World Families Forums - Why did do the Basques have so much R1b-P312 and what does that mean?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 21, 2014, 08:17:21 AM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  Why did do the Basques have so much R1b-P312 and what does that mean?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Why did do the Basques have so much R1b-P312 and what does that mean?  (Read 4246 times)
Jason Bourgeois
Project Coordinator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« Reply #50 on: April 16, 2012, 10:15:13 AM »

It seems to me that R1b-M153 must have arisen "on site" after the arrival and settlement of Basque-speaking people.  There are at least two theories to explain its presence there:

1.  The original Basque-speaking (or Aquitanian-speaking) people of southwestern France were R1b, thus dissociating R1b from Indo-European language.  In this theory, Z196 and its descendants in southern France and Iberia would be associated primarily with non-Indo-European-speaking peoples.

2.  R1b represents an intrusion from a non-Basque-speaking people (probably of Celtic or proto-Celtic origin) and thus signifies a gene flow from Indo-European-speaking populations.  In this theory, Basque would have been a language spoken *before* this intrusion, by peoples who were not R1b (perhaps some form of I), and the R1b newcomers would then have been "assimilated" into this language culture.
Logged
razyn
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #51 on: April 16, 2012, 11:40:26 AM »

These matters were debated on Eupedia last year, and at some point I even participated in that, before I got enough Experience Points or whatever to start a separate thread about Z196 as such.  In case anyone is interested (there are wildly variant viewpoints on that forum, but some very well informed Europeans only post there), here is the old thread:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26727-Lack-of-G2a-in-Basque
Logged

R1b Z196*
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #52 on: April 16, 2012, 02:38:47 PM »

It seems to me that R1b-M153 must have arisen "on site" after the arrival and settlement of Basque-speaking people.  There are at least two theories to explain its presence there:

1.  The original Basque-speaking (or Aquitanian-speaking) people of southwestern France were R1b, thus dissociating R1b from Indo-European language.  In this theory, Z196 and its descendants in southern France and Iberia would be associated primarily with non-Indo-European-speaking peoples.

2.  R1b represents an intrusion from a non-Basque-speaking people (probably of Celtic or proto-Celtic origin) and thus signifies a gene flow from Indo-European-speaking populations.  In this theory, Basque would have been a language spoken *before* this intrusion, by peoples who were not R1b (perhaps some form of I), and the R1b newcomers would then have been "assimilated" into this language culture.


Number 2 seems much more likely to me. We should probably be speaking in terms of the parent DF27, rather than it's subclade Z196. Assigning a non IE language to all of DF27, which is spread throughout Europe, presents far more problems than those of the second scenario.
Logged
A_Wode
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #53 on: April 17, 2012, 10:47:02 PM »

My own thought is the spread of "Caucasus/West Asian" genes post-dates the Roman period. Consider this, a North-West Norwegian has more of this component than some areas of France. Isn't this strange? Well I suppose it isn't if you consider almost all of Europe, except some isolated regions like Basque territory must have been spreading genes around, perhaps more female related than male? I don't know, but it seems female variation exceeds male.
Logged
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #54 on: April 18, 2012, 05:20:41 AM »

It seems to me that R1b-M153 must have arisen "on site" after the arrival and settlement of Basque-speaking people.  There are at least two theories to explain its presence there:

1.  The original Basque-speaking (or Aquitanian-speaking) people of southwestern France were R1b, thus dissociating R1b from Indo-European language.  In this theory, Z196 and its descendants in southern France and Iberia would be associated primarily with non-Indo-European-speaking peoples.

2.  R1b represents an intrusion from a non-Basque-speaking people (probably of Celtic or proto-Celtic origin) and thus signifies a gene flow from Indo-European-speaking populations.  In this theory, Basque would have been a language spoken *before* this intrusion, by peoples who were not R1b (perhaps some form of I), and the R1b newcomers would then have been "assimilated" into this language culture.


Number 2 seems much more likely to me. We should probably be speaking in terms of the parent DF27, rather than it's subclade Z196. Assigning a non IE language to all of DF27, which is spread throughout Europe, presents far more problems than those of the second scenario.
I think that dissociating DNA from languages is what presents far less problems that trying to match languages with DNA. Remember (I have to remind that everytime) that it is not only Basques, in ancient times there were a much larger region in Western Europe that spoke non IE languages and that it is today heavy in R1B
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #55 on: April 18, 2012, 08:39:20 AM »

I copied over the STR variance by haplogroup information from the STR Wars thread, primarily because I wanted everyone to see the difference in diversity between M153, the "Basque marker" and its probable parent, Z209 and the North-South cluster and then Z196 above that. My M153 data is very limited.
For the Z169-1418(North-South) variety I included everyone with the STR signature, not just the Z209+ tested folks.

