World Families Forums - Iberian R-L21*

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 21, 2014, 09:35:50 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)
| | |-+  Iberian R-L21*
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 19 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Iberian R-L21*  (Read 35072 times)
Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #50 on: April 07, 2009, 04:15:29 AM »

Now, on the J2 issue.
It is very hard to present all arguments here as our theory (we have been working on it with one of my friends, who even did not test himself not to be "biased" until we cant find a good explanation for all Hgs and language families) as it is very complex, taking into account all haplogroups.

First, every researcher on this issue should rely on MRCA times which is very cosy evidence and changes many times (as we have seen with R1b). Estimates for J2 are ranging from 15 kya to 7 kya. However, MRCA could have appeared many years before a migration started. For example, Hg H is very old (around 30 kya), but it does not mean that Roma people came to Europe in Paleolithic times... So we can not be sure, but we place J2 expansion to around 5000-4000 BC, Anatolia.

Second, the popular misunderstanding about J2 is the Semitic connection. J2 has nothing to do with Afro-Asiatic speakers. J2 is the most frequent (over 20%) in Anatolian Turkish, Kurds, Armenians, Iranians, Greeks, Albanians and Central/South Italians. It is also frequent in the Fertile Crescent (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq) where now Semitic languages are spoken, but are a result of a historically attested migration from the South. Sumerians for example did not spoke Semitic (although neither IE).

Semitic peoples are connected to J1, which is also very frequent in the Northeast Caucasus. Therefore, we argue that J1 peoples spoke NE Caucasian (Hurro-Urartuan included), and were later "Afro-Asiatized" by Hg E migrants from Egypt. E-M123 is the likely candidate for this move.

IE homeland should have been west from the NE Cauc. languages, as Kurdish has Hurrian, Armenian has Urartuan (comp. to Ararat) substrates. This puts IE into Anatolia. We think that IE languages spread with metallurgy, from around 3000 BC. This makes a mix of Renfrew (Anatolian origin) and Gimbutas (Bronze Age), but disproves the neolithic spread and the Steppe homeland.
Anatolia is absolutely in the center of IE languages if you look on the map, and the earliest branch is Anatolian/Hittite, so everything fits well.

As you can read in V. Gordon Childe: The Dawn of European civilization, the most striking difference between Neolithic and "Metallist" societies is interaction/trade. Childe thinks that Neolithic peoples are more-or-less self-supplying of food, clothes and instruments, and only engage in trade for luxuries. This lack of regular interaction between communities (towns) causes a relatively quick language divergence, resulting in many dialects and later seperate languages. This process is strengthened by geographical features, see for example the Caucasus or New Guinea (where neighbouring villagers do not understand each other)

With the introduction of metal however, trade grows, as metallurgists should buy food from the peasants and peasants buy tools. Those people, who has a monopoly in metallurgy and thus weapon manufacturing, can easily dominate "peaceful peasant communities". That is why Neolithic is seen as egalitarian and less patriarchal than later ages. If elites are emerging, the dominated population would take their language over, because the language of trade and prestige is that language. I think IE spread mostly with trade plus with some elite dominance. (to be continued)
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #51 on: April 07, 2009, 04:33:10 AM »

IE thus spread both westwards and eastwards out of Anatolia. The Caucasus range has blocked the northern expansion/probably the Caucasians learned the metal-making process quickly, without taking the language over. Southward migration was blocked by the Semitic migration from the South.

After this, we would argue that some sort of "proto-European" language was formed in Thrace, what is now Bulgaria, being the ancestor of every European IE lineage (probably save for Greek). Greek and Armenian are often connected to each other and to Indo-Iranian (see Graeco-Aryan theory). I am not a Greek expert thus cant decide whether Greek was included or not.

Metal use spread through the Balkan-Danubian complex, ranging from the Baden culture (Austria-Czech Rep-W Hungary) to Troy. We think this was the place where the current branches of IE were formed. The western branch was Celto-Italic-Albanian, while the eastern Thraco-Cymmerian-Balto-Slavic.
Language drift of course affects metallurgist societies as well, thus these branches were separated later. A second wave of expansion after the Bronze Age, was in the Iron Age, when people on the brinks of IE area started to expand (Celts, Slavs, Aryans). Germanic was a result of creolization of an IE (presumably Celtic) elite and strong mesolithic population (I1, I2b) based on the Germanic substrate hypothesis.

