated by the people who already lived in Etruria, and these newcomers contributed to the ethnogenesis of the Etruscans.

    It is methodologically wrong to trace an Iron Age ethnos back to only a specific material culture from many hundreds of years earlier, such as the Bell Beaker, which there really was in Etruria, much more than we think.
    below is all the J2b2a-L283 and its descendents

    Fathers mtdna ... T2b17
    Grandfather mtdna ... T1a1e
    Sons mtdna ... K1a4p
    Mum paternal line ... R1b-S8172
    Grandmum paternal side ... I1-Y33791
    Wife paternal line ... R1a-Z282

  2. #27
    Moderator Pax Augusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-06-14
    Location
    Ara Pacis
    Posts
    1,299


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by torzio View Post
    below is all the J2b2a-L283 and its descendents
    You find anything on Yfull.

    There is one missing from ancient samples that has not been released yet (I think from Moldova or surrounding area, but I don't remember, however that is earlier than the one from northern Serbia, MOK15). Y-Full has done more updates and some formed ages and TMRCA may still not be in place.

    L283 may have been in Europe as early as the Neolithic period or Late Neolithic period. But there were likely also later movements during the Bronze and Late Bronze Age, following a Balkan route.


    https://yfull.com/tree/J-L283/

  3. #28
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    1 members found this post helpful.
    @Pax Augusta

    Genetically describing a culture that lasted 700/800 years with only 5-10 genomes seems to me reckless, but we are already used to see prestigious geneticists jumping to conclusions in order to fulfill certain agendas. We need many more samples to draw definitive conclusions about the Etruscans. This is what I think about them with the data we have at our disposal.

    1-Evidently they spoke a NON-Indo-European language

    2- We only have a male marker and it comes from Illyria

    3-Their mitochondrial markers seem typically western, although some of them have been found much earlier in the steppes and later in the BB culture.

    4-They are practically identical to Latins (24-28% Yamnaya)

    5-Very similar to the Iron Age Iberians and Northern Italians-Italian Chalcolithic has a strong Iberian signal and we have cases of Bbs in Parma with Iberian signal in its Autosomal DNA-It is not strange that the Etruscans were genetically similar to the Iberians.

    6-it seems that the Etruscans are a mixture of local Eneolithic + Balkans + BBs-They have more Balkan mix than Latins

    7- Obviously they were NOT Africans or Anatolians, nor Levantines despite some outlier data

    8- Heirs of the Villanovan culture that comes from UrnField Culture

    9-Descend from BBs (45-50%)

    The Italian Bronze Age will demonstrate the genetic continuity between the BBs and the Etruscans and then the linguistic debate will become much more interesting. We know that

    9039-CO (1.300 BC)-Olmo di Nogara-HapY-R1b-P312-L51-CTS6889 (xP311 xL52 xL151)-Mit Hap-V-I think this sample belongs to the Terramare culture

  4. #29
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    Quote Originally Posted by Pax Augusta View Post
    There is only one thing that complicates the question of the origins of the Etruscans: the lack of knowledge of the many studies dedicated to the subject, especially those of archaeology.

    The presence of J2b2a-L283 among the Etruscans does not complicate anything and doesn't cast any doubt, the one found among the Etruscans is decidedly more related to the one found earlier in Croatia than to the ones found in the Nuragics, and archaeologists for years have argued that between the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age in Etruria arrived migrations of male "warriors" from Middle-Danube Urnfield culture (from an area ranging from the northern Balkans to the Danubian plain).

    To be clear, these who arrive from Middle-Danube Urnfield culture are not the Etruscans, which is widely shown to have formed in Italy, but they are simply the migrations of a component, probably of IE languages, assimilated by the people who already lived in Etruria, and these newcomers contributed to the ethnogenesis of the Etruscans.

    It is methodologically wrong to trace an Iron Age ethnos back to only a specific material culture from many hundreds of years earlier, such as the Bell Beaker, which there really was in Etruria, much more than we think.
    Here I absolutely disagree with you, because precisely what is methodologically correct is to relate archaeologically, genetically and culturally (also linguistically) the Iron Age cultures (of which we have accurate information thanks to classical sources) with the Bronze Age and Chalcolithic cultures. In Spain we know that all the Bronze Age cultures (Cogotas, Motillas, Argar, Atlantic and Mediterranean Bronze etc) are overwhelmingly R1b-Df27. All of them descend from the BB culture. And we also know that the Iberian peoples of the Iron Age are descended from these Bronze Age cultures, so we have no rational reason to think that these men and women changed their language. This is the genetic continuity I am talking about. I believe that in northern Italy the genetic continuity will be the same as in Iberia.

