Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
E1b1b is more common in Greece (21%) than in Turkey (11%), but it's considerably higher in both those countries than it is in German (5.5%) and England (2%). I don't know about "central Asian markers". Can you explain about that?
Almost all of E1b1b in Greece is E-V13, though in Turkey that clade can only be found near the Western shores. It is virtually non-existent further inland, while i.e. in Germany it reaches up to 8% in the Central and Southern part of the country. The E1b1b in Turkey is mostly E-M123. It is rather insignificant in Greece or Germany. This clade dominates in the Near East.
As for the Central Asian markers, Turkey has some exotic markers which originate in Asia. These markers came in the region with the Ottoman Turks in the middle ages, but they are not to be found among Greeks (or Armenians). If there was recent intermixture then we would be able to detect these markers (even at lower rate) among Greeks. So we can rule out mixture because of the Ottoman empire. Whatever the genetic correlation between Greeks and Turks, it was there before the Ottoman Turks arrived. I.e. the relatedness between Greeks and Anatolians.
The point is how many Turkish people are related to these Proto-Turkic nations that came in the first place from the steps. Maybe the majority of them are mixed with European population. Recall the jenissaries were Balkan males. This says a lot, I think.
Hi Clarissant,
I have some doubts.
The dating is indirect, but 45000 BC might be correct.
Gravettian appeared only 30000 BC.
First modern humans in Europe would have been Bohùnicians in Moravia, 50000 year old, tough they didn't find skelletons.
The Gibraltar Strait was never dry land, alltough during the ice ages ( 125000 year ago and 20000 year ago ) it was quite narrow.
The main problem is, they found only these 2 skelletons, in only 1 location.
They found many Cro Magnon bones and skelletons in Europe, they were much taller than the Grimaldi.
There is some A1a Y DNA in Europe today.
I would think they crossed Gibraltar some 20 - 25000 year ago.
A1a probably was in North Western Africa then, before Y haplo E1b1 toke over, coming from North Eastern Africa
There are many problems with this hypothesis, including:
- The figures don't show steatopygia. Steatopygia is characterized by the angle between the back and the buttocks, not just a large buttocks. The figures don't have this angle. Much more likely is that they're an exaggeration based on the valued female physical characteristics of their culture.
- Even if they did, it would be possible that steatopygia was once more widespread than it is now.
- If you're proposing a Gibraltar area introduction of these African lineages, it conflicts with the archaeology of the Gravettian culture, which shows an origin near Crimea.
- Is there any evidence of Khoisan even in North Africa?
Then why is there so little Haplogroup I diversity in Hellenic/Greek areas? For having its early stages there, it sure looks like a latecomer to there. And how old do you think Haplogroup I is anyway? It's not really on the same timescale as Homer...
..............
Re evidence of the Khoisan people in Europe, I think there is...for example, the Khoisan are mainly of haplogroup A and that haplogroup has been found in Europe (and throughtout the world).
.........
..........
Hi Aberdeen,
You wrote: " Your comments don't make much sense to me. First of all, if you're talking about Albert Lord, he worked with Parry to develop a theory about oral poetry. He wasn't involved in the study of genetics. Also, there's not much in the way of cultural affinities connecting Turkey to Atlantic Europe, at least not since the end of the Neolithic. Turkish isn't even an IE language- it was brought to Turkey in the Middle Ages by invading Turks who were originally from Central Asia. Greek is IE, but less closely related to German, Gaelic, English or Spanish than they are to each other, with English being a Germanic language with a lot of French grafted on to it. And the genetic profile of Turkey and Greece match each other much better than they match Germany, Britain, Ireland or Spain. If you refer to the very handy list of genetic profiles for different European countries that Maciamo has provided for us in the Genetics section of this website, you'll see that both Turkey and Greece have a lot more J2 and E1b1b than Britain or Spain, and a lot less R1b. The interesting thing about Britain, Ireland and Spain is just how dominant R1b is in those countries. And of course Germany has a lot more R1b than Greece or Turkey but less than Britain or Spain. Turkey has a lot less I haplotype than any of the other countries. As for the Illyrians, people can't seem to agree as to who they were, although some of us see a connection to the Albanians. If you buy yourself an atlas, you'll see how close Greece and Turkey are to one another, and how far they are from Spain, Britain and Ireland. And of course there are a lot of cultural affinities between Greece and Turkey today, simply because the Turks occupied Greece for centuries. And that might have affected the genetic similarities just as much as proximity did."
