World Families Forums - Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA

ARCHIVAL COPY
Home Help Search Login Register

WorldFamilies has changed our Forum Operating system and migrated the postings from the prior system. We hope that you’ll find this new system easier to use and we expect it to manage spammers much better. If you can’t find an old posting, please check our Legacy Forum to see if you can see the old posting there.
+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: Maliclavelli)
| | |-+  Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 17 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA  (Read 117640 times)
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #250 on: May 22, 2012, 10:04:08 PM »


Haha seriously? Nobody has connected R1a and IE. The connection is clear. Why should I argue with a theory embraced by no one but Western Europeans. Whats the difference between accepting that theory and the garbage out of india theory? Both motivated by racism and nationalism. But neither supported by science. IE comes from the steepe and is connected with R1a not R1b.

Don't be jealous now.

Jealous of what?
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #251 on: May 22, 2012, 10:10:58 PM »

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.

Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Haha seriously?

Yes, seriously.

Nobody has connected R1a and IE. The connection is clear. Why should I argue with a theory embraced by no one but Western Europeans. Whats the difference between accepting that theory and the garbage out of india theory? Both motivated by racism and nationalism. But neither supported by science. IE comes from the steepe and is connected with R1a not R1b.

I think you are going off on a tangent. I make no attempt to disconnect R1a with some forms of IE languages. To the contrary, I agree that R1a was involved at some early stage.  However, it is an illogical leap to conclude that no other haplogroups were involved.

Pray tell, per Richard R's request, please list your evidence and logic rather than go off on tangents about politics or whatever.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 10:20:24 PM by Mikewww » Logged

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

Posts: 121


« Reply #252 on: May 22, 2012, 10:26:26 PM »


I just don't believe that. Mountain people always tend to be not as long headed which makes me doubt Armenians being anything other than short and broad faced. I have been told by Iranian friends that this even appli es to Iran where Persians tend to be dolichocephalic but Iranian Azeris due to their surroundings are mesocephalic.

There is not much to believe or not to believe.  There are crania, and the crania are not, generally speaking, brachycephalic. 

http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showpost.php?p=868277&postcount=193
Logged

intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #253 on: May 22, 2012, 11:11:44 PM »

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.

Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Haha seriously?

Yes, seriously.

Nobody has connected R1a and IE. The connection is clear. Why should I argue with a theory embraced by no one but Western Europeans. Whats the difference between accepting that theory and the garbage out of india theory? Both motivated by racism and nationalism. But neither supported by science. IE comes from the steepe and is connected with R1a not R1b.

I think you are going off on a tangent. I make no attempt to disconnect R1a with some forms of IE languages. To the contrary, I agree that R1a was involved at some early stage.  However, it is an illogical leap to conclude that no other haplogroups were involved.

Pray tell, per Richard R's request, please list your evidence and logic rather than go off on tangents about politics or whatever.


Polako has aleady done it. Pretty much every kurdgan type sample has turned up R1a. All the tarim samples, tocharians, scythians etc all R1a. How is that the case? Do you think steepe nomads got their language from farmers they conquered?
Logged
A_Wode
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #254 on: May 22, 2012, 11:55:40 PM »

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.

Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Haha seriously? Nobody has connected R1a and IE. The connection is clear. Why should I argue with a theory embraced by no one but Western Europeans. Whats the difference between accepting that theory and the garbage out of india theory? Both motivated by racism and nationalism. But neither supported by science. IE comes from the steepe and is connected with R1a not R1b.

Try to provide evidence next time. Thanks. Yes, there is evidence of Iranic rituals in the steppe, but so what?
Logged
A_Wode
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #255 on: May 22, 2012, 11:57:05 PM »


Polako has aleady done it. Pretty much every kurdgan type sample has turned up R1a. All the tarim samples, tocharians, scythians etc all R1a. How is that the case? Do you think steepe nomads got their language from farmers they conquered?