    Iberia-Mediterranean coast

    *GBVPK (2.380 BC)- Grotte Basse de la Vigne Perdue, Narbona-HapY-R1b1a/1b1a/1a2a/1-DF27-Z195-
    *I3494 (1.836 BC)-Coveta del Frare, Valencia-Bronce Valenciano-HapY-R1b- DF27-ZZ12-Hap Mit-J1c1/b
    *I1312d (1.782 BC)-Can Roqueta, Barcelona-Bronce Nordeste-HapY-R1b-Df27-Z195-Hap [email protected]
    *I3397 (1.741 BC)-Lloma de Betxí, Valencia-Bronce Valenciano-HapY-R1b-Df27-Z195-Hap Mit-K1a2/b
    *I4563 (1.600 AC)-Galls Carboners, Tarragona-HapY-R1b- Df27-Z195-Haplogrupo Mitocondrial-H1/H84
    *I3324 (276 BC)-Puig de Sant Andreu, Gerona-Cultura Ibérica-Indiketes- HapY-R1b-DF27-Hap MitH1
    *I3320 (200 BC)-Els Estrets-El Racó de la Rata, Castellón-Ilerkavones-HapY-R1b-Df27-Z225-Hap Mit-I1
    *I8206 (200 BC)-Ampurias, Gerona-Cultura Ibérica-Indiketes-HapY-R1b-Df27-Z195-Hap Mit-H7a1

    I think it is absolutely clear BB culture (DF27)>Mediterranean Bronze Age (Df27)>Iberian peoples (Indiketes, Ilerkavones, Layetanos, Basques.....Df27)- ergo the genetic and cultural continuity is enough to prove that the BB culture did not speak an IE language. The Etruscans will prove us right.

  5. #30
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I will say only one thing in response to the verbiage by Signor Gaska: MtDna counts too.

    As to the rest, when I say I won't waste time arguing with people who want to ignore genetics I mean exactly what I say.
    @From Signor Gaska to Doña Angela-

    You have opened this thread about the origin of the Basques and since I am Basque I suppose you won't mind if I give my opinion on what I think is correct and convenient.

    Perhaps you could explain what you think of the Etruscan mitochondrial markers?

    What are your genetic, linguistic or archeological arguments to say that the Iberians and the Etruscans changed their language for that of their women?. It will be interesting to hear your explanations in this regard.

  6. #31
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    28-07-13
    Posts
    7


    Country: UK - England



    2 members found this post helpful.
    The men didn't necessarily adopt the language of the women. They may not have hung arround. It was the children who adopted the language of their mothers.

  7. #32
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    3 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by youngkeithden View Post
    The men didn't necessarily adopt the language of the women. They may not have hung arround. It was the children who adopted the language of their mothers.
    it could be true but you need a double situation

    1-That the fathers were foreigners
    2-That the mothers were local women

    However, in Iberia, the first documented R1b-P312-Df27s are

    *EHU002 El Hundido (2.434 BC)-- HapY-R1b-P312-Mit-K1a4/a1-BB burial-Oval pit in the corridor of a dolmen-Male+45 years, 1,85 m, fetal position in right lateral decubitus and with NO-SE orientation-Grave goods- Ciempozuelos style vessel, copper dagger, V perforated button-
    *EHU001/UE 750-El Hundido (2.413 BC)-HapY-R1b-L51-Mit-U5a1/b1-

    This site is in Burgos (Castilian Plateau), very close to the ancestral home of the Basques, and the first thing we have to see who are the mothers of these men. The first of them has a typical Iberian Neolithic mitochondrial marker documented in the peninsula since 5.273 BC (Cova de la Sarga, Valencia), so evidently his mother was originally from Iberia, but the second man has a U5a1b1 marker, which has never been documented in Iberia previously. Moreover, it has its origin in the Maykop culture, Russia-Marinskaya5-MK5007-3.505 BC (Wang et al, 2.018) and then has been documented in other European BB sites (Berzingerode etc...).

    Then, we can reason as follows

    A- R1b-P312-Df27 were foreigners who crossed the Pyrenees, (some of them with their wives who also had their origin in the steppes)- So why would they or their children change their language, if their mothers should also speak an IE language? It does not make sense. For that you would need all the women to be of local origin.

    B- R1b-P312-Df27 were Iberians who by exogamy took women in central Europe (CWC- who had a distant origin in the steppes). So why would Df27 change their language, if these women had to adapt to a new culture and when they also lived with other women of Iberian origin?

    The argument that these men were foreigners (conquerors, traders, hunters, miners, explorers or whatever you want to call them) does not make much sense because;

    1-They are buried in a Neolithic dolmen in the same place where there is a previous collective burial. It is strange that a conqueror knows those sacred sites and also instead of erasing the memory of his conquered enemies he buries himself next to them.

    2. The grave goods that accompany them are absolutely Iberian (palmela points, V perforated buttons, copper daggers, wristguards and Ciempozuelos ceramic style that is exclusive of Iberia and the south of France). It seems strange that conquerors instead of imposing their cultural customs immediately adopted the culture of the conquered.