Quote from: Mikewww link=topic=10513.msg129272#msg129272
Relative variance with the 49 mixed speed, non-multicopy, non-null STRs from FTDNA's 1st 67:
[font=courier
Z196_________:  Var=1.00 (N=285)   
Z196-1418(NS):  Var=0.92 (N=97)   
SRY2627______:  Var=0.83 (N=151)   
M153_________:  Var=0.31 (N=7)

U152________:  Var=1.07 (N=806)
L2__________:  Var=1.02 (N=287)
Z56_________:  Var=0.97 (N=32)   
Z36_________:  Var=0.92 (N=34)   

L21__________:  Var=0.99 (N=2590)
DF21_________:  Var=0.80 (N=116)
L513_________:  Var=0.75 (N=157)
Z253_________:  Var=0.61 (N=145)
M222_________:  Var=0.49 (N=540)
Z255_________:  Var=0.39 (N=102) [/font]

Albeit that the data for M153 is limited, it appears to be quite young, younger than M222, for example.   The z1418-North-South people are much older and are spread all over.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
razyn
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #56 on: April 18, 2012, 10:16:15 AM »

I copied over the STR variance by haplogroup information from the STR Wars thread, primarily because I wanted everyone to see the difference in diversity between M153, the "Basque marker" and its probable parent, Z209 and the North-South cluster and then Z196 above that. My M153 data is very limited.
For the Z196-1418(North-South) variety I included everyone with the STR signature, not just the Z209+ tested folks.
___________

Albeit that the data for M153 is limited, it appears to be quite young, younger than M222, for example.   The z1418-North-South people are much older and are spread all over.

To my way of thinking, this is the rational point of departure for discussing the topic of this thread.  Is the sample-size problem a function of using only 67-marker haplotypes?  Because I'd think you could get much bigger Basque samples, but tested at a much lower level.  Then it clearly wouldn't be possible to compare "49 mixed speed, non-multicopy, non-null STRs," of guys who had only taken a 12-marker test and an M-153 SNP test.  Most of the guys in the M153 project at least got 37-marker tests.  (2 out of 13 only tested 12 markers -- and the "Basque" SNP.)  Of the remaining eleven, only one didn't have the 1418 signature.  His was 1417.

Somewhere out there, there should be a mine rich enough for data miners to work, with some hope of profit.  But I'm not sure where it is.  Academic studies still seem to be looking at just the first ten or twelve markers -- although I have no clue what may be "in press" or under peer review, as we speak.  It may be that someone on the planet is looking at long haplotypes, but I'll believe that when I see it.  Anyway, at that level, they can't be targeting the 1418 guys for M153 SNP testing -- nor for that matter Z196, Z209, Z220, etc.
Logged

R1b Z196*
A_Wode
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #57 on: April 18, 2012, 12:40:08 PM »

I think that dissociating DNA from languages is what presents far less problems that trying to match languages with DNA. Remember (I have to remind that everytime) that it is not only Basques, in ancient times there were a much larger region in Western Europe that spoke non IE languages and that it is today heavy in R1B

I am okay with this idea, provided the fact that there is an admission that we do not know anything about these languages. That said, could they not also be dead branches of PIE? For all intents and purposes these languages could be anything - of course no expert on the topic, I would expect to see far more of substance than what was provided by this Theo Vennemann character. I have yet to see anything - except that "they must be Basque-like" which I think is a brutal argument.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #58 on: April 18, 2012, 05:15:41 PM »

I copied over the STR variance by haplogroup information from the STR Wars thread, primarily because I wanted everyone to see the difference in diversity between M153, the "Basque marker" and its probable parent, Z209 and the North-South cluster and then Z196 above that. My M153 data is very limited.
For the Z196-1418(North-South) variety I included everyone with the STR signature, not just the Z209+ tested folks.
___________

Albeit that the data for M153 is limited, it appears to be quite young, younger than M222, for example.   The z1418-North-South people are much older and are spread all over.

To my way of thinking, this is the rational point of departure for discussing the topic of this thread.  Is the sample-size problem a function of using only 67-marker haplotypes?  Because I'd think you could get much bigger Basque samples, but tested at a much lower level.  Then it clearly wouldn't be possible to compare "49 mixed speed, non-multicopy, non-null STRs," of guys who had only taken a 12-marker test and an M-153 SNP test.  Most of the guys in the M153 project at least got 37-marker tests.  (2 out of 13 only tested 12 markers -- and the "Basque" SNP.)  Of the remaining eleven, only one didn't have the 1418 signature.  His was 1417.

I looked at the Basque project.  I have all of the M153+ I can find anywhere in FTDNA projects in the Haplotype Data P312xL21 file.  There were a couple of good suspects who were not deep clade tested but I honestly couldn't tell whether they were probably M153+ or just plain North-South and probably Z209+ M153-.  