Sadly, nobody from the east has ever conquered the west. In fact it's the reverse, but nice try and better luck next time.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #256 on: May 23, 2012, 12:48:21 AM »

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.

Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Haha seriously?

Yes, seriously.

Nobody has connected R1a and IE. The connection is clear. Why should I argue with a theory embraced by no one but Western Europeans. Whats the difference between accepting that theory and the garbage out of india theory? Both motivated by racism and nationalism. But neither supported by science. IE comes from the steepe and is connected with R1a not R1b.

I think you are going off on a tangent. I make no attempt to disconnect R1a with some forms of IE languages. To the contrary, I agree that R1a was involved at some early stage.  However, it is an illogical leap to conclude that no other haplogroups were involved.

Pray tell, per Richard R's request, please list your evidence and logic rather than go off on tangents about politics or whatever.


Polako has aleady done it. Pretty much every kurdgan type sample has turned up R1a. All the tarim samples, tocharians, scythians etc all R1a. How is that the case? Do you think steepe nomads got their language from farmers they conquered?

Interestedinhistory, please follow the conversation and don't go off on to your own tangents, raves or whatever.

You were challenged on this.

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.
Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Please answer.  R1a may very well be connected to IE. That's fine. I tend to agree, but that by no means provides any evidence that no other haplogroups were part of the early stages of IE.

If you don't haven any evidence that R1b can't be a part of early IE, please explain it or just admit you don't.  That's okay.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #257 on: May 23, 2012, 04:11:54 AM »

Is the similarity in Andronovo mtdna and Bell beaker mtdna due to shared Neolithic bell beaker influence or due to shared northern hunter gatherer nomad influence?

Meaning did the andronovo people bring their own northeast european women (guessing mtdna u4/u5) or did they migrate as men to central asia picking up bell beaker and central asian neolithic and east eurasian women?

The mtDNA found in Andronovo can be seen in my Western Eurasian Ancient DNA table. As you can see for yourself, it is exactly what we would expect from a mixture of Western Eurasian hunter-gatherers and a Neolithic population rooted in the Near East. It includes U4, U5, and most interestingly U2e, which appears to have spread with Indo-Europeans. It also includes H6, K2b, T1, and the interesting T2a1b1 from Cucuteni, mentioned above.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 04:15:08 AM by Jean M » Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #258 on: May 23, 2012, 08:24:24 AM »


Polako has aleady done it. Pretty much every kurdgan type sample has turned up R1a. All the tarim samples, tocharians, scythians etc all R1a. How is that the case? Do you think steepe nomads got their language from farmers they conquered?

Sadly, nobody from the east has ever conquered the west. In fact it's the reverse, but nice try and better luck next time.

Believe whatever you want. We are all communicating in IE languages which come from Eastern Europe.  Polako has posted enough about R1a's connecton to IE.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 08:37:55 AM by intrestedinhistory » Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #259 on: May 23, 2012, 08:26:21 AM »

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.

Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Haha seriously?

Yes, seriously.

Nobody has connected R1a and IE. The connection is clear. Why should I argue with a theory embraced by no one but Western Europeans. Whats the difference between accepting that theory and the garbage out of india theory? Both motivated by racism and nationalism. But neither supported by science. IE comes from the steepe and is connected with R1a not R1b.

I think you are going off on a tangent. I make no attempt to disconnect R1a with some forms of IE languages. To the contrary, I agree that R1a was involved at some early stage.  However, it is an illogical leap to conclude that no other haplogroups were involved.

Pray tell, per Richard R's request, please list your evidence and logic rather than go off on tangents about politics or whatever.


Polako has aleady done it. Pretty much every kurdgan type sample has turned up R1a. All the tarim samples, tocharians, scythians etc all R1a. How is that the case? Do you think steepe nomads got their language from farmers they conquered?

Interestedinhistory, please follow the conversation and don't go off on to your own tangents, raves or whatever.

You were challenged on this.