    Common sense tells me that whatever the origin of these men and women, at least in Iberia they had no reason to change their language, ergo the BB culture never spoke an IE language and neither did R1b-P312/Df27-

    Iberia is not the exception, all of southern France (Aquitaine, Occitania) spoke Iberian/Basque at the arrival of the Romans, while in the center and north Celtic languages were spoken. And in Italy, it turns out that the Etruscans (of whom we have hardly any data on their male markers) spoke a NON-IE language, and yet they were instrumental in the founding of Rome, which nevertheless spoke an IE language. I think that the issue of Indo-European languages in Western Europe must be related to the Iron Age, previously everyone would speak Neolithic languages related to Iberian/Tartessian/Etruscan etc...

  8. #33
    Moderator Pax Augusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-06-14
    Location
    Ara Pacis
    Posts
    1,299


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Gaska View Post
    Here I absolutely disagree with you, because precisely what is methodologically correct is to relate archaeologically, genetically and culturally (also linguistically) the Iron Age cultures (of which we have accurate information thanks to classical sources) with the Bronze Age and Chalcolithic cultures.
    I'm not surprised that you disagree on this. What you mention is not an accepted method by many scholars, there is an ongoing debate. It's more a common belief very spread in the forums, and that was rehashed as a method indeed 30-40 years ago by geneticists (the same ones who then fed the myth that Sardinians and Basques were the same thing). Also the idea that classical sources always contain accurate information survives in the pseudo-scientific books but is rejected as a postulate by scholars.

  9. #34
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    4,866

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 members found this post helpful.
    I answer to some arguments by Gaska. If I write "Moesan says", it is not because I want to take God's place, but for practical purposes.

    Gaska said :
    post #7
    NO, NO , NO, the rest of Iberia has hardly changed...][ The rest of the Iberian peninsula is very uniform genetically speaking (certainly much more than the Balkans, Italy or Greece) - We Basques are Iberians from the Iron Age descendants of the first Iberian BBs and the rest of Spaniards are like us, except for a small percentage of Romans and Moors in some regions…][... Of course, that means that Iberians (and Basques especially who have never spoken an Indo-European language) have never been Indo-European, neither we nor our ancestors R1b.P312. Forget the fairy tales they have been telling us for years...]


    Moesan says: What an idyllic picture ! Don’t confuse BB Iberians with post-BB Iberians : not the same thing ; ancient Iberia was not so homogenous : if Neolithic saw some unity it was not so leveled, and Basques and some northern regions of Spain was already more isolated from the Mediterranean streams then ; and Southern and Eastern Iberia knew Helladic streams already since the 2500’s BC, without speaking of BB’s. We are not sure that Basque language was spoken allover today Basque country. Someones consider that Celtic language was spoken too in some of its areas. (I have no personal knowledge here, only maps here and there, but it could be important, speaking of male haplos and language)
    Post#9
    [… If you refer to the Iberian peoples that inhabited Iberia at the arrival of the Romans, they were not different from the Basques, they were exactly the same (both in their uniparental markers and in their autosomal composition), that is to say, the Basques are Iberians who have kept their language despite the conquest. If when you say Iberians, you mean the current Spaniards, it is true that some regions of Spain are very similar to the Basques (Castile, Aragon, and the entire Mediterranean coast) and that in some regions such as Galicia, Extremadura are somewhat different because of the Roman and Muslim conquest.
    Moesan says :
    Culturally, archeologically, anthropologically, genetically, there is no such unity at those dates, before Romans, even if it depends also on the scale (degree of focus) we choose for DNA. We only lack extend enough surveys about ancient DNA to show it (too much averages based on heterogenous groups, or too little groups knowing that since metal ages we find rather elite buryings, of weight concerning males haplos). More than 270 individual ancient DNA seems impressive but it isn’t so much at the Scale of Iberia on a relatively long span of time. And speaking of past we may not forget there has been some regional moves after Romans and later levelings (Reconquista and modern times) in comparisons with moderns. More than Rome and Muslim conquests have been at play.
    That said I agree that the differences between basques and even the most different ancient Iberians are not so huge and doesn’t disprove a relative continuity compared to other regions of Europe.
    [… As for "Indoeuropeans", I am fine with you (Angela) not wanting to debate, but you will understand that this explanation of R1b men from the steppes adopting the language of their women is simply speculation with little scientific basis. Because in any case, not only the Basque R1b men changed their language but all the historical Iberian peoples of the peninsula did it (Andalusia, Murcia, Valencia, Catalonia, Aragon, Pyrenees, large areas of Castile, Navarra, Basque Country and the south of France up to Herault, including Aquitaine and Occitania), it would be the first time in the history of mankind that conquerors did not impose their culture and language on a conquered people.
    Moesan says :
    Speculation to date ? Yes, agree. But no, it isn’t the first time conquerors lost their language. Look at Franks in Gaul, Bretons in Eastern Brittany (early enough, surely linked to France attraction and feudal model of alliances), Normans in Normandy, all of them leaving toponymic traces nevertheless. Very often it passes through a bilinguism or a disglossy during some centuries. Let’s notice that often, the lower civilisational level « winners », spite military dominant, loose their langage when the number is not on their side.
    BTW we don’t know exactly when Iberian language was spoken at first, and where. Writings and languages are not born at the same time. Saying that some Y-R1b-P312 of Eastern Iberia at those times (even early Iron) were Iberian speakers or non I-Ean speakers is going to fast, without to speak of who teaches to whom. Society structure is at play too in the question of links between languages and ethnies: were all illegitimate sons incorporated into the elite families ? I doubt it, it would have needed fathers would have been always aware of the case ! Such inegalitarian societies has been multilingual for a while, I think. And are we sure of the « winners » identity at Iron, and the direction of linguistic changes (when we see the debates about Iberian material culture and Iberian language in Ebro valley)? Seemingly I-Ean hydronymy were in some places of Iberia even in zones known as non-I-Ean speaking later.