This also implies that J2 in Britain is not the result of Roman soldiers but Celts, I would risk to say druids, as an elite strata of Celtic society. Of course the main body of Celts was R1b1b2, mainly L21 and U152.

Now, this post is too long already, I finish.
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #52 on: April 07, 2009, 08:15:57 AM »

I think you are making too much of a small thing. There is no real evidence that the Vasconic language was ever widespread or that it had an impact on Celtic or any other language.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2009, 08:21:19 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #53 on: April 07, 2009, 08:18:43 AM »

I think you are very much mistaken about J2, Jafety. It is very common among Semitic speakers and much less common among non-Semitic speakers.

Check out its distribution:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Distribution_Haplogroup_J2_Y-DNA.svg

There is nothing whasoever to connect it to the spread of Indo-European. The movement of J2 was FROM the Semitic-speaking Near East to other locations, including Southern Europe, and not the other way around.

The script Linear A found on Crete and still undeciphered is believed to represent a Semitic language. The incoming Myceneans introduced Mycenean Greek and produced Linear B, which was used to write in Greek. The point is the Semites had spread to Crete and the northern shore of the Mediterranean but acquired Indo-European languages when they were overcome by the arrival of the (non-J2) Indo-Europeans from the North.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2009, 08:26:25 AM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #54 on: April 07, 2009, 08:22:46 AM »

... IE homeland should have been west from the NE Cauc. languages, as Kurdish has Hurrian, Armenian has Urartuan (comp. to Ararat) substrates. This puts IE into Anatolia. .....
Why do you say the IE homeland should have been west from the NE Caucasian languages?   Author David Anthony makes a good case that is north, in the Pontic Steppes.  What is your rationale for having originated in Anatolia?
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #55 on: April 07, 2009, 10:11:01 AM »

The idea that J2 spread Indo-European is baseless. As I said, the putative homeland of J2 - the Fertile Crescent - is overwhelmingly Semitic speaking and has been for untold millennia. The notion that Indo-European arose from within an overwhelmingly Semitic region and milieu strains credibility beyond the breaking point. It's silly.

J2 is extremely infrequent in Europe outside Italy and the Balkans, and even there it declines rapidly as one moves north from the Mediterranean.

There is no evidence whatsoever that metallurgy was the vehicle through which Indo-European was spread or that it was J2s who spread metal-working into Europe or at any rate beyond the Mediterranean region.

Use common sense. If a craftsman moves into an area to ply his trade, the majority population doesn't struggle to learn his language in order to buy his goods. Instead he learns their language in order to sell his goods and survive.

The idea that Indo-European was spread by J2 craftsmen is ridiculous.

It's rather funny actually: you find a small minority population (the Basques) that is non-IE speaking and generalize from it to the untold millions of IE-speaking R1b1b2s. With J2s, however, you do just exactly the opposite. Untold millions of them are non-IE (Semitic) speaking, yet you make them the authors of Indo-European!

Good grief!
« Last Edit: April 07, 2009, 10:37:43 AM by rms2 » Logged

IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #56 on: April 08, 2009, 02:56:00 AM »

Sorry I can´t follow this interesting debate daily.

To Mike
My point was that even if Basques have a matrilocal/exogamous system, Basque males would marry as well, so if they carried an exotic Haplogroup, some trace would be left in the original population and in their neighbours. However, as you said, my main point was that there is no evidence of Basque matrilocal tradition.
The myth about Basque matriarchic system has its origin in the assumption of Basques as the original population of Europe. Then, following Gimbutas, some anthopologists considered that the Basque should have a matriarchic society. However there is no trace of such a system, on the contrary, Basque society is strongly patriarchic from the earliest sources, but as there are strong evidence from ancient and early medieval sources about a matrilineal and matrilocal organization among their Celtic neighbours in Northern Spain, those anthopologists thought that it should be a Basque influence, and an indirect prove of Basque matriarchy. All very speculative, to say the least.
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


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

Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #57 on: April 08, 2009, 03:23:55 AM »

Why do you say the IE homeland should have been west from the NE Caucasian languages?   Author David Anthony makes a good case that is north, in the Pontic Steppes.  What is your rationale for having originated in Anatolia?