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.
Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Please answer.  R1a may very well be connected to IE. That's fine. I tend to agree, but that by no means provides any evidence that no other haplogroups were part of the early stages of IE.

If you don't haven any evidence that R1b can't be a part of early IE, please explain it or just admit you don't.  That's okay.

I am sure R1b had a role with spreading IE. But the origins do not lie with R1b. Ydna J2 helped spread IE languages too yet very few people would place its role/importance alongside R1a.
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #260 on: May 23, 2012, 08:27:43 AM »

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.

Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Haha seriously?

Yes, seriously.

Nobody has connected R1a and IE. The connection is clear. Why should I argue with a theory embraced by no one but Western Europeans. Whats the difference between accepting that theory and the garbage out of india theory? Both motivated by racism and nationalism. But neither supported by science. IE comes from the steepe and is connected with R1a not R1b.

I think you are going off on a tangent. I make no attempt to disconnect R1a with some forms of IE languages. To the contrary, I agree that R1a was involved at some early stage.  However, it is an illogical leap to conclude that no other haplogroups were involved.

Pray tell, per Richard R's request, please list your evidence and logic rather than go off on tangents about politics or whatever.


Polako has aleady done it. Pretty much every kurdgan type sample has turned up R1a. All the tarim samples, tocharians, scythians etc all R1a. How is that the case? Do you think steepe nomads got their language from farmers they conquered?

Interestedinhistory, please follow the conversation and don't go off on to your own tangents, raves or whatever.

You were challenged on this.

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.
Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Please answer.  R1a may very well be connected to IE. That's fine. I tend to agree, but that by no means provides any evidence that no other haplogroups were part of the early stages of IE.

If you don't haven any evidence that R1b can't be a part of early IE, please explain it or just admit you don't.  That's okay.

I already answered. When Corded ware, andronovo, yamna , tarim basin, scythian samples have already come back R1a or will most likely come back as R1a what else is needed.
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #261 on: May 23, 2012, 08:33:35 AM »

Is the similarity in Andronovo mtdna and Bell beaker mtdna due to shared Neolithic bell beaker influence or due to shared northern hunter gatherer nomad influence?

Meaning did the andronovo people bring their own northeast european women (guessing mtdna u4/u5) or did they migrate as men to central asia picking up bell beaker and central asian neolithic and east eurasian women?

The mtDNA found in Andronovo can be seen in my Western Eurasian Ancient DNA table. As you can see for yourself, it is exactly what we would expect from a mixture of Western Eurasian hunter-gatherers and a Neolithic population rooted in the Near East. It includes U4, U5, and most interestingly U2e, which appears to have spread with Indo-Europeans. It also includes H6, K2b, T1, and the interesting T2a1b1 from Cucuteni, mentioned above.

Thanks for the link.Would you put U2e in the group with hunter-gatherers and U4/U5? I also suspect some of the West Eurasian lineages in Andronovo were from Central Asia's Iranian Neolithic in addition to hunter gatherer and Cucuteni ones. H5a also seems connected to the spread of IE.

What do  you think of mtdna W? I believe I finds its peak in Northern Pakistan and a second peak among some Uralic and Slavic population.  Does that seem like a IE hunter gatherer lineage?

Also what does the Kazakhstan mtdna from 1400-1000 BC represent? T, HV, I, H, U5 mainly. Looks very West Asian like something you would find among armenians or iranians. Is there any chance this is related to the Botai culture?

And later on the found H, W and U1 in Kazakhstan. Looking like a migration from somewhere further south.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 08:41:34 AM by intrestedinhistory » Logged
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #262 on: May 23, 2012, 09:40:21 AM »

I already answered. When Corded ware, andronovo, yamna , tarim basin, scythian samples have already come back R1a or will most likely come back as R1a what else is needed.