    Post #20 @Angela :[... In the first case, because the genetic continuity in Iberia is absolutely demonstrated from the Chalcolithic to the Iron Age. The uniparental markers are the same (males R1b-P312/Df27). To say that these men changed their language because of their women seems to me a simplistic and unscientific explanation. Genetic continuity is the only way to demonstrate which language a culture spoke in prehistoric times. In Iberia we are fortunate to be able to demonstrate that the Iberians/Basques and Tartessians (all of them overwhelmingly P312) did not speak Indo-European languages in the Iron Age but Iberian/Basque and Tartessian. In other words the BB culture did not speak an Indo-European language. In order to prove that IE was spoken in the steppes and that R1a-M417 and R1b-L51 brought those languages to mainland europe you need to prove the genetic continuity between the Yamnaya culture (or any other steppe culture) and the BB culture, and you know what? so far nobody has been able to prove it. When you do it then we all will have to accept that R1b-P312 (and the BB culture) spoke an IE langage...]

    Moesan says :

    We have very few Y-haplos in Chalco/Bronze/Iron Iberia (<20 for MBA, almost all of them R1b-P312). We know that sepultures changed in Southern cultures (eg El Argar), passing from collective ones to individual ones (with tumuli I think) in the same settlements: have we here a continuity of pop plus internal evolution only, or some new elite intruders ? Comparing Bronze to current %’s, may we think all the non-R1b haplo’s came later into Iberia ? Who believes really taht Y-R1b was the only Y-haplo in Iberia at Bronze ?

  10. #35
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    4,866

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Gaska View Post
    it could be true but you need a double situation

    1-That the fathers were foreigners
    2-That the mothers were local women

    However, in Iberia, the first documented R1b-P312-Df27s are

    *EHU002 El Hundido (2.434 BC)-- HapY-R1b-P312-Mit-K1a4/a1-BB burial-Oval pit in the corridor of a dolmen-Male+45 years, 1,85 m, fetal position in right lateral decubitus and with NO-SE orientation-Grave goods- Ciempozuelos style vessel, copper dagger, V perforated button-
    *EHU001/UE 750-El Hundido (2.413 BC)-HapY-R1b-L51-Mit-U5a1/b1-

    This site is in Burgos (Castilian Plateau), very close to the ancestral home of the Basques, and the first thing we have to see who are the mothers of these men. The first of them has a typical Iberian Neolithic mitochondrial marker documented in the peninsula since 5.273 BC (Cova de la Sarga, Valencia), so evidently his mother was originally from Iberia, but the second man has a U5a1b1 marker, which has never been documented in Iberia previously. Moreover, it has its origin in the Maykop culture, Russia-Marinskaya5-MK5007-3.505 BC (Wang et al, 2.018) and then has been documented in other European BB sites (Berzingerode etc...).
    OK Gaska. Have you the auDNA making of these two men? (apparently BB's). And do you find 2 examples are a demonstration?
    That said Ciempozuelos vessel as it seems were not older than 1900 BC. Are these datations so safe?
    mt U5a1b1 origin in Maykop? Not very sure, it was I think a common mt-haplo in Steppes, its upstream forms there since long ago. But as you use it, yes, it is come from East.

