R1b: Indo-European or not?

[Sizzo]

In other words, is Western Europe Indo-European (genetically and phisically) or not? Were Italics, Celts and Germanics Aryan people or only Aryanized people? And then: which is the Indo-European admixture? How could I determine how much is my Indo-European DNA?

[blogen]

Yes and not. Basically the R1b was a sign of the Cardium pottery peoples and they were definitely not Indoeuropeans (maybe the Basque peoples are their remains). But presumaby there were some R1b Indoeurpean too.

[Ianus]

I don't think R1b is connected with IE. I understood that most ancient sublades on R1b come from Anatolia, so they probabily were farmer.

[SardiniaAtlantis]

I don't think R1b is connected with IE. I understood that most ancient sublades on R1b come from Anatolia, so they probabily were farmer.
Yes it is 22% in Sardinia so that makes sense.

[Sizzo]

I don't think R1b is connected with IE. I understood that most ancient sublades on R1b come from Anatolia, so they probabily were farmer.

Who brought, for example, the U152 (S28) in Italy then? Anatolian farmers from the Danube? La Tène and Hallstatt weren't Indo-European stations?

[blogen]

Yes it is 22% in Sardinia so that makes sense.

No, this is why not Indoeuropean! The yellow regions in this map were not Indoeuropeans before the Bronze/Iron age and sometimes the Roman Empire:

http://armchairprehistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/europe-map1.gif

And this is the distriubution of the R1b in Europe:
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b-borders.png

[SardiniaAtlantis]

No, this is why not Indoeuropean! The yellow regions in this map were not Indoeuropeans before the Bronze/Iron age and sometimes the Roman Empire:

http://armchairprehistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/europe-map1.gif

And this is the distriubution of the R1b in Europe:
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b-borders.png

Yes I am aware of that fact, but that along with the Neolithic non IE farmer populations makes sense to me. It must be connected to the Farmer population to some extent.

[blogen]

Yes I am aware of that fact, but that along with the Neolithic non IE farmer populations makes sense to me. It must be connected to the Farmer population to some extent.

Yes, definitely the farmers!

[Damião de Góis]

Anatolian R1b is different from western european one, apart from the fact that there is no S116, U152, U106, etc in Anatolia.

[Fire Haired]

Yes and not. Basically the R1b was a sign of the Cardium pottery peoples and they were definitely not Indoeuropeans (maybe the Basque peoples are their remains). But presumaby there were some R1b Indoeurpean too.

There are five Y DNA samples from the Cardium pottery culture from 5000BC, 4 were G2a-P15 and 1 was E1b1b-V13, in line with Y DNA from other Neolithic European farmers. There are over 30 Y DNA samples from Neolithic west Europe, not one is R1b. West European specific R1b L11 spread rapidly(does not have a clear place of origin because of that) and is estimated to be 5,000 years old. R1b1a2-M269 first appears in ancient west European Y DNA in German Bell Beaker 4,600 years ago, that is exactly where it was expected to be based on research on modern people. R1b L11 is constant with spreading with Indo Europeans because it arrived when Indo European cultures did, and has language or culture specific subclades(Germanic R1b-S21, Urnfield R1b-U152, Insular Celtic R1b-L21, etc.). mtDNA from the Bell Beaker site of the two R1b samples, were obviously of Indo European origin not native Neolithic origin, so they were probably early western Indo Europeans.

[1stLightHorse]

There are five Y DNA samples from the Cardium pottery culture from 5000BC, 4 were G2a-P15 and 1 was E1b1b-V13, in line with Y DNA from other Neolithic European farmers. There are over 30 Y DNA samples from Neolithic west Europe, not one is R1b. West European specific R1b L11 spread rapidly(does not have a clear place of origin because of that) and is estimated to be 5,000 years old. R1b1a2-M269 first appears in ancient west European Y DNA in German Bell Beaker 4,600 years ago, that is exactly where it was expected to be based on research on modern people. R1b L11 is constant with spreading with Indo Europeans because it arrived when Indo European cultures did, and has language or culture specific subclades(Germanic R1b-S21, Urnfield R1b-U152, Insular Celtic R1b-L21, etc.). mtDNA from the Bell Beaker site of the two R1b samples, were obviously of Indo European origin not native Neolithic origin, so they were probably early western Indo Europeans.

Yes, due to the rapid spread of R1b throughout western europe it is indicative of an indo-european warlike people that used fast raiding/chariot tactics to strike and pillage whoever was living there at the time and eventually dominate the scene culturally and as we can see today, genetically.

[Fire Haired]

Anatolian R1b is different from western european one, apart from the fact that there is no S116, U152, U106, etc in Anatolia.

European-specific R1b1a2a1-L51 is a subclade of R1b1a2a-L23, which also takes up the majority of west Asian R1b. There is a east European-west Asian-specific brother clade of European L51, named Z103. There are probably many L23 subclades in west Asia that have not been discovered. Some west Asians also belong to R1b-M343 and R1b-M269 lineages that are apart of unknown subclades.

[EliasAlucard]

Anatolian R1b is different from western european one, apart from the fact that there is no S116, U152, U106, etc in Anatolia.It doesn't matter, because no R1b was present amongst the proto-Indo-Europeans. Regardless of what Maciamo and Jean Manco say, it just wasn't there.

