Neolithic farmers: Southwest Europeans or West Asians ?

... - the first neolithic people was in Southern France since the 6000/5500BC with pottery but without any megalith! For COON, some traits of these seafarers recalled Sumerians but the faces did not check it at all
so, the 'gedrosia' element in « Celtic », « Basque » or « Scandinavian » could be old in these populations and even be linked to megalithism - the problem is that it proposed a way by southern e sea, not by northern European lands !
It is not a theory, only e possibility – future will tell us I hope !

I also think this possibility should be kept in mind. Especially that what you write about a possible Sumerian connection being mentioned by somebody already (e.g. Coon) is very interesting, because I also had this idea already. The relatively high Gedrosia component of Basques could be a hint for a neolithic origin of their language. The Sumerian language is peculiar like the basque and there are some remarkable similarities, although officially it has not been accepted by scholars. I know this all is still very speculative and data are perhaps unreliable, but I think it could be possible that the gedosia component could have left the near-east before caucasus and south-west asian "components" merged and settled in the former land of "gedrosians" (North-west Iran, Mesopotamia or somewhere near). A recent bayesian analysis yielded 3750 BC as most likely date of semitic language genesism, which is late enough. That could be an explanation for the lack of caucasus on the altantic fringe. I'm aware that talking in terms of "caucasus", "gedrosian" etc. is simplistic, but that's all we have currently. It also should not be forgotteh that the "Atlantic_med" component today still reaches approx. 20% in the middle east itself.
After all, I'm undecided and consider Maciamo's scenario of a land-route of IE (with some modifications) also very likely.
 
More informations about the Baluch People. I usually do not quote Wikipedia but this article seems to be correct.



The Baloch or Baluch (Balochi: بلوچ) are an ethnic group who mainly inhabit the Balochistan region in the southeast corner of the Iranian plateau in Western Asia.

The Baluch people mainly speak Baluchi, which is a branch of the Iranian languages, and more specifically of the North-western Iranian languages, that is highly influenced by that of Mesopotamia and shares similarities with Kurdish and other languages of the region. It also contains archaic features reminiscent of Old Persian and Avestan.[7] They inhabit mountainous terrains and deserts, and maintain a very distinct cultural identity. The Baloch-speaking population worldwide is estimated to be in the range of 10 to 15 million.[citation needed] However, the exact number of Baloch and those who are or claim to be of Baloch ancestry is difficult to determine. In the Punjab province of Pakistan almost 10% of peoples are Balochi.[citation needed] Most of them speak Saraiki but in the Jhang area of Punjab, the majority of the Baloch population speak Punjabi also.[citation needed]

It is possible that there are more Baloch than simply those who claim Balochi as their mother tongue. This, however, raises the question as to who is and is not a Baloch, as many surrounding peoples claim to be of Baloch descent but do not speak Balochi. The Brahui, having lived in proximity to the Baloch, have absorbed substantial linguistic and genetic admixture from the Baloch and in many cases are indistinguishable. Despite very few cultural differences from the Baloch, the Brahui are still regarded as a separate group on account of language difference.

The Baluchis came from West Iran/Mesopotamia and played a huge role in spreading Gedrosia, this is my opinion.
 
I find very interesting these last two posts we are doing bets, but alternative bets can be fructuous wait and see more discoverings
 
I add that a south maritime way for the 'gedrosian' minority is not stupid even if the continental way keeps its chances-
other problem? a kinf of basque language was (maybe, according to a survey on finnish saami language) spoken before the Finn Saami colonized northern Scandinavia - that doesn't match too well with the south maritime way because if basque is a megalithic language, it - Could we figure out some basque speaking tribes (not too numerous) travelling side by side or in not too bad relations with numerous I-Eans and keeping their languages??? it remains for me that the not "autochtonous" element in first Megalithic Culture of Western Europe coasts came surely enough from East Mediterranea but then what language???
could we imagine that the finnish languages came in Saamiland after the Megaliths one (-4000/-3000)???
 