You are stating the obvious. Most will agree that R1a is the perfect fit for the spread of IE in eastern Europe and further to the east. However, R1a is a poor candidate for the spread of IE to Western Europe. That is where R1b comes in. More than likely R1a and R1b were in close proximity for a long time and both spoke a similar proto-IE language before going off on their separate ways.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #263 on: May 23, 2012, 09:54:08 AM »

I already answered. When Corded ware, andronovo, yamna , tarim basin, scythian samples have already come back R1a or will most likely come back as R1a what else is needed.

You are stating the obvious. Most will agree that R1a is the perfect fit for the spread of IE in eastern Europe and further to the east. However, R1a is a poor candidate for the spread of IE to Western Europe. That is where R1b comes in. More than likely R1a and R1b were in close proximity for a long time and both spoke a similar proto-IE language before going off on their separate ways.

Spread is different from origins. R1b most likely never spoke proto IE. R1b spread the language to Western Europe but they are not the source of it.

Your point would be more valid if the origins of PIE were in Western Europe. But since hehy were probably around Yamna/the steepe we will see who is right when the Yamna study comes out.
Logged
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #264 on: May 23, 2012, 10:22:07 AM »

I already answered. When Corded ware, andronovo, yamna , tarim basin, scythian samples have already come back R1a or will most likely come back as R1a what else is needed.

You are stating the obvious. Most will agree that R1a is the perfect fit for the spread of IE in eastern Europe and further to the east. However, R1a is a poor candidate for the spread of IE to Western Europe. That is where R1b comes in. More than likely R1a and R1b were in close proximity for a long time and both spoke a similar proto-IE language before going off on their separate ways.

Spread is different from origins. R1b most likely never spoke proto IE. R1b spread the language to Western Europe but they are not the source of it.

Your point would be more valid if the origins of PIE were in Western Europe. But since hehy were probably around Yamna/the steepe we will see who is right when the Yamna study comes out.

You do realize that the highest branches of R1a and R1b are probably a few thousand years older than the Yamna Culture, right?
Logged

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

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #265 on: May 23, 2012, 10:45:07 AM »

I already answered. When Corded ware, andronovo, yamna , tarim basin, scythian samples have already come back R1a or will most likely come back as R1a what else is needed.

You are stating the obvious. Most will agree that R1a is the perfect fit for the spread of IE in eastern Europe and further to the east. However, R1a is a poor candidate for the spread of IE to Western Europe. That is where R1b comes in. More than likely R1a and R1b were in close proximity for a long time and both spoke a similar proto-IE language before going off on their separate ways.

Spread is different from origins. R1b most likely never spoke proto IE. R1b spread the language to Western Europe but they are not the source of it.

Your point would be more valid if the origins of PIE were in Western Europe. But since hehy were probably around Yamna/the steepe we will see who is right when the Yamna study comes out.

Is your point that R1a is the sole source for the original PIE speakers? It's possible, but I don't necessarily agree. Is that your point? If so, what is the evidence that R1a is the sole source?  

You might want to consider that the PIE homeland territory is not totally agreed upon.  You might also want to consider that even a Pontic Steppes PIE homeland takes into coverage a very large area with multiple cultures over multiple timeframes. David Anthony makes the point that Yamna is not a singular culture.  It is an horizon of cultures.  Timing-wise, per Richard R, you might want to consider that it is quite likely that that R1a and R1b are both older than PIE and both of a central Eruasian origin. Of course, at one time their lineages are one.. the time of the R1 TMRCA, which Karafet estimates to be 18.5k ybp. Are you claiming R1b (M343) is as young or younger than PIE?

Interested, you state
Quote
Your point would be more valid if the origins of PIE were in Western Europe
Implicit in your statement is an assumption that R1b (M343) is of Western European origin. Are you claiming R1b is of Western European origin?  Please be specific.

