How did the Basques become R1b

There's an interesting discussion of this issue on the eurogenes blogspot.
 
Anyone got any Eurogenes data for Basques?
 
adamo said:
The basque were not the only non-indo European language in Iberia; the Tartessians were probably Phoenicians and Turdetanians; the basque genetic composition more or less shows they were always heavily R1b; maybe the spoke a conquerer's language; maybe basque is most similar to an ampncientpelasgic or even pre-indo-European tongue; languages shifted a lot with the Latin dominations; maybe basque is a survived tongue of the pre-Latin IberiaIberia
Click to expand...


And if Basque was a language IE.

Then there would not be problem anymore and jigsaw puzzle would be OK.
Who can maintain that Basque is not a language IE?
Basque is not a PIE language, nor a Caucasian language, fact is there the languages which resemble most in Basque languages IE are.
Since the discovery of languages iberian, and Hittites by 1917, all certainties concerning the eushkara collapses and it became more marked with archaeology, collection of archives and ancient manuscripts which show the recent presence of basques around Pyrenees. With genetics final proof, as much on masculine descendants as female, of little having migrated newly.
 
Sorry if you didn't get the memo; my account was recently blocked , for no perceivable reason, by either Maciamo or lebrok. No, basque was not a I-E tongue; I believe it pre-dates the indo-Europeans and has to do with men of the I-M26 (I2a1) lineage.
 
John123 said:
Sorry if you didn't get the memo; my account was recently blocked , for no perceivable reason, by either Maciamo or lebrok. No, basque was not a I-E tongue; I believe it pre-dates the indo-Europeans and has to do with men of the I-M26 (I2a1) lineage.
Click to expand...



they know that the presentation of I among basques is weak in the 6 % turn with for I2a about almost 3 %, I2b about 2 % and for I1 less than 2 %; when to M65 Celtic Iberian (P312 / M65 / U152-/DF27-/U106-) is to Basque of maximum 0,3 % in the closest to Spanishes and to 0 % in the shrine R1b of the basques of navarre. The geographically nearest neighbouring region of basques Asturias with 15 % of M65 is.
Conclusion: I2a spoke the iberian and not Basque and M65 Celtic Iberian spoke the Celtic and not Basque.
Alone Basque, Gascony and in former days region of the Atlantic Loire (France, ancient Novempulanie) spoke the Basque language.
 
The main markers among basques are R1b with the most important DF27 followed by L21.
Then I for 6 % with almost equal I2a (iberian), I2b (ancient aquitain), I1 (franc).
Then J2 for 2/3 % (east Mediterranean, Tartessian, Roman...)
Then comes mysterious Q1a (Mongolian) for 1/1,5 % and R1a (indo-iranian for 1/2 %). Strangeness is that basques have the strongest rate compared with French and Spanishes and it nobody knows how to explain it as long as they assume that basques are indig?nes of Pyrenees.
When in G presence of which does not exceed 1 % it is present in populations not proved to be of origins Basque ancient.

The strong development of DF27 and I1 in Spain of the centre and Andalusia seems to be linked to the reconquest bringing numerous soldiers of navarre and Franc against Arabic and genetics does not deny the violence of the second stage of the reconquest but contrariwise she would seem even more violent than according to writings. They do not determine this evolution to the female descendants which seem to be indig?ne. They can then assume an ethnic purgation being accompanied by murder and by rape as strategy.
 
Sorry but I-M26 is the only I present in basque people and it once had a much heavier weight among them.
 
John123 said:
Sorry but I-M26 is the only I present in basque people and it once had a much heavier weight among them.
Click to expand...

go on the site of Alda?ta the ancient cimeti?rs Basque of the 8th century (the most ancient necropolis of the Basque country) and you will note that these markers I2a, I2b and G2, J2, J1 is not present there; but contrariwise you will find Q1a, R1a and also of I1 of Francs (allies of basques).
How explain you that the relics of the most ancient vascon language are north of the Gascony and the south of the Loire, there is not I2a1 there.
On the other hand I2a1 already has a language (iberian) and this PIE language completely differs from eushkara and also I add that the peaks of I2a1 are in the Sardinia and that there nobody speaks a language only is even ressemblante with eushkara from a distance or from far away.
Finally I say to you that presence of masculine I2a1 is 2/3 % among Basque and of more this marker is especially located, concentrated in region the most insulated being next to the Aragon and goes away in the Basque population of the north and from the west with 0 % scores.
And it is in these regions of the north and from the west that is most speakers of the eushkara.
 
nordicfoyer said:
I don't doubt R1b travelled into Europe through the Danube, several different routes over land, through the Baltic, and hugging the Northern coast of the Mediterranean Sea by boat. Their huge numbers indicate multiple methods of arrival in wave after wave.