I add that a south maritime way for the 'gedrosian' minority is not stupid even if the continental way keeps its chances-
other problem? a kinf of basque language was (maybe, according to a survey on finnish saami language) spoken before the Finn Saami colonized northern Scandinavia

Right, those are two hypotheses which may be independent from each other. If one of them appears wrong (near-eastern origin of basque language), then the other still can be right.
Not sure if I already mentioned, but an IE-origin of the Gedrosian component by land route into western europe is questioned a bit once more when looking at the genetic peculiarities of the basques, which are obvious, but surprisingly not by a decreased gedrosian component, but by decreased north_euro component instead, similar to Sardinia. So it could be possible that IE might have brought only north_euro components to WE, without gedrosian.

- that doesn't match too well with the south maritime way because if basque is a megalithic language, it - Could we figure out some basque speaking tribes (not too numerous) travelling side by side or in not too bad relations with numerous I-Eans and keeping their languages??? it remains for me that the not "autochtonous" element in first Megalithic Culture of Western Europe coasts came surely enough from East Mediterranea but then what language???

Speculation: Maybe the basque language really was originally based on old european languages, but later got mixed with advanced terms (f.i. metal-working) from megalithic peoples and others.
 
Right, those are two hypotheses which may be independent from each other. If one of them appears wrong (near-eastern origin of basque language), then the other still can be right.
Not sure if I already mentioned, but an IE-origin of the Gedrosian component by land route into western europe is questioned a bit once more when looking at the genetic peculiarities of the basques, which are obvious, but surprisingly not by a decreased gedrosian component, but by decreased north_euro component instead, similar to Sardinia. So it could be possible that IE might have brought only north_euro components to WE, without gedrosian.



Speculation: Maybe the basque language really was originally based on old european languages, but later got mixed with advanced terms (f.i. metal-working) from megalithic peoples and others.

I find interesting your analysis
so, if I understand well, possibly a pre-I-E old european (mesolithic? older?) language, after that technical terms from Eastern Mediterranea (Levant) send there by the elite that accultured Atlantic coastal populations? just before the I-Eans arriving?
Why not? Some say (it's debated) that iberian language was a mixture of an undetermined non-I-E element, an basco-aquitan non I-E element, and some celtic loans... Some others note common terms in basque, sardignan substrate and other mediterranean coastal languages (albanian too, I believe) - maybe not so old as the basis of proto-basque but later the words send there by this supposed maritime elite I was speaking about?
good night (it 's good for the brain work)
 
Not sure if I already mentioned, but an IE-origin of the Gedrosian component by land route into western europe is questioned a bit once more when looking at the genetic peculiarities of the basques, which are obvious, but surprisingly not by a decreased gedrosian component, but by decreased north_euro component instead, similar to Sardinia. So it could be possible that IE might have brought only north_euro components to WE, without gedrosian.

Although I have to admit that the recent neolithic genetic samples support a different story for scandinavia than for iberia. Maybe the various R1b lineages could support these different stories too, I don't know. Without the basques, the IE explanation for R1b and "gedrosian" would be somewhat likely. It's undecidable at the moment.
 
What if R1b folks did not enter Europe through Balkan but went to North Africa and then divide themselves into two groups. One group entered Europe across Gibraltar and the other went south (huge number of R1b around Cameroon)?

That could explain why some population lack "gedrosian" component and it would also mean that we should look for that component in some sub Saharan population.
 
What if R1b folks did not enter Europe through Balkan but went to North Africa and then divide themselves into two groups. One group entered Europe across Gibraltar and the other went south (huge number of R1b around Cameroon)?

That could explain why some population lack "gedrosian" component and it would also mean that we should look for that component in some sub Saharan population.

lol, because they are two completely different branches of R1b.
 

This thread has been viewed 30032 times.

Back
Top