If you recognize that answering these questions gets you deeper into logic traps, that's okay. Just admit you don't have much evidence. There is no shame in changing your mind.  I used to think R1b (M343) was the prevalent Y hg of Cro-Magnon men in Europe. I was wrong and no longer think so.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 11:41:02 AM by Mikewww » Logged

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

Posts: 186


« Reply #266 on: May 23, 2012, 12:29:40 PM »

I already answered. When Corded ware, andronovo, yamna , tarim basin, scythian samples have already come back R1a or will most likely come back as R1a what else is needed.

You are stating the obvious. Most will agree that R1a is the perfect fit for the spread of IE in eastern Europe and further to the east. However, R1a is a poor candidate for the spread of IE to Western Europe. That is where R1b comes in. More than likely R1a and R1b were in close proximity for a long time and both spoke a similar proto-IE language before going off on their separate ways.

Spread is different from origins. R1b most likely never spoke proto IE. R1b spread the language to Western Europe but they are not the source of it.

Your point would be more valid if the origins of PIE were in Western Europe. But since hehy were probably around Yamna/the steepe we will see who is right when the Yamna study comes out.

You do realize that the highest branches of R1a and R1b are probably a few thousand years older than the Yamna Culture, right?

Yes.

If PIE originated in Yman and the yamna samples come out as R1a why would anybody assume R1b spoke PIE unless they are saying R1b speakers got it from R1a people.
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #267 on: May 23, 2012, 12:35:44 PM »

I already answered. When Corded ware, andronovo, yamna , tarim basin, scythian samples have already come back R1a or will most likely come back as R1a what else is needed.

You are stating the obvious. Most will agree that R1a is the perfect fit for the spread of IE in eastern Europe and further to the east. However, R1a is a poor candidate for the spread of IE to Western Europe. That is where R1b comes in. More than likely R1a and R1b were in close proximity for a long time and both spoke a similar proto-IE language before going off on their separate ways.

Spread is different from origins. R1b most likely never spoke proto IE. R1b spread the language to Western Europe but they are not the source of it.

Your point would be more valid if the origins of PIE were in Western Europe. But since hehy were probably around Yamna/the steepe we will see who is right when the Yamna study comes out.

Is your point that R1a is the sole source for the original PIE speakers? It's possible, but I don't necessarily agree. Is that your point? If so, what is the evidence that R1a is the sole source?  

You might want to consider that the PIE homeland territory is not totally agreed upon.  You might also want to consider that even a Pontic Steppes PIE homeland takes into coverage a very large area with multiple cultures over multiple timeframes. David Anthony makes the point that Yamna is not a singular culture.  It is an horizon of cultures.  Timing-wise, per Richard R, you might want to consider that it is quite likely that that R1a and R1b are both older than PIE and both of a central Eruasian origin. Of course, at one time their lineages are one.. the time of the R1 TMRCA, which Karafet estimates to be 18.5k ybp. Are you claiming R1b (M343) is as young or younger than PIE?

Interested, you state
Quote
Your point would be more valid if the origins of PIE were in Western Europe
Implicit in your statement is an assumption that R1b (M343) is of Western European origin. Are you claiming R1b is of Western European origin?  Please be specific.

If you recognize that answering these questions gets you deeper into logic traps, that's okay. Just admit you don't have much evidence. There is no shame in changing your mind.  I used to think R1b (M343) was the prevalent Y hg of Cro-Magnon men in Europe. I was wrong and no longer think so.

Central Eurasian origin? What zone is this referring to?  Who said R1b originated in Western Europe? R1b originated in West Asia. And R1a in Eastern Europe makes sense. R1b spread IE to western europe.

Its not a coincidence that Tocharians were R1a and were one of the earliest groups to diverge. Or that Balto-Slavic speakers are heavy in R1a and speak languages closer to PIE than Germanic or italo-celtic languages which deviate heavily from IE.