If I back off to 37 length markers I get a few more M153 which gets us up to 15 - which is not really that bad a minimum number... not that good either.


Z196 All_______:  Var=0.98 [Mixed 24]  (N=372)   
Z196-1418(NS):_:  Var=1.00 [Mixed 24]  (N=117)   
M153___________:  Var=0.44 [Mixed 24]  (N=15)   

Z196 All_______:  Var=1.05 [Linear 16]  (N=372)   
Z196-1418(NS):_:  Var=1.03 [Linear 16]  (N=117)   
M153___________:  Var=0.43 [Linear 16]  (N=15)   


That doesn't really change anything so I'll say it again.  M153 appears to be quite young, perhaps about M222's age, for example.   The z1418-North-South people are much older and are spread all over.

Now what would be interesting would be either:
1) There were zero z196-1418-NS M153- people in the Basque populations or
2) There were M153 found outside of Aquitaine and Northern Iberia.

#1 is appears to be false as there are z196-1418-NS look people in the Basque project that are M153-. Well, I don't know. Are the following two Iberian surnames who just joined the Basque project? López and Yriarte?

#2 would be really interesting because that would be evidence that M153 and his some of his Z196 brothers might have arrived late into the pre-Basque/Basque culture.  I keep thinking about that one M153+ result in the Old Norway Project....   one does not a trend make, but if a M153 turned out to be a little more significant in Scandinavia than could be accounted for by an historic era movement...  I don't think we've ever found M153 in the Isles so if a Basque fisherman made it to Scandinavia his group didn't stop off at the Isles.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2012, 05:38:27 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #59 on: April 18, 2012, 07:32:13 PM »

It seems to me that R1b-M153 must have arisen "on site" after the arrival and settlement of Basque-speaking people.  There are at least two theories to explain its presence there:

1.  The original Basque-speaking (or Aquitanian-speaking) people of southwestern France were R1b, thus dissociating R1b from Indo-European language.  In this theory, Z196 and its descendants in southern France and Iberia would be associated primarily with non-Indo-European-speaking peoples.

2.  R1b represents an intrusion from a non-Basque-speaking people (probably of Celtic or proto-Celtic origin) and thus signifies a gene flow from Indo-European-speaking populations.  In this theory, Basque would have been a language spoken *before* this intrusion, by peoples who were not R1b (perhaps some form of I), and the R1b newcomers would then have been "assimilated" into this language culture.


Number 2 seems much more likely to me. We should probably be speaking in terms of the parent DF27, rather than it's subclade Z196. Assigning a non IE language to all of DF27, which is spread throughout Europe, presents far more problems than those of the second scenario.
I think that dissociating DNA from languages is what presents far less problems that trying to match languages with DNA. Remember (I have to remind that everytime) that it is not only Basques, in ancient times there were a much larger region in Western Europe that spoke non IE languages and that it is today heavy in R1B

While I would never suggest a one on one correlation between haplogroups and languages, we can't ignore the fact that IE languages are spoken throughout Europe, where R1b is the predominant HG. You may see that as a coincidence, but I do not.
I have always thought Ireland is the key. Their language has been Celtic for a very long time, and Ireland is close to 100% R1b. The only reasonable explanation I can see is that it was introduced there by R1b.
Any attempt to completely disassociate R1b from the introduction of IE  in Europe presents what I see as an insurmountable problem, and assumes there is no connection between language and population movements.
However that does not mean that all of R1b necessarily spoke IE, or that no other HG did so.
Logged
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #60 on: April 19, 2012, 05:03:39 AM »


While I would never suggest a one on one correlation between haplogroups and languages, we can't ignore the fact that IE languages are spoken throughout Europe, where R1b is the predominant HG. You may see that as a coincidence, but I do not.
I have always thought Ireland is the key. Their language has been Celtic for a very long time, and Ireland is close to 100% R1b. The only reasonable explanation I can see is that it was introduced there by R1b.
Any attempt to completely disassociate R1b from the introduction of IE  in Europe presents what I see as an insurmountable problem, and assumes there is no connection between language and population movements.
However that does not mean that all of R1b necessarily spoke IE, or that no other HG did so.
I have selected those key sentences in your post. Because they are resting all in the assumption that there is an univocal connection between language and population movements, and that is not the case. I don´t doubt that sometimes language is changed by population replacement, but there are plenty of examples of cultural replacement  without much change in population.
If you admit the possibility of cultura change then it becomes the alternative explanation for Celtic in Ireland and the problem of IE expansion is no longer unsurmountable.
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #61 on: April 19, 2012, 10:19:29 AM »

I have selected those key sentences in your post. Because they are resting all in the assumption that there is an univocal connection between language and population movements, and that is not the case. I don´t doubt that sometimes language is changed by population replacement, but there are plenty of examples of cultural replacement  without much change in population.
If you admit the possibility of cultura change then it becomes the alternative explanation for Celtic in Ireland and the problem of IE expansion is no longer unsurmountable.