Linguists only state that NE Caucasian and proto-IE were close to each other, they had regional contact. Of course if someone supports the Kurgan-R1a theory, that would be north of them. If someone supports the Anatolian theory, then it would be Eastern Anatolia (whether he thinks R1b1b2 or J2 as origin)
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #58 on: April 08, 2009, 03:43:24 AM »

I think you are very much mistaken about J2, Jafety. It is very common among Semitic speakers and much less common among non-Semitic speakers.

OK, I will list some J2 data here (from different studies):
I. Semitic (Afro-Asiatic) speakers:

Lebanon 25-30%
Syria, Palestine 15-17%
Jewish 23-28% (however, Jewish even have R1b1b2 around 20%)
Iraq: 22%
North African Arab: 10-12%
Bukhara (Central Asian) Arab: 17%

II. Indo-European peoples:
In Europe

Spain: 4-8%
France: 13%
Italy (mainland): 20-29%
Sicily: 17%
Sardinia: 5-10%
Albanian: 20-24%
Greek: 20-21%
Macedonia: 12-25%
Croatian: 5-6%
Czech-Slovak: 9%
Ukrainian: 6-7%
Russian: 4-8%
Polish: 1%
Bavarian German: 5%
Frisian: 1-6%
English: 0-6%

Outside Europe:

Armenians: 24%
South Ossetians: 24%
Iranians: 21-25%
Kurds: 18-28%
Parsi (Zoroaster follower living in India): 38%
Indo-Aryan speakers in Pakistan: 6-20%
Indo-Aryan castes in India: 12-14%
Tajiks (Central Asia): 9-31%

Other areas which were IE speaking historically:
Turkey: 18-40%
Uyghurs (Tocharian area): 20%
Uzbekistan: 10-16%

Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #59 on: April 08, 2009, 03:53:36 AM »

Now, if you carefully look at the numbers, you can see, that J2 is more frequent in "core" IE populations than in Semitic. And all Semitic areas could get it from Turkey or Iran as they were part of IE empires (the Hittite, Byzantine and Persian empire). Both the highest frequency and the central point of distribution points on Kurdistan/East Turkey area.
It is around 20% in every "core IE" population, namely Italian, Greek, Albanian, Armenian, Anatolian (Turkish), Iranian, Tocharian; plus enough for an elite dominance model conquest of India. The 5-10% range in the supposed Celtic homeland (Bavaria-Czech Rep.) is again enough for an elite-dominance, as is 6-8% in Ukraine and Russia for Slavic speakers.
According to my theory, Celtic and Balto-Slavic were not spread mainly by J2 people, only influenced R1b1b2 and R1a1 in the Boii and Ukrainian area, respectively. If German really is a "creole" of Celtic and a Mesolithic language, it is not surprising that J2 is very low or missing there.
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #60 on: April 08, 2009, 05:25:01 AM »

To Jafety
The Basque word for Mountain is Mendi, I don´t know where did you get the word Karp, but the only word similar in Basque I can think of is Karpe, a small bush with yellow flowers
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


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

Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #61 on: April 08, 2009, 05:26:10 AM »

Another argument in favour of the J2's spread from Anatolia is the distribution of J1. It's frequency is the biggest in Yemen (approx 80%) and Northeast Caucasus (60-70%). It is also frequent in-between these two areas, but much less. This points on a J1 area extending from the Caucasus to Yemen which was later cut into half in the Turkey-Iraq-Iran area by incoming J2 peoples from the West.
(This is clear, even if you do not accept the proto-IE = J2 theory.)
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #62 on: April 08, 2009, 05:31:42 AM »

To Jafety
The Basque word for Mountain is Mendi, I don´t know where did you get the word Karp, but the only word similar in Basque I can think of is Karpe, a small bush with yellow flowers

Thanks, I read it somewhere. Probably they thought on "Harri" = rock. (K often turns to H in many languages). But the Albanian version is much better, I agree.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2009, 08:07:29 AM by Jafety R1b-U152 » Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #63 on: April 08, 2009, 05:31:55 AM »

To rms2
Your theory of R1b=IE has many problems. Basques are now a small population, but historical Aquitanians were extended over a considerably larger territory. Besides, you have also the Iberic languages, also non IE and extending over an even larger area of Iberia in ancient times, an area with a R1b majority.
Haplogroups are useful markers to determine movements of population, like I think L21 could be useful to prove a late arrival of Basques south of the Pyrenees, but to treat them as Ethnic groups, tribes or races is a mistake, ethnic groups are always mixed, IE and non IE groups alike would be a mix of R1b and some other Haplogroups.
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


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

Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #64 on: April 08, 2009, 08:05:26 AM »

It's rather funny actually: you find a small minority population (the Basques) that is non-IE speaking and generalize from it to the untold millions of IE-speaking R1b1b2s. With J2s, however, you do just exactly the opposite. Untold millions of them are non-IE (Semitic) speaking, yet you make them the authors of Indo-European!