And yes R1a carriers are the source of PIE. The PIE homeland territory is not agreed upon by individuals who want to connect it to R1b or whatever else fits their agenda. Yamna fits. R1b arriving to Yamna with farmers from the tripoyle culture with links to west asia doesn't make R1b a PIE lineage.
Logged
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #268 on: May 23, 2012, 12:46:37 PM »


Central Eurasian origin? What zone is this referring to?  Who said R1b originated in Western Europe? R1b originated in West Asia. And R1a in Eastern Europe makes sense. R1b spread IE to western europe.

Its not a coincidence that Tocharians were R1a and were one of the earliest groups to diverge. Or that Balto-Slavic speakers are heavy in R1a and speak languages closer to PIE than Germanic or italo-celtic languages which deviate heavily from IE.

And yes R1a carriers are the source of PIE. The PIE homeland territory is not agreed upon by individuals who want to connect it to R1b or whatever else fits their agenda. Yamna fits. R1b arriving to Yamna with farmers from the tripoyle culture with links to west asia doesn't make R1b a PIE lineage.

What language do you think the first R1+ carrier spoke? You think he passed that language down exclusively to his one son (R1a) but not the other (R1b)?  Was R1b a mute? Did he use sign language?
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #269 on: May 23, 2012, 02:53:54 PM »

I already answered. When Corded ware, andronovo, yamna , tarim basin, scythian samples have already come back R1a or will most likely come back as R1a what else is needed.
It is wrong: there is not yet yamna sample tested thus far. So you don't know if y-dna of yamna people were R1a or any thing else.
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #270 on: May 23, 2012, 05:05:56 PM »


Central Eurasian origin? What zone is this referring to?  Who said R1b originated in Western Europe? R1b originated in West Asia. And R1a in Eastern Europe makes sense. R1b spread IE to western europe.

Its not a coincidence that Tocharians were R1a and were one of the earliest groups to diverge. Or that Balto-Slavic speakers are heavy in R1a and speak languages closer to PIE than Germanic or italo-celtic languages which deviate heavily from IE.

And yes R1a carriers are the source of PIE. The PIE homeland territory is not agreed upon by individuals who want to connect it to R1b or whatever else fits their agenda. Yamna fits. R1b arriving to Yamna with farmers from the tripoyle culture with links to west asia doesn't make R1b a PIE lineage.

What language do you think the first R1+ carrier spoke? You think he passed that language down exclusively to his one son (R1a) but not the other (R1b)?  Was R1b a mute? Did he use sign language?

Why does it matter? R1a and R1b predate IE languages. R1b originates in West Asia. IE languages developed with R1a carriers in Eastern Europe. Do all sons have the same accomplishments?
Logged
eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #271 on: May 23, 2012, 06:24:21 PM »


Central Eurasian origin? What zone is this referring to?  Who said R1b originated in Western Europe? R1b originated in West Asia. And R1a in Eastern Europe makes sense. R1b spread IE to western europe.

Its not a coincidence that Tocharians were R1a and were one of the earliest groups to diverge. Or that Balto-Slavic speakers are heavy in R1a and speak languages closer to PIE than Germanic or italo-celtic languages which deviate heavily from IE.

And yes R1a carriers are the source of PIE. The PIE homeland territory is not agreed upon by individuals who want to connect it to R1b or whatever else fits their agenda. Yamna fits. R1b arriving to Yamna with farmers from the tripoyle culture with links to west asia doesn't make R1b a PIE lineage.

What language do you think the first R1+ carrier spoke? You think he passed that language down exclusively to his one son (R1a) but not the other (R1b)?  Was R1b a mute? Did he use sign language?

Why does it matter? R1a and R1b predate IE languages. R1b originates in West Asia. IE languages developed with R1a carriers in Eastern Europe. Do all sons have the same accomplishments?

None of the men knew whether they were R1a or R1b, and the Indo-European langauge didn't know who was taking it where.

You talk as if there was a competition taking place...  Indo-European is a language and it was spread by people who had no idea what Haplogroup they belonged to.
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #272 on: May 23, 2012, 06:30:01 PM »

Why does it matter? R1a and R1b predate IE languages. R1b originates in West Asia. IE languages developed with R1a carriers in Eastern Europe.