Maybe in your mind, but not in mine. Ireland has seen few if any large scale conquests compared to other regions in Europe, no doubt due to it being an island and being on the geographic periphery of NW Europe. That anything cultural would have caused a language shift from non-IE to IE in Irish L21 is extremely unlikely.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2012, 11:04:13 AM by Richard Rocca » Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #62 on: April 19, 2012, 10:48:55 AM »

I have selected those key sentences in your post. Because they are resting all in the assumption that there is an univocal connection between language and population movements, and that is not the case. .I don´t doubt that sometimes language is changed by population replacement, but there are plenty of examples of cultural replacement  without much change in population
If you admit the possibility of cultura change then it becomes the alternative explanation for Celtic in Ireland and the problem of IE expansion is no longer unsurmountable.
I don't think anyone will say a total (100%) population change is required to change languages, but there must be some contact and probably some additional new people (to change the balance) at least enough to motivate the language change.

What are the examples of language replacement with little population change that you are thinking of?
« Last Edit: April 19, 2012, 06:01:58 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #63 on: April 19, 2012, 02:33:41 PM »


Maybe in your mind, but not in mine. Ireland has seen few if any large scale conquests compared to other regions in Europe, no doubt due to it being an island and being on the geographic periphery of NW Europe. That anything cultural would have caused a language shift from non-IE to IE in Irish L21 is extremely unlikely.

As an Irishman I would caution about this. Ireland is also a prime example of language-shift happening in the last 300 years where the vast bulk of population (97% today) shifted to language of a dominant introduced elite.

In 1700 about 90% of population spoke Irish, by 1770 this had dropped to around 66%, by 1800 it was down to 50%

The situation got so grave during the 19th century (with famine and mass migration) that some thought that Irish may cease to be a spoken language in the first two decades of the 20th century. Even 90 years of official "support" (mostly token at best) has not even fully stop the shift, with continunal population loss in Gaeltacht (irish speaking) areas. I've read reports from the 1960's-1970's that predicted the death of the language as a community language by 2000. This didn't happen thankfully.

Of course one could argue that shifting between two IE languages isn't too much of an issue. It however negates the fact that Irish and English (Celtic/Germanic) aren't the closest related in the IE family. That and Irish has a compeltely different word ordering then non-Celtic (insular celtic) languages. Been VSO instead of SVO of English eg.
"hit me the ball" vs. "I hit the ball"

Anyways leaving that aside I think the TMRCA data shows L21 as been under 4,000 years old, with highest varience on the continent. This at least implies a major population replacement of male lineages in Ireland sometime from the Late Bronze Age onwards (Ireland has been inhabited since 8,000 BC)
Logged
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #64 on: April 19, 2012, 05:52:44 PM »

I have selected those key sentences in your post. Because they are resting all in the assumption that there is an univocal connection between language and population movements, and that is not the case. .I don´t doubt that sometimes language is changed by population replacement, but there are plenty of examples of cultural replacement  without much change in population
If you admit the possibility of cultura change then it becomes the alternative explanation for Celtic in Ireland and the problem of IE expansion is no longer unsurmountable.
I don't think anyone will say a total (100%) population change is required to change languages, but there must be some contact at least to motivate the language change.

What are the examples of language replacement with little population change that you are thinking of?
Besides the numerous examples of modern societies in which the methodsw at the disposal of an state to impose a language are well known, for primitive societies we have the classical study by Fredrik Barth Ethnic groups and boundaries. The social organization of culture difference, where he showws how Baluchi is extending through the Pashtun because the Baluchi society, being hierarchical, is able to better integrate individuals while the more egalitarian Pashtun have very little integration capacity. The study is cited by Mallory as an explanation for the IE expansion.
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #65 on: April 19, 2012, 06:05:09 PM »

Ireland has seen few if any large scale conquests compared to other regions in Europe, no doubt due to it being an island and being on the geographic periphery of NW Europe. That anything cultural would have caused a language shift from non-IE to IE in Irish L21 is extremely unlikely.
This is along the same lines of thinking that I come up with to dispute the "IE=R1a and R1b learned IE from R1a" hypothesis.  Where are the R1a Celtics along the western fringes of Europe. There just aren't that many, so what convinced so many R1b people to speak R1b in the middle of or in Western Europe.  Much of R1b must have learned IE somewhere close to the PIE homeland if not in the PIE homeland.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2012, 06:16:35 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.12 seconds with 17 queries.