My reply:
A) When I refer to Lord, I'm referencing his theory on oral tradition in relation to comparative cultural studies, not genetic studies. And according to Lord, the iconic Hellenic poem, The Odyssey, shared similarities to Balkan oral traditions/ poems. In this way, there was a cultural diffusion between these regions or perhaps, they are sprung from an ancient Illyrian culture that encompassed Greece (or vice versa).
B) I never suggested that relatively modern British/Scottish/ Iberian/ Irish culture corresponds to contemporary Islamic/ Ottoman Turkish culture. I compare them only on a comparative genetic level. Also, haplogroup I is present in both these regions too. So, my general viewpoint/ argument is at a macro level i.e. comparative/ standardised level. And thus, at the macro comparative level, British and Turkish genetic profiles display an affinity (as shown in the attached diagram above).
Moreover, I made the point earlier that, perhaps, it is ridiculous to even try to assign an ethnographic name/ nation to a single haplogroup. Perhaps, haplgroup I & R (both Rb & Ra) etc were always historically linked together....whatever the case, more evidence is needed to construct a sound argument either way i.e. tribes were always a mixture of haplogroups, or perhaps, once upon a time, there were separate tribes that correspond to single haplogroup etc.
C) As far as I understand, Albania's comparative haplogroup profile is similar to Turkey, in contrast to the West Balkans (which have haplogroup I levels corresponding to Scandinavian/ Germanic nations and Sardinia. Also, ancient Illyria roughly corresponds to ancient Dalmatia and regions adjacent to it i.e. Slovenia/ Croatia/ B-H/ Serbia/ Macedonia(?), and arguably, some places outside the current Balkan national borders. In contrast, Albania appears to have more of an Ottoman/ Turkish (?) identity and history; however, I believe Albania should be included as part of ancient Illyria, but certainly, Albania's modern borders do not encompass the expansive ancient Balkan regions of ancient Illyria.
D) There are well-known ancient Greek settlements on Croatian Islands, so there is a shared history between both countries. Likewise, German & Slavic nations share a history too i.e. there were Germanic settlements on Slavic lands and Slavic settlements on Germanic lands. My point is this: yes, Rb is present in modern Germany, but ancient Germania/ Kerman would have encompassed larger areas than its present borders, and thus have experienced Rb and Ra encroachment on its expansive ancient lands. In much the same way, Turkey and Greece experienced a population exchange of sorts. However, according to comparative genetic studies, the British haplogroup profile share an affinity with Turkey, whilst Greece shares a comparative affinity with Germany.
Another possibility is that perhaps, the Rb presence in Germany is evidence of a proto Celtic/ Gothic (?) / Illyrian (?) tribe that had members from Rb/ I/ (Ra?) haplogroups that settled in the regions of modern Germany and resettled other parts of Western Europe.
However, I don't think the Rb haplogroup can be regarded as "Germanic" because the places where it is concentrated is not in traditional "Germanic" lands. I see it more as Basque/ Celtic/ Gothic / Turkic. However, perhaps there is no distinctively Germanic haplogroup at all? Perhaps, "Germanic" can only be applied to culture and language? I think this might be the case actually...
In fact, at this stage, it might be more factual to talk of Basque (Rb), Illyrian (I), Sarmatian (Ra) haplogroups...
E) Re J & E haplogroups in Greece etc, yes, I made the point earlier that haplogroup I most probably shared Europe with more ancient haplogroups. Also, they were most probably in Europe prior to the appearance of haplogroup I. I did state that I thought Africans were the first to set foot in Europe, and thus the first "Europeans".
Hope that clarifies my argument for you a bit more
Did you read history of slavic serbian propaganda?
Thanks for your update Bicicleur
Yes, you're probably right about the revised date of 45,000. And you make very interesting new points too...