  11. #36
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    4,866

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 members found this post helpful.
    @Gaska
    - Nobody will never believe that some obscure chalcolithic minorities of the 3000’s BC, based in spots between Portugal and S-W Spain colonised genetically the whole western Europe. Culturally at least it seems that around the 3000/2500’s BC there were diverse chalcolithical pop’s in Iberia and the BB’s were not the masters, at first. Things changed only after, and how and why they changed is not so evident. Nevertheless we see around 2500 BC relatively quick autosomals changes in western Europe, with introduction of ‘steppic’ auDNA (even if unequal), all that under the BB umbrella. I know you are not the supporter of a ‘steppic’ input come from Iberia ! So we may say at least that the BB question is not so simple, and that perhaps, genetic flood and cultural one could have been dissociated, even opposed at some stage.
    - Nobody may say the whole territories associated to BB culture spoke an I-Ean language. What we see is that a lot of cultures partially inherited from BB’s spoke an I-Ean language todate over a large space and before the Roman Empire (Ireland, Britain, Gaul, 3/4 f Germany, western and central parts of Iberia…). Language shift can occur more or less quickly according to several serious causes, among them a political/economical constitution of networks under the control of some strong enough groups : at its maximum, BB culture could have been a candidate. In fact, all this is speculation yet. For I know, we have no text at BA in Iberia nor elsewhere in West (except some kind of runes in Skara Brae Scotland, just before?).
    - Concerning males haplo’s, BB’s of Iberia seemingly did not show an overwhelming domination of Y-R1b-P312, if I remember well and if the studies have been correct for archeology and datations. So, first BB’s and Y-R1b connection is still speculative (it spites me ; we need plenty of auDNA and haplo’s from the supposed first settlements of S-W Iberia). At the opposite, Y-R1b-P312 was the almost unique marker of other western BB’s. In Central Europe Hungary BB’s are kind of exception.
    - concerning autosomals, it seems clear that between Chalco and Bronze Iberia knew introgressions from Central Europe of more remote steppic origin, Basque country as well as other places. Some time ago, you and others defended the concept of BB’s females conquering Europe, now you are putting the ‘steppic’ DNA on account of the lone steppic-like females ? It’s very easy to cite some individual isolated cases when associating Y-haplos and auDNA, you know that in isolated cases their couple can be dissociated in only 6/7 generations. But at a statistical level, it’s very evident that Y-P312 and ‘steppic’ auDNA came along westwards in Europe, and not as late as Bronze but even at Chalco. It’s evident to me that P312 began to develop at non-negligible levels around Alps or even a bit more eastern, as soon as 3000 BC.
    - language drift can occur on every side, it depends on respective numbers, too : some of the BB’s groups seem small and then possibly incorporated after some time, loosing auDNA and even changing burying modes (rather by reusing older tombs than by making new ones!).

  12. #37
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,261


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    ^^Very reasoned and subtle analysis, Moesan, with which I'm largely in agreement, but reason will never make headway against emotional beliefs. All evidence will be emphasized or discounted to make the a priori emotional conclusion true.

    Some "theories" will never die because some people are too emotionally invested in them. I give you credit for taking the time to address things again and again; I'm just getting too bored and am starting to lose interest.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  13. #38
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    3 members found this post helpful.
    @Angela-

    When people have no arguments, they prefer to resort to old clichés such as emotional beliefs, emotional conclusions, nationalism etc..... If you are really interested in finding out how things happened in Western Europe you should at least contemplate different views and value them. Never take for granted risky theories that sooner or later will be totally debunked. An example is the collapse of the Yamnaya culture as the origin of R1a-M417 and R1b-L51, which means that the whole Kurgan theory as interpreted by Harvard and Anthony is pure fantasy. You can continue to believe this fairy tale or study carefully the Chalcolithic in France and Iberia.

  14. #39
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    3 members found this post helpful.
    @Moesan

    Yeah the BB question is not simple and Yeah we all see an autosomal change in mainland Europe with the arrival of the CWC and then the extension of this autosomal component thanks to the BBC. We also see different proportions of steppe ancestry and a great heterogeneity in the uniparental markers in those two cultures.

    But what is important is that these changes

    1-Were not male mediated, because there are dozens of female steppe markers in both CWC and BBC. This means that Harvard's conclusions that R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 were solely responsible for the introduction of this signal in Europe are simply a big mistake (or a big lie).

    2. The genetic change was not immediate, nor a consequence of conquests or massive migrations, but a consequence of small migrations of family groups and exogamy between different cultures. The process did not last years but centuries

    You have to take into account several data-

    1-Bb culture lasted in Iberia more than 1,000 years (Estuario del Tajo-2,800 BC, dating of Joao Cardoso 2,014-Cultura de las Cogotas, Castilla, 1,800 BC)- However in other BBs regions, the phenomenon can be considered almost sporadic (Sicily, Poland, North Italy, North Africa, Holland, Czech Republic, Hungary).

    2-Evidently the BB culture was characterized by small migratory movements of family groups that following the course of the rivers and the neolithic trade routes managed to colonize some regions of Europe. This culture could be defined as a true thalassocracy because they controlled the maritime trade of Asian African and European products (ivory, ostrich eggs, amber, salt etc.).

    3-I have already said that in its first phase, the BB culture was very heterogeneous in terms of its uniparental markers and autosomal composition. Not only Iberia and Hungary, Sicilian and Northern Italian BBs have hardly any steppe ancestry, there are men with steppe ancestry (male Hap G2a) in France and Germany. There are also cases of I2a in Iberia, England and cases of H2 in Hungary, all of them buried in BB tombs with grave goods typical of that culture. After 2,500 BC things changed radically because R1b-P312 was imposed to the rest of markers. It is evident that there was a founding effect of P312 in the West (Germany, Switzerland, France and Spain), L21 in the British Isles, U152 in Central Europe (Germany, Switzerland, Czech Republic) and Df27 in Iberia. . But this process lasted hundreds of years until all the Bronze Age cultures at least in Iberia and France (from Italy we hardly have any data) were overwhelmingly R1b-P312. And when I say all, I mean all, that is, Las Cogotas culture, El Argar culture (this year a very interesting work will be published with more than 65 analyzed skeletons), Las Motillas culture, etc.