I know that this can seem ridicolous but the main point behind it is that R1b1b2 is the last population among Basques, therefore the most likely bearer of the language. There is no later migration there. With J2, the case is different, as J2 is a late-comer, most likely the latest population in Italy, Greece, Albania etc. There is no more than 15% R1a in Turkey which now speaks Turkish, however you would not argue that Turkish language was not spread by R1a, would you?

I still want to draw your attention on the fact, that languages, genes etc. usually originate where they are the most diverse, not where they are the most frequent or dominant. The colonization of the Americas is an especially good showcase. There are 185 million Portoguese speakers in Brazil and only 10 mio in Portugal, still not Brazil is the original place. Languages tend to "conquer" massive population on the extremes of a territory, see English, Spanish and Portuguese in the Americas, Russian penetration into Asia, Indo-Aryan languages of India etc.
IE is most diverse in the Balkans/Anatolia area therefore it is very likely that originated there.

Another point on the trade spread of IE: in Africa, most IE languages (primarily French and English) spread through the elite dominance+trade model. There was virtually no White settlement there apart from South Africa, but the local population shifted and is shifting to IE languages. Why? Because these are the languages of trade and contract between the local tribes. These do not understand each other, even if they all speak Niger-Congo languages, as the Neolithic language drift model of V.G. Childe suggested. Thus more and more people shifts to IE, without having a drop of R1 or J2 Y-DNA.

Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #65 on: April 08, 2009, 09:15:59 AM »

I think you are very much mistaken about J2, Jafety. It is very common among Semitic speakers and much less common among non-Semitic speakers.

OK, I will list some J2 data here (from different studies):
I. Semitic (Afro-Asiatic) speakers:

Lebanon 25-30%
Syria, Palestine 15-17%
Jewish 23-28% (however, Jewish even have R1b1b2 around 20%)
Iraq: 22%
North African Arab: 10-12%
Bukhara (Central Asian) Arab: 17%

II. Indo-European peoples:
In Europe

Spain: 4-8%
France: 13%
Italy (mainland): 20-29%
Sicily: 17%
Sardinia: 5-10%
Albanian: 20-24%
Greek: 20-21%
Macedonia: 12-25%
Croatian: 5-6%
Czech-Slovak: 9%
Ukrainian: 6-7%
Russian: 4-8%
Polish: 1%
Bavarian German: 5%
Frisian: 1-6%
English: 0-6%

Outside Europe:

Armenians: 24%
South Ossetians: 24%
Iranians: 21-25%
Kurds: 18-28%
Parsi (Zoroaster follower living in India): 38%
Indo-Aryan speakers in Pakistan: 6-20%
Indo-Aryan castes in India: 12-14%
Tajiks (Central Asia): 9-31%

Other areas which were IE speaking historically:
Turkey: 18-40%
Uyghurs (Tocharian area): 20%
Uzbekistan: 10-16%
You should also consider ancient populations.  People like the Phoenicians were Semitic speaking and Dr. Wells/National Genographic claim that the Phoenicians had a very high J2 contingent.   Your %'s of current populations only point out that J2 is not the predominant Y haplogroup across a large swath of Europe and the Mediterranean.  One way to look at that, maybe the right way, is that this is only evidence that J2 spread early and unevenly, which actually supports that their languages didn't end up becoming predominant, like IE did in Europe.

I think you are avoiding a major issue with claiming J2 brought IE to Europe.   The conflict in timing and archeology.  Archeology clearly shows the Neolithic moved into Central and Western Europe in a big way from 6000-5000 BC.  When you trace the Neolithic movement, you find a trail of J2.    Are you disputing that J2 was a big part of the Neolithic expansions?    That is very commonly agreed upon.

If J2 was Neolithic in Europe beyond the Southeast, then it couldn't have been IE.  PIE wasn't spoken until about 4000 BC to 2500 BC.   This is the latest and greatest research.