To be more accurate, PIE evolved from a hunter-gatherer language in contact with farming people on the border of Europe and Asia. The hunters acquired knowledge from farming neighbours who had brought that knowledge from West Asia.





 
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 06:31:54 PM by Jean M » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #273 on: May 23, 2012, 06:56:31 PM »

I think the idea that R1a was the sole source of initial IE and R1b the recievers is questionable.  I also am not sure what the fetish some people have to be related to a backwards culture of late hunters turning into wandering violent cattle men bashing each other on the heads with hammer axes after borrowing most of the stuff that dragged them out the dark ages from the farmers who had towns and sophisticated societies etc.  All sounds a bit wrong headed to me.

What the proto-IE were was not steppes hunters but a mix of hunters who had taken on a lot from more advanced societies around them.  It was only after some sort of input from the farming workd that PIE society developed.  If you want some sort of pure R1a society in the steppes (if it ever existed) then you need to go back to the days when they were hunters and the PIE culture had not formed.  PIE is not a steppes hunters thing.  It clearly is a hybrid of influences.  Without the farmers it could not have existed.

I also wonder why people fetishish these hunters anyway like they were some sort of uber-men.  They didnt look too uber-men like when the Bug-Dniester culture were swept aside by the allegedly flower power loving tree hugging Cucutene Trypole people as they expanded east.  Bottom line is these guys were nothing but simple hunters borrowing ideas from farmers with a society nothing like PIE society until the farmer people made crucial inputs.  If ideas travel with people then you can be sure the genes of farming groups were mixed in.  By the time PIE evolved there had been a very very long period of interaction.

I also think we have to wonder about the idea that even the PIE core was R1a-dominated.  The Anatolian branch is thought by some serious linguists to be an offshoot from what was to become the PIE area before PIE had fully formed and it seems that only R1b could have been involved in that given the lack of R1a in Anatolia (that is if you believe languages and genes spread together).  That could put R1b in the area of PIE even before PIE had fully formed.

Finally, there is no certainty that L23 and downstream was actually the farming language.  The only map I have seen of L23* variance actually places higher variance in an arc from around Armenia through the west side of the Black Sea, along the top of the latter and into Romania.  There is a possibility that the more southerly groups in the PIE world could have been R1b and headed into Anatolia and Romania from an intermediate point along the north coasts of the Black Sea or adjacent.   .  

Finally, and this is a real question rather than a rhetorical one, is the concept of R1a and R1b people belonging to really radically separated language families like some sort of pre-PIE on the one hand and Afro-Asiastic viable?  How deep do linguists calculate the common ancestor of those language branches?

Finally, we often talk about the hypothesis that R1b spread with some mega-advantage of lactose persistence developed by them perhaps being linked to dairying evolving in NW Anatolia before 6000BC and entering SE Europe before 5000BC. If this is all true then surely an steppes hunters would have been at a tremendous selective disadvantage in starting regular milk use far later?    
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 07:10:41 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #274 on: May 23, 2012, 07:56:55 PM »

I guess people will never stop trying to connect IE and R1b no matter how much evidence has been presented against it.

Care to list them here, because I haven't seen any evidence/proof.

Haha seriously? Nobody has connected R1a and IE. The connection is clear. Why should I argue with a theory embraced by no one but Western Europeans. Whats the difference between accepting that theory and the garbage out of india theory? Both motivated by racism and nationalism. But neither supported by science. IE comes from the steepe and is connected with R1a not R1b.

Tone down your rhetoric please or demonstrate how the idea that there is a connection between R1b and Indo-European languages is "motivated by racism and nationalism".

By the way, when it comes to R1b and Indo-European languages "[t]he connection is clear". The overwhelming majority of the population of Europe speak an Indo-European language, and R1b is the most common European y haplogroup.
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 17 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 0.166 seconds with 18 queries.