    4-In a second stage (after 2,400 BC) migrations of Df27 Iberian males have already been demonstrated in Sicily (Fernandes et al), and small migrations and exogamy of Iberian females have also been demonstrated in Germany, Czechia, Hungary and Poland. That is to say, on the one hand, factories and colonies were exploited to obtain valuable and prestigious products, and on the other hand, migratory movements took place. The BB culture reached its maximum expansion in Csepel island in its eastern domain, there they stopped the Indo-European expansion.

  15. #40
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    3 members found this post helpful.
    @Moesan said "OK Gaska. Have you the auDNA making of these two men? (apparently BB's). And do you find 2 examples are a demonstration? That said Ciempozuelos vessel as it seems were not older than 1900 BC. Are these datations so safe?

    That question is amusing, considering that the whole steppe theory as formulated by Haak and colleagues in 2015 was done using 3 samples in Khvalynsk and a few more in the steppes. With those data, the geniuses at Harvard were able to convince the international scientific community and a large number of geneticists that the mass migrations of R1b and R1a were able to bring IE to mainland Europe. Don't you think that it is at least risky to claim such a thing?

    Regarding those two men, they are perfectly dated (2.434 and 2.413 BC) if you want I will give you the link to consult the archaeological excavation, but it is in Spanish, and of course they are typical Iberian BBs with all the typical package of the peninsula (palmela points, ciempozuelos ceramic, wristguards, V perforated buttons).

    The Ciempozuelos style is very old in Iberia, its origin is in the cave of La Mora (Somaén Soria, Castilian Plateau dated in 2.650 BC (excavation without stratigraphic alterations). I don't know where you got these dates of 1,900 BC. And evidently it is exclusive of Iberia and southern France (like the Palmela type spearheads, and certain types of perforated buttons).

  16. #41
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    2 members found this post helpful.
    @Moesan

    Helladic streams since 2.500 BC? I have no idea what you are talking about, Greek colonies appear in the Iron Age.
    And evidently genetic homogeneity, there are a lot of papers that speak of genetic continuity in Iberia with respect to its uniparental markers (the males since the Chalcolithic, the females some since the Paleolithic and the rest since the Neolithic). Iberia is a very boring region genetically speaking (at least until the arrival of the Celts, Greeks and Romans).

  17. #42
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    1 members found this post helpful.
    @Moesan

    Regarding the linguistic issue, Basque is not the solution to the problem because we obviously do not have writings from the Iron Age. The key is in the Iberian and Tartessian languages. we have hundreds of inscriptions in these languages, we know where it was spoken and the time range. Some sentences have even been translated and the meaning of many words is known. We also know that the sites where these writings have been found and now thanks to the Olalde’s paper (2.019) we know that the Iberian peoples who wrote those words (Ilerkavones, Layetanos, Edetanos) were overwhelmingly R1b-P312-Df27. Since these same lineages have been documented in the Chalcolithic (BB culture) throughout the Iberian Peninsula, the genetic and cultural continuity is evident. Common sense tells us that these men never changed their language ergo the BB culture did not speak an IE language.

    Actually, in Spain we only need to check the genetics of the western Iberian peoples who supposedly spoke IE languages ​​(Lusitanians, Vettones, Vacceos, Galaicos, Astures….). So far we know that the Cogotas culture (1,800-1,000 BC) which is what gave rise to these peoples of the Iron Age was also overwhelmingly R1b-P312 / Df27, but we do not have genetic data for those peoples. If it is confirmed that they are also Df27 then we would come to the absurd conclusion that genetically equal men spoke different languages. At the moment the only genome of a Celtiberian that we have is I2a, that is why even Olalde made it clear that the linguistic issue is not much resolved.

  18. #43
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    19-05-15
    Posts
    146

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3h

    Ethnic group
    Croat
    Country: Switzerland



    2 members found this post helpful.
    I don't know who's wrong or right but I find it generally interesting reading people's (argumented) opinions. Even if they could be wrong. Or not...

    No different opinions - no discussions...simple as that. Is this the purpose of this or any other "forum"? Should it be a like-minded club instead?

    I'll just comment the tone of the discussions that I'm witnessing for the last few years, when I'm occasionally (still) visiting this forum. It seems to become a closed society where a certain administrator always has right and the others almost certainly get a "lecture", before they very soon lose the "honour to be addressed at all". I was a victim too, even if I barely post anything. I was hit in a "I shoot first and then I ask manner", cause "there are so many people with nationalistic agendas" on this forum. Conspiracies left and right. Sure, we cleared it up, I had no hard feelings. But I see this over and over again.

    I can't say anything about the content. There is a lot of good inputs and very interesting links I'm really thankful for. But the tone that's been opposed is nothing close to normal.