That is not to say some J2 couldn't have joined somebody else during the IE expansions across Europe post 2500 BC, but it doesn't make it likely J2 was the original PIE speaking people.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #66 on: April 08, 2009, 09:26:27 AM »

Yes, I think E-M78 is the sign of Neolithic movement, and probably also R-M269*.
I argue that J2 expanded only in the metal ages, thus exactly in the timespan that you mentioned.

I think there is a very good chance that IE languages originated in the Bronze Age and in Anatolia. However, I can be mistaken in connecting it to J2. Probably there were more lineages. But I think the Kurgan theory is not defendable on linguistic or genetic terms. Renfrews Anatolian hypothesis is too early for the language, as you mentioned already. Thus the solution should be an Anatolian homeland, but Bronze Age spread. This is very logical, and after that we should find the Haplogroup.

I presented my J2 idea, and you are challenging it. That is good. Probably together we will find out the answer.
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #67 on: April 08, 2009, 09:57:46 AM »

I think you are very much mistaken about J2, Jafety. It is very common among Semitic speakers and much less common among non-Semitic speakers.

OK, I will list some J2 data here (from different studies):
I. Semitic (Afro-Asiatic) speakers:

Lebanon 25-30%
Syria, Palestine 15-17%
Jewish 23-28% (however, Jewish even have R1b1b2 around 20%)
Iraq: 22%
North African Arab: 10-12%
Bukhara (Central Asian) Arab: 17%

II. Indo-European peoples:
In Europe

Spain: 4-8%
France: 13%
Italy (mainland): 20-29%
Sicily: 17%
Sardinia: 5-10%
Albanian: 20-24%
Greek: 20-21%
Macedonia: 12-25%
Croatian: 5-6%
Czech-Slovak: 9%
Ukrainian: 6-7%
Russian: 4-8%
Polish: 1%
Bavarian German: 5%
Frisian: 1-6%
English: 0-6%

Outside Europe:

Armenians: 24%
South Ossetians: 24%
Iranians: 21-25%
Kurds: 18-28%
Parsi (Zoroaster follower living in India): 38%
Indo-Aryan speakers in Pakistan: 6-20%
Indo-Aryan castes in India: 12-14%
Tajiks (Central Asia): 9-31%

Other areas which were IE speaking historically:
Turkey: 18-40%
Uyghurs (Tocharian area): 20%
Uzbekistan: 10-16%



Call me strange, but I don't see an Indo-European "core" for J2 in the stats you posted the way you seem to. I see a cline from the Near East that fades as the distance from that homeland increases, just as the map of J2 frequency I posted shows:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Distribution_Haplogroup_J2_Y-DNA.svg

I don't have much time to argue about this right now. Maybe I can return to it later.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2009, 09:58:37 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #68 on: April 08, 2009, 10:30:58 AM »

To rms2
Your theory of R1b=IE has many problems. Basques are now a small population, but historical Aquitanians were extended over a considerably larger territory. Besides, you have also the Iberic languages, also non IE and extending over an even larger area of Iberia in ancient times, an area with a R1b majority.

Not enough is known about the Iberian languages to say what they were. I have read some sources that claim they were Indo-European and others that claim they were non-IE.

Aquitanian was probably Vasconic, but it did not extend over a very great area. Where is the evidence that all R1b1b2s once spoke such a language?
 
Haplogroups are useful markers to determine movements of population, like I think L21 could be useful to prove a late arrival of Basques south of the Pyrenees, but to treat them as Ethnic groups, tribes or races is a mistake, ethnic groups are always mixed, IE and non IE groups alike would be a mix of R1b and some other Haplogroups.

I'm not sure why you wrote that. First off, there is little to link L21 to the Basques. Right now, you are it. Take a look at the Basque Project. While most of its members are R1b1b2 of one kind or another, there are a number of different y haplogroups represented, including E1b1b, G2, I1, J1, and J2.

No one is arguing that ethnic groups and tribes aren't mixed. When we speak of the Celts being this or that or the Indo-Europeans being this or that, we are generalizing. That is necessary to do in order to communicate. Otherwise, if we all had to qualify everything we wrote with constant nit-picking reminders that "populations are mixed" and "not every man was L21+", etc., etc., very little would get said.

Besides that, there must have been a time when tribes - which, after all, began as extended kinship groups - were mostly composed of separate, single y haplogroups, those of their individual progenitors. Other y haplogroups might have been present, but to a much lesser degree. If this were not true, if peoples had always been inextricably mixed, we would not see the kinds of y haplogroup clines we still see today.