And yes, although the Gravettian culture is dated to only 30,000 BC, I do believe that haplogroup I did not appear until perhaps 25,000 years ago. Thus, I highly doubt the people that belonged to the Grimaldi skeleton left no trace of their culture in Europe. IMO, it seems more likely that the Gravettian Culture is the proto Khoisan people's culture, as the "Illyrian" phenotype (i.e. in regions where the haplogroup I is concentrated, the people tend to be on average tall and lean - more so than the short statured Grimaldi skeletons and the Gravettian Venus figures).
Also, there are remnants of African phenotypes/ haplogroups in Europe. (And as you mentioned, there are indeed Europeans with African haplogroup A1a). And then there are those displaying greater African phenotypes that were often lumped together with the Romani. However, many early European nobles displayed African phenotypes too. In this way, I think that African and European haplogroups lived side by side in ancient Europe and prehistory Europe...just as they do, more or less, today. However, it seems logical to conclude that the Africans arrived in Europe first, and so many "prehistory" artifacts we find in Europe today is evidence of their culture.
Re the Khosian, I believe they are mainly haplogroup A (and even B - possible even E??). But please don't quote me on that just yet, I'll need to confirm it..
As for the postulation of the first human arriving in Europe via Moravia, 50,000 year ago...until a skeleton is found to back up the dating, it appears this a still a theory....thus the Grimaldi skeletons are the only evidence we have as yet of modern humans in Europe...And while there were other "hybrid" humans in Europe, I've read that modern humans predate these so-called hybrid humans i.e. the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons.
Cheers
PS Yes, it seems the Khoisan are Haplogroup A, B and E according to the attached diagram.
View attachment 6404
______________________________________________
Hi Aberdeen,
You wrote: " Your comments don't make much sense to me. First of all, if you're talking about Albert Lord, he worked with Parry to develop a theory about oral poetry. He wasn't involved in the study of genetics. Also, there's not much in the way of cultural affinities connecting Turkey to Atlantic Europe, at least not since the end of the Neolithic. Turkish isn't even an IE language- it was brought to Turkey in the Middle Ages by invading Turks who were originally from Central Asia. Greek is IE, but less closely related to German, Gaelic, English or Spanish than they are to each other, with English being a Germanic language with a lot of French grafted on to it. And the genetic profile of Turkey and Greece match each other much better than they match Germany, Britain, Ireland or Spain. If you refer to the very handy list of genetic profiles for different European countries that Maciamo has provided for us in the Genetics section of this website, you'll see that both Turkey and Greece have a lot more J2 and E1b1b than Britain or Spain, and a lot less R1b. The interesting thing about Britain, Ireland and Spain is just how dominant R1b is in those countries. And of course Germany has a lot more R1b than Greece or Turkey but less than Britain or Spain. Turkey has a lot less I haplotype than any of the other countries. As for the Illyrians, people can't seem to agree as to who they were, although some of us see a connection to the Albanians. If you buy yourself an atlas, you'll see how close Greece and Turkey are to one another, and how far they are from Spain, Britain and Ireland. And of course there are a lot of cultural affinities between Greece and Turkey today, simply because the Turks occupied Greece for centuries. And that might have affected the genetic similarities just as much as proximity did."
My reply:
A) When I refer to Lord, I'm referencing his theory on oral tradition in relation to comparative cultural studies, not genetic studies. And according to Lord, the iconic Hellenic poem, The Odyssey, shared similarities to Balkan oral traditions/ poems. In this way, there was a cultural diffusion between these regions or perhaps, they are sprung from an ancient Illyrian culture that encompassed Greece (or vice versa).
B) I never suggested that relatively modern British/Scottish/ Iberian/ Irish culture corresponds to contemporary Islamic/ Ottoman Turkish culture. I compare them only on a comparative genetic level. Also, haplogroup I is present in both these regions too. So, my general viewpoint/ argument is at a macro level i.e. comparative/ standardised level. And thus, at the macro comparative level, British and Turkish genetic profiles display an affinity (as shown in the attached diagram above).
Moreover, I made the point earlier that, perhaps, it is ridiculous to even try to assign an ethnographic name/ nation to a single haplogroup. Perhaps, haplgroup I & R (both Rb & Ra) etc were always historically linked together....whatever the case, more evidence is needed to construct a sound argument either way i.e. tribes were always a mixture of haplogroups, or perhaps, once upon a time, there were separate tribes that correspond to single haplogroup etc.
C) As far as I understand, Albania's comparative haplogroup profile is similar to Turkey, in contrast to the West Balkans (which have haplogroup I levels corresponding to Scandinavian/ Germanic nations and Sardinia. Also, ancient Illyria roughly corresponds to ancient Dalmatia and regions adjacent to it i.e. Slovenia/ Croatia/ B-H/ Serbia/ Macedonia(?), and arguably, some places outside the current Balkan national borders. In contrast, Albania appears to have more of an Ottoman/ Turkish (?) identity and history; however, I believe Albania should be included as part of ancient Illyria, but certainly, Albania's modern borders do not encompass the expansive ancient Balkan regions of ancient Illyria.
D) There are well-known ancient Greek settlements on Croatian Islands, so there is a shared history between both countries. Likewise, German & Slavic nations share a history too i.e. there were Germanic settlements on Slavic lands and Slavic settlements on Germanic lands. My point is this: yes, Rb is present in modern Germany, but ancient Germania/ Kerman would have encompassed larger areas than its present borders, and thus have experienced Rb and Ra encroachment on its expansive ancient lands. In much the same way, Turkey and Greece experienced a population exchange of sorts. However, according to comparative genetic studies, the British haplogroup profile share an affinity with Turkey, whilst Greece shares a comparative affinity with Germany.
Another possibility is that perhaps, the Rb presence in Germany is evidence of a proto Celtic/ Gothic (?) / Illyrian (?) tribe that had members from Rb/ I/ (Ra?) haplogroups that settled in the regions of modern Germany and resettled other parts of Western Europe.
However, I don't think the Rb haplogroup can be regarded as "Germanic" because the places where it is concentrated is not in traditional "Germanic" lands. I see it more as Basque/ Celtic/ Gothic / Turkic. However, perhaps there is no distinctively Germanic haplogroup at all? Perhaps, "Germanic" can only be applied to culture and language? I think this might be the case actually...
In fact, at this stage, it might be more factual to talk of Basque (Rb), Illyrian (I), Sarmatian (Ra) haplogroups...
E) Re J & E haplogroups in Greece etc, yes, I made the point earlier that haplogroup I most probably shared Europe with more ancient haplogroups. Also, they were most probably in Europe prior to the appearance of haplogroup I. I did state that I thought Africans were the first to set foot in Europe, and thus the first "Europeans".
Hope that clarifies my argument for you a bit more
Regardless of subclade, Turkey and Greece have more J2 and E1b1b than Germany, Britain, Ireland and Spain, and have far less R1b than those countries. On the whole, Turkey and Greece, despite their differences, are more like one another than either of them are like the other countries mentioned. That's also true culturallly, despite the fact that Turkey is largely muslim and non-IE speaking. Look at the foods and social attitudes in those countries and see if you don't see some shared cultural traits that no doubt came from their shared history.
Please refer me to a scientific paper that talks about those "exotic markers" from Asia that are found in Turkey but not in Greece. A search of the internet didn't produce any results for me.
It's not exactly like that. They are relatively close, but given they are neighboring countries they are relatively far away from each other in the Autosomal dna charts.
As for cultural overlaps. This is not really the topic here.
That's odd. Given the mongoloid admixture in Turks as a topic is all over the internet. In any case, the very page you are getting your numbers from has some extra notes under the schematic.
Wasn't Sarmatian one of Iranic languages and not very closely related to Slavic?
Actually, Clarissant is presenting a cultural argument, based on what I consider to be a misreading of the modern theory of the oral poetry tradition.
As for the DNA, you're still being cryptic. If you're talking about the DNA haplotypes that can be found at low levels in Turkey but not in Greece, they're not found in Britain, Ireland or Spain either. Nor in Germany, except for very low levels of N and Q, but those are different subclades of N and Q, from different Asian sources. If you're talking about the East Asian portion of Turkish autosomal, it's not found in Greece, but it's not found in northern Europe either. It is a fact that despite differences between Greek and Turkish DNA, they're closer to each other in DNA content than they are to the DNA content of Germany, Britain, Ireland or Spain. The East Asian portion of Turkish DNA is the only way in which Greece and Turkey differ significantly on an autosomal level.
Hope that clarifies my argument for you a bit more
This thread has been viewed 438605 times.