    Please, allow us to be dumb and uneducated but to still participate. This is a "forum", for Christ's sake. What are we supposed to do, to pass an entry exam first?

    A smart man can learn even from a fool. Why chase the fool away?

  19. #44
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    4,866

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Gaska View Post
    @Moesan

    Yeah the BB question is not simple and Yeah we all see an autosomal change in mainland Europe with the arrival of the CWC and then the extension of this autosomal component thanks to the BBC. We also see different proportions of steppe ancestry and a great heterogeneity in the uniparental markers in those two cultures.

    But what is important is that these changes

    1-Were not male mediated, because there are dozens of female steppe markers in both CWC and BBC. This means that Harvard's conclusions that R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 were solely responsible for the introduction of this signal in Europe are simply a big mistake (or a big lie).

    2. The genetic change was not immediate, nor a consequence of conquests or massive migrations, but a consequence of small migrations of family groups and exogamy between different cultures. The process did not last years but centuries

    You have to take into account several data-

    1-Bb culture lasted in Iberia more than 1,000 years (Estuario del Tajo-2,800 BC, dating of Joao Cardoso 2,014-Cultura de las Cogotas, Castilla, 1,800 BC)- However in other BBs regions, the phenomenon can be considered almost sporadic (Sicily, Poland, North Italy, North Africa, Holland, Czech Republic, Hungary).

    2-Evidently the BB culture was characterized by small migratory movements of family groups that following the course of the rivers and the neolithic trade routes managed to colonize some regions of Europe. This culture could be defined as a true thalassocracy because they controlled the maritime trade of Asian African and European products (ivory, ostrich eggs, amber, salt etc.).

    3-I have already said that in its first phase, the BB culture was very heterogeneous in terms of its uniparental markers and autosomal composition. Not only Iberia and Hungary, Sicilian and Northern Italian BBs have hardly any steppe ancestry, there are men with steppe ancestry (male Hap G2a) in France and Germany. There are also cases of I2a in Iberia, England and cases of H2 in Hungary, all of them buried in BB tombs with grave goods typical of that culture. After 2,500 BC things changed radically because R1b-P312 was imposed to the rest of markers. It is evident that there was a founding effect of P312 in the West (Germany, Switzerland, France and Spain), L21 in the British Isles, U152 in Central Europe (Germany, Switzerland, Czech Republic) and Df27 in Iberia. . But this process lasted hundreds of years until all the Bronze Age cultures at least in Iberia and France (from Italy we hardly have any data) were overwhelmingly R1b-P312. And when I say all, I mean all, that is, Las Cogotas culture, El Argar culture (this year a very interesting work will be published with more than 65 analyzed skeletons), Las Motillas culture, etc.

    4-In a second stage (after 2,400 BC) migrations of Df27 Iberian males have already been demonstrated in Sicily (Fernandes et al), and small migrations and exogamy of Iberian females have also been demonstrated in Germany, Czechia, Hungary and Poland. That is to say, on the one hand, factories and colonies were exploited to obtain valuable and prestigious products, and on the other hand, migratory movements took place. The BB culture reached its maximum expansion in Csepel island in its eastern domain, there they stopped the Indo-European expansion.

    I have no time just now, I take some rest.
    But I agree with some of your statements, not all of them. So, read you and me again.

  20. #45
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    4,866

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Gaska View Post
    @Moesan said "OK Gaska. Have you the auDNA making of these two men? (apparently BB's). And do you find 2 examples are a demonstration? That said Ciempozuelos vessel as it seems were not older than 1900 BC. Are these datations so safe?

    That question is amusing, considering that the whole steppe theory as formulated by Haak and colleagues in 2015 was done using 3 samples in Khvalynsk and a few more in the steppes. With those data, the geniuses at Harvard were able to convince the international scientific community and a large number of geneticists that the mass migrations of R1b and R1a were able to bring IE to mainland Europe. Don't you think that it is at least risky to claim such a thing?

    Regarding those two men, they are perfectly dated (2.434 and 2.413 BC) if you want I will give you the link to consult the archaeological excavation, but it is in Spanish, and of course they are typical Iberian BBs with all the typical package of the peninsula (palmela points, ciempozuelos ceramic, wristguards, V perforated buttons).

    The Ciempozuelos style is very old in Iberia, its origin is in the cave of La Mora (Somaén Soria, Castilian Plateau dated in 2.650 BC (excavation without stratigraphic alterations). I don't know where you got these dates of 1,900 BC. And evidently it is exclusive of Iberia and southern France (like the Palmela type spearheads, and certain types of perforated buttons).
    I can read spanish, if I hardly speak it. OK for the link you propose, over all if they speak too of anDNA and not only of archeology.
    THanks beforehand

  21. #46
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    4,866

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Gaska View Post
    @Moesan

    Regarding the linguistic issue, Basque is not the solution to the problem because we obviously do not have writings from the Iron Age. The key is in the Iberian and Tartessian languages. we have hundreds of inscriptions in these languages, we know where it was spoken and the time range. Some sentences have even been translated and the meaning of many words is known. We also know that the sites where these writings have been found and now thanks to the Olalde’s paper (2.019) we know that the Iberian peoples who wrote those words (Ilerkavones, Layetanos, Edetanos) were overwhelmingly R1b-P312-Df27. Since these same lineages have been documented in the Chalcolithic (BB culture) throughout the Iberian Peninsula, the genetic and cultural continuity is evident. Common sense tells us that these men never changed their language ergo the BB culture did not speak an IE language.