I could be all wrong, but I do not see the Basques as the quintessential Western Europeans, the fountainhead of all R1b1b2 in Europe. I think those ideas came from some pretty faulty and mistaken assumptions. Maybe L21 will start popping up right and left among the Basques, but if it does, I will be surprised. Thus far Iberia appears to be mostly L21-. But it's early, and things could change, I suppose.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2009, 10:33:54 AM by rms2 » Logged

IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #69 on: April 08, 2009, 10:53:04 AM »

To rms2
1) Iberian languages, although not understood, can be read (unlike Lineal A). Pericay and Maluquer pretended a long time ago that the Iberian language spoken in Catalonia and Southern France was IE because their Urnfield archaeological tipology, but they could not decipher a single line. If that Iberian was in fact IE it would have been deciphered at least partially.

2) I don´t defend the Vasconic substratum theory at all, I think it is very much unsupported, but it is clear that there were some non IE languages attested in Western Europe as well as IE.

3) I do not see the Basques as the quintessential Western Europeans either, I think there is no direct link between languages and haplogroups, and that Basques were mostly R1b with mixing of other haplogroups also in the past. Some mostly R1b groups spoke IE languages, some didn´t, some changed their language along history.

Regarding the Basque project, of which I am a member, it is a very poor project. I counted only 13 people, including myself, of proven Basque origin, while there is a good number of non basque surnames. I contacted the Administrator on the subject, but received no answer, I must note the Administrator himself has a non Basque surname!
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


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

IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #70 on: April 08, 2009, 02:04:53 PM »

BTW for my theory to be right, Iberia should be indeed L21-, while L21+ be shown in some numbers among Basques
« Last Edit: April 08, 2009, 02:12:27 PM by IALEM » Logged

Y-DNA L21+


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

vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #71 on: April 08, 2009, 09:16:32 PM »

Rich,

I see a second Iberian L21+ has appeared on Ysearch (Barreto, AF8GN), and you have him on your map.  Have you contacted him yet?
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #72 on: April 09, 2009, 02:51:12 AM »

Call me strange, but I don't see an Indo-European "core" for J2 in the stats you posted the way you seem to. I see a cline from the Near East that fades as the distance from that

I think still J2 is the only Hg which has a frequency around 20% from Italy to India/Central Asia and thus "mirrors" the IE languages at best. The other groups, which have low J2 (Celts, Germans and Balto-Slavs) expanded in historical times from areas where J2 is present around 6-10%.
Be careful with such maps, as it does not show that Uyghurs (Tocharian area) have 20% J2 for example. My idea is based on that J1 and E-M78 is neolithic migration (probably R1b1b2 as well) and J2 is a later one. It is everywhere a ruling class rather than massive population, as the 15-20% shows.
Semitic Phoenicians could have spread J2 of course, as did IE Greeks. These colonizations took place in a relatively recent time (1st millennium BC) like the Celtic expansion for example. At that stage HGs were already mixed.
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
Jafety R1b-U152
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #73 on: April 09, 2009, 02:57:45 AM »

Haplogroups are useful markers to determine movements of population, but to treat them as Ethnic groups, tribes or races is a mistake, ethnic groups are always mixed, IE and non IE groups alike would be a mix of R1b and some other Haplogroups.

Partially true but I agree with rms' post. There is an interesting paper on the Y and MtDNA of New Guinea. It is shown that in most of the tribes, which there means only several villages, only 1 Hg is present while MtDNA is very mixed as a result of mandatory exogamy. The same goes for the Bantu expansion in Africa, nearly all are E-M2.
Thus I think it is reasonable to believe that R1b1b2 was once a tribe, which of course mixed with others during migrations. But if we want to trace back our ancestors, we have to look for the place where R1b1b2 men were a tribe once.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2009, 02:58:35 AM by Jafety R1b-U152 » Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b4 (S28/U-152) L2 test pending
Earliest known paternal ancestor: Matthias Fejer, b. 1819, Jaszarokszallas, Jasz county, Central Hungary
MtDNA: U4 (Western Siberian Ugric)
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #74 on: April 09, 2009, 04:10:15 AM »

That is interesting indeed, could you please post the reference for the paper on New Guinea?
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


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

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 19 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 0.144 seconds with 19 queries.