Here I'm referring specifically to the original Basque settlers though. Their unusual language tells me they made little contact with neighbors on the journey from the Russian steppes (if that's still where science has them pegged) to their new home in Iberia. How else could such a unique language develop?

They would have had to travel over water with little to no neighbor contact--ensuring the purity of the language-- and the Mediterranean route makes the most sense.
Click to expand...
this is a sensible reflection and I would add that maybe the Basque as their ancestor did not want kes contacts autrecultures or civilisation.En fact it seems seon your reasoning that had the old Basque semblablr character as the Basque of today. The Basque america seem to have followed the same process.
This suggests that as the French ; deduced in an atavism where Basque seem taciturn and withdrawn and cold with no-Basque and instead very expansive between themselves.
 
martiko said:
go on the site of Alda�ta the ancient cimeti�rs Basque of the 8th century (the most ancient necropolis of the Basque country) and you will note that these markers I2a, I2b and G2, J2, J1 is not present there; but contrariwise you will find Q1a, R1a and also of I1 of Francs (allies of basques).
How explain you that the relics of the most ancient vascon language are north of the Gascony and the south of the Loire, there is not I2a1 there.
On the other hand I2a1 already has a language (iberian) and this PIE language completely differs from eushkara and also I add that the peaks of I2a1 are in the Sardinia and that there nobody speaks a language only is even ressemblante with eushkara from a distance or from far away.
Finally I say to you that presence of masculine I2a1 is 2/3 % among Basque and of more this marker is especially located, concentrated in region the most insulated being next to the Aragon and goes away in the Basque population of the north and from the west with 0 % scores.
And it is in these regions of the north and from the west that is most speakers of the eushkara.
Click to expand...

1-Iberian language has nothing to do with PIE nor IE.
2-The closest language related to basque, despite of its fragmentary status, is iberian. This is not only a matter of modern linguistical studies, but Strabo gave us a clue (IV,1,1)


"1 (176) Next, in order,1 comes Transalpine Celtica.2 I have already3 indicated roughly both the shape and the size of this country; but now I must speak of it in detail. Some, as we know, have divided it into three parts, calling its inhabitants Aquitani, Belgae, and Celtae.4 The Aquitani, they said, are wholly different, not only in respect to their language but also in respect to their physique — more like the Iberians than the Galatae; while the rest of the inhabitants are Galatic in appearance, although not all speak the same language, but some make slight variations in their languages. "
 
Segia2 said:
1-Iberian language has nothing to do with PIE nor IE.
2-The closest language related to basque, despite of its fragmentary status, is iberian. This is not only a matter of modern linguistical studies, but Strabo gave us a clue (IV,1,1)


"1 (176) Next, in order,1 comes Transalpine Celtica.2 I have already3 indicated roughly both the shape and the size of this country; but now I must speak of it in detail. Some, as we know, have divided it into three parts, calling its inhabitants Aquitani, Belgae, and Celtae.4 The Aquitani, they said, are wholly different, not only in respect to their language but also in respect to their physique — more like the Iberians than the Galatae; while the rest of the inhabitants are Galatic in appearance, although not all speak the same language, but some make slight variations in their languages. "
Click to expand...

correct, but ancient iberians only covered the east side as far as modern Valencia. Central and southern Spain was not iberian in strabo times.
Iberians stretched in a mix to the rhone river in southern france. there ancient historians state iberians and ligurians clashed in warfare
 
therefore you are able of translating me a text in iberian towards Basque? you confonez Basque which is ancient Gallic people with the iberian who is people of the family of the Sardinian and to have such lacuna is ridiculous!
 