    Actually, in Spain we only need to check the genetics of the western Iberian peoples who supposedly spoke IE languages ​​(Lusitanians, Vettones, Vacceos, Galaicos, Astures….). So far we know that the Cogotas culture (1,800-1,000 BC) which is what gave rise to these peoples of the Iron Age was also overwhelmingly R1b-P312 / Df27, but we do not have genetic data for those peoples. If it is confirmed that they are also Df27 then we would come to the absurd conclusion that genetically equal men spoke different languages. At the moment the only genome of a Celtiberian that we have is I2a, that is why even Olalde made it clear that the linguistic issue is not much resolved.
    You don't read acutely my posts, sometimes.
    concerning Olalde and R1b in Iberia

  22. #47
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    06-04-21
    Posts
    1


    Country: Iran



    I wonder why Gaska has not been banned yet? You banned me and several other ones just because we say some things that you don't like, so by this rule, Gaska should be banned too, unfortunately a good forum has been destroyed by some dictators who never tolerate different opinions.

  23. #48
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    I can read spanish, if I hardly speak it. OK for the link you propose, over all if they speak too of anDNA and not only of archeology.
    THanks beforehand
    Ok here you go

    http://tp.revistas.csic.es/index.php...ticle/view/693

    https://www.academia.edu/13806511/La...odilla_Burgos_

    The first paper refers only to the collective tomb (dolmen). the second paper to the BB burials found at the entrance of the dolmen (only is the archaeological description of the site). There is nothing regarding genetics, just an anthropological description of the remains (brachycephaly, height, etc.) and their dating.

  24. #49
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-01-21
    Posts
    128

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Df27
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2b3e

    Country: Spain



    1 members found this post helpful.
    @Moesan

    Concerning Olalde and Iberia, this image was used by Reich to explain his theory of the conquest of mainland Europe by the horsemen of the steppes and the extermination of all the male Iberian lineages of Neolithic origin. The most surprising thing is that at least one red point is missing, which is ATP3 (El Portalon, Atapuerca Burgos, Gunther et Valdiosera 2.015,)-R1b-M269

    They did not include it because it evidently hindered their theory that R1b-M269 did not exist in Western Europe before the arrival of the Indo-Europeans. however, three years later Harvard lab publishes

    Reich Lab-Harvard (2.021)-ATP3 5397 44 Spain_C.SG El Portalon Cave, Sierra de Atapuerca-

    !!!!!!!!!!! R1b1a1-R-M343>L754>L389>P297 !!!!!!!!!!!

    They knew they had this lineage in Iberia (3,389 BC) but they could not admit it so they simply ignored the sample until they published their paper on the Bell Beaker in Europe and the genetic history of Iberia. ATP 3 has no steppe ancestry, but is autosomically close to the Balkans and another r1b-M269 has been found there (Smyadovo, Bulgaria-4,500 BC). It may be that these genetic lines were lost because this lineage has suffered bottlenecks throughout its history, but we will never know unless we continue to analyze Iberian sites from the late Neolithic and early Chalcolithic (3.500-2.500 BC). And believe me, there are dozens of sites and hundreds of skeletons to analyze (Los Millares, La Pijotilla, Cueva de las Higueras, Marroquies Bajos etc etc...)

  25. #50
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    11-08-18
    Location
    Lugo - Galicia
    Posts
    53

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2b2-L283 CTS3617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1

    Ethnic group
    Galician
    Country: Spain - Galicia



    We have the whole Iberia with exactly the same people in genetic terms during Iron Age (same as actual Basques), but ones speaking non-IE languages in the south and the east and ones speaking IE languages (celtic and perhaps italic) in the center, north and west.
    Actual Basque Country was inhabitated by people speaking IE languages. Navarra country was inhabitated by people speaking IE, Iberic and Vasconic languages. Surely Basque homeland was Aquitanie in southeast France and along Pirineos mountains.
    Please hear spanish archeologists about languages in ancient Iberia, nobody better than them about what they are speaking about:
    The end of the paleohispanic languages: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1wMFrV7meg
    Lusitanian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AkwcJTJGLI&t=1602s
    Iberic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAtv97ufFBE
    Celticiberic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBev9-XjLPs
    Tartessian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlAW_jZ868I

    More than 7 hours speaking about languages in ancient Iberia, based on texts written on stone or bronze. And almost nothing about languages from Kallaikoi in the northwestern, Astures and Cantabrians, surely some kind of old Celtic or at least, some kind of IE.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •