Bashkirs are mostly L23 with some M73 and U152.
That comes as a surprise... can you cite a source for this find of U152 amongs the Bashkirs? It would be pretty unexpected to find U152 as far east as the Volga region.
That comes as a surprise... can you cite a source for this find of U152 amongs the Bashkirs? It would be pretty unexpected to find U152 as far east as the Volga region.
Taranis,
Myres et al clearly showed that S28 is represented among the Bashkirs. In fact in her sample from Bashkortostan, Russia, 70% of the men tested positive for S28.
It seems that S28 appeared in that region around 10000BC, just before the migration down the Volga to Ukraine; so we are talking here about the ancestors of the PIE.
I also found a series of articles showing that the caves of that area were inhabited from 14000 to 10000 years ago.
My assumption is that R1b appeared in northern Pakistan just under the tundra line during the ice age. (Myres et al also showed r1b in that region).
After the ice age, most r1b moved north to Bashkortostan, while a few moved west toward the middle east.
Bashkist are Turkic people. They do look like northern Turkic people and they do speak a Turkic language.In my opinion, the Bashkirs R1b descend directly from the Bronze-age Proto-Indo-Europeans. The only place where both M73 and M269 are both common is around the Caucasus and Anatolia. Based on my theory of the PIE moving to the Pontic steppes in the Neolithic, the first steppe invaders would have belonged to both M73 and M269, although the latter would have been much more dominant. It is possible that all the subclades as far as S116 and even S28/U152 developed in the steppes before migrating to Europe. The Bashkirs could represent the last leftovers from these PIE R1b, who would later been overwhelmed by neighbouring R1a from further north and east.
Bashkist are Turkic people. They do look like northern Turkic people and they do speak a Turkic language.
I don't think that R1b is PIE.
To many non-Indo-European speakers belong to R1b! Turkic speakers in Russia, Semitic speaking Assyrians in West Asia. African population in Africa etc. I don't understand why you do still think that R1b is proto-IE. There's absolutely no proof for it. And no renowned scientists supports this idea. R1b is more archaic and has nothing to do with IE folks in particular.Turkish people speak a Turkic language too, but only a small percentage of their haplogroup is truly Turkic. Read this please. R1b in the Volga was probably there long before Turkic speakers arrived, but were absorbed, like any other haplogroups in other Turkic-speaking regions outside Northeast Asia.
To many non-Indo-European speakers belong to R1b! Turkic speakers in Russia, Semitic speaking Assyrians in West Asia. African population in Africa etc. I don't understand why you do still think that R1b is proto-IE. There's absoutely no proof for it. And no renowned scientists supports this idea. R1b is more archaic and has nothing to do with IE folks in particular.
? Everybody knows that Indo-European (Aryans) invaded India. Indic people ARE Indo-European speakers! And it's a well known fact that Indo-Europeans have been living in the Mesopotamia for thousands years. You can only find R1a very frequent among the only non-Indo-Europeans the Turkic speaking people. But we all know that these Turkic speakers assimilated many Indo-European speaking Iranic races.The same can be said about J2 and R1a Too many non Indo-European Semites share J2, too many non Indo European Indians share R1a.
? Everybody knows that Indo-European (Aryans) invaded India. Indic people ARE Indo-European speakers! And it's a well known fact that Indo-Europeans have been living in the Mesopotamia for thousands years. You can only find R1a very frequent among the only non-Indo-Europeans the Turkic speaking people. But we all know that these Turkic speakers assimilated many Indo-European speaking Iranic races.
There's no R1a in Africa...
Didn't you contradict yourself? I always thought that Indians are contained in Indo part in "Indo-European" name.too many non Indo European Indians share R1a.
OK. You're right.Many of the R1a among the non Indo European Indians is older than the lineage brought by Indo Europeans. The same in Central Asia. Not every R1a has to do with Indo Europeans.
If you explain every R1a among non Indo European people with influence of Indo Europeans, than we can also explain the distribution of R1b among non Indo Europeans exactly the same way. R1b among Assyrians for example is most probably due influence of Armenians. It almost seems like todays Assyrians are Assyrified Armenians. Genetically they are almost not distinguishable. R1b found in Africa is the product of back migration from West Eurasia.
Didn't you contradict yourself? I always thought that Indians are contained in Indo part in "Indo-European" name.