Are Mozambique people Portuguese because of portuguese speaking? Are Irish Germans because they use (german) English? Are Russians same people as Bosniaks because of "slavic" language? No.
Are Turks settler in Germany Germans? Or will be after 100-200 years because they use german language and and give birth to more children (to 8) than Germans (0-1). Are all this names at the beginning of human kind or it is changing like Russia was Soviet Union,Grand Duchy of Moscow, Golden Horde etc.?
My point of view is that R1b are true European or sons of this Aryans, R1a are "unwanted" sons of R and local Indian (or indo-iranian) people. About I - they are truly Hebrew, J people are Semites (I,J,K), R1a, some subclades are Khazars, so turkic people who takes religion. Maybe it is not political correct, but that is my researches and thinking for now.
 
vandalorum said:
Are Mozambique people Portuguese because of portuguese speaking? Are Irish Germans because they use (german) English? Are Russians same people as Bosniaks because of "slavic" language? No.
Are Turks settler in Germany Germans? Or will be after 100-200 years because they use german language and and give birth to more children (to 8) than Germans (0-1). Are all this names at the beginning of human kind or it is changing like Russia was Soviet Union,Grand Duchy of Moscow, Golden Horde etc.?
My point of view is that R1b are true European or sons of this Aryans, R1a are "unwanted" sons of R and local Indian (or indo-iranian) people. About I - they are truly Hebrew, J people are Semites (I,J,K), R1a, some subclades are Khazars, so turkic people who takes religion. Maybe it is not political correct, but that is my researches and thinking for now.
Click to expand...

There's more to it than Y chromosome and MTdna, some southern whites in the US may belong to L or A, because one of their ancestors was black, does that make them west African? Y chromosome I isn't Semitic, is it? I'm pretty sure it's most common in far eastern Europe. As for K, some subclades of K are exclusive to places like England, Germany or Scandinavia. J can be divided into J 1 or 2, J1 is most common in southwestern Asia, but J2 is common in central-west Asia and Mediterranean Europe.
 
John Doe said:
There's more to it than Y chromosome and MTdna, some southern whites in the US may belong to L or A, because one of their ancestors was black, does that make them west African? Y chromosome I isn't Semitic, is it? I'm pretty sure it's most common in far eastern Europe. As for K, some subclades of K are exclusive to places like England, Germany or Scandinavia. J can be divided into J 1 or 2, J1 is most common in southwestern Asia, but J2 is common in central-west Asia and Mediterranean Europe.
Click to expand...

I is pure Hebrew. J is Semitic (semi - half). R1b at generally is "Aryan". I do not know which subclade exactly.
I live in Poland, I look everyday at Poles, I lived in Holland, UK, Finland, so I have my own studies about their phenotype. I personaly can fit in Belenux, but in Poland I am in minority with my prevail North-Atlantid look. I see every summer the skin colour of Poles. Most of them tan differently than for example pure Dutch or Irish people.
 
vandalorum said:
I is pure Hebrew. J is Semitic (semi - half). R1b at generally is "Aryan". I do not know which subclade exactly.
I live in Poland, I look everyday at Poles, I lived in Holland, UK, Finland, so I have my own studies about their phenotype. I personaly can fit in Belenux, but in Poland I am in minority with my prevail North-Atlantid look. I see every summer the skin colour of Poles. Most of them tan differently than for example pure Dutch or Irish people.
Click to expand...
R1a, R1b and J2 are about 20 thousand years old. No recent language, religion or culture can go back that far and claim continuity.

R1b at generally is "Aryan"
Click to expand...
Aryans were Indo-Iranians and ended up in Middle East. What they have in common with R1b in Western Europe? Neither Europe speak Iranian dialect, nor we have historical records about Indo-Iranians in Europe.

Recently there was a discovery of R1a in Yamna culture, around 5,000 years ago. But still it doesn't tell us if Yamna was a homeland of Indo-European. Poor chaps didn't left anything written for us. It will take mirriad of archeological and genetic clues to make this connection, and we will never know for sure. To link R1a or b with any known culture reaching 20 k years will be impossible.
 
R1b is a very old and widespread haplotype, but so far it doesn't seem to have been found in the presumed IE homeland. In western Europe, it seems to cluster near the Mediterranean and Atlantic coasts, so I think some subclades may have arrived in western Europe through a different route than the Anatolia to Balkan to eastern European route that some subclades of R1b probably followed.
 
R1 (or R1b) came to India and return home to Europe. Not all were traveling. R1a is a result of this journey to east as R1b can be, but R1b is more this "Aryan" than R1a people. For example "sanskrit" was written by local people (r1a) in their language - indo-iranian with trace in "slavic" language, which still exist, the first R1b can be Basque language, which is almost extinct (exist only in Basque community).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top