[Hevo]

It doesn't matter, because no R1b was present amongst the proto-Indo-Europeans. Regardless of what Maciamo and Jean Manco say, it just wasn't there.

Perhaps that will change, Klyosov is publishing a series of articles on R1b and related burial practices and according to a Russian member he said this to linguist Klein.



еперь вопрос – а почему я считаю, что там была гаплогруппа R1b? Объясняю. Это мне в частном порядке сообщил Л.С. Клейн, в январе 2014 года. Вот что он написал (и не в первый раз, это он мне сообщает последние три года):
Есть у меня ученик, Алексей Ковалев, он копал много лет в Монголии и Синьцзяне. Вот он поместил в Рос. Арх. Ежегоднике 2011 сенсационную статью «Великая чемурчекская миграция» – о происхождении чемурческский культуры Алтая и Синьцзяна прямиком из Западной и Южной Франции. Это III тыс. до н.э. Он связывает эту культуру с тохарами. У меня впечатление, что миграция доказана, а связь с тохарами вызывает ряд вопросов…

Полагаю, Вам будет интересно узнать, что мой ученик Алексей Ковалев, тот самый, который исследовал чемурчекскую культуру Алтая, Монголии и Синьцзяна (видимо, тохары), и выпустил сейчас уже две книги о ней, добился анализов ДНК по афанасьевцам и окуневцам. Два из трех афанасьевцев и один окуневец оказались R1b1 (M269), а один афанасьевец – R1b. Ковалев же имеет радиуглеродные даты по многим афанасьевцам: калибров. 3000-2600 до н.э… Чемурчекская культура совершенно четко из Франции.

Я ответил:
Советую А. Ковалеву передать, что ему стоит перед публикацией показать эти данные мне, чтобы потом не было конфуза. Он, надеюсь, имеет данные по трупоположению? …Я вовсе не исключаю, что в Южной Сибири были древние R1b, сам это описывал, и датировал по ДНК. Просто надо исключить неверные отнесения, и знать, кто определял эти R1b и R1b1, какие там гаплотипы (если их нет – это большой промах), и поставить это в исторический контекст. Думаю, что Вам это объяснять не надо, как и А. Ковалеву. Надеюсь, понятно, почему А. Ковалеву стоит со мной связаться?

К сожалению, данных по трупоположению ни в одной статье А. Ковалева не оказалось. Если это так – непростительное упущение для археолога. И досадная упущенная возможность идентифицировать принадлежность останков к определенному роду, к тому же R1b, например.

Two out of three afanasievo remains and one okunevo remains tested R1b1 (M269) and one afanasievan – R1b.

It's not peer reviewed yet so it's not certain but it's very interesting.

[EliasAlucard]

Perhaps that will change, Klyosov is publishing a series of articles on R1b and related burial practices and according to a Russian member he said this to linguist Klein.



Two out of three afanasievo remains and one okunevo remains tested R1b1 (M269) and one afanasievan – R1b.

It's not peer reviewed yet so it's not certain but it's very interesting.I'm not saying there was absolutely no R1b males whatsoever in Yamnaya; there probably was a tiny minority of such males. If so however, they were not part of the proto-Indo-European tribe, and they had no Y-DNA effect on the initial spread of Indo-European languages.

Afanasievo is not Yamnaya,

[Hevo]

I'm not saying there was absolutely no R1b males whatsoever in Yamnaya; there probably was a tiny minority of such males. If so however, they were not part of the proto-Indo-European tribe, and they had no Y-DNA effect on the initial spread of Indo-European languages.


How do you know there was probably a tiny minority of such males? That's impossible to be sure atm, r1a has a strong Indo-European character no doubt but more Y haplogroup testing needs to be done to be certain about the R1b role.

[I've Her Son]

I am going to laugh my fucking ass off when all of these different stupid haplogroups (R1b, R1a, etc) thought to be instrumental to the Bronze-age peopling of Europe are going to be revealed as having a much more recent and less spectacular origin, and a link between intermingles with Negroids in colonial times.

[I've Her Son]

Just thought I'd add that the Euro/Euroanthro obsession with haplogroups resembles Japanese blood-type racial mysticism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_types_in_Japanese_culture

[awyr dywyll]

I don't believe in Kurgan hypothesis, so IE and R1b-M269 must be among Neolithic European settlers

[Sizzo]

I don't believe in Kurgan hypothesis, so IE and R1b-M269 must be among Neolithic European settlers

If I remember well Cavalli-Sforza said that there's no contradiction between Gimbutas (Kurgan) and Renfrew's (Anatolia) theories about the Indo-European spread in Europe.

[EliasAlucard]

How do you know there was probably a tiny minority of such males? That's impossible to be sure atm, r1a has a strong Indo-European character no doubt but more Y haplogroup testing needs to be done to be certain about the R1b role.I don't know, that's why I wrote probably. It's unlikely every single male in and during the Yamnaya culture was 100% R1a-M17+, some males were probably of earlier non-PIE stock, and so on. R1b males also lived close to the Pontic-Caspian steppe, either in Anatolia or Central Asia.

But R1b has no real match with Indo-European languages. That R1b is most common amongst Europeans in Western Europe, decisively means R1b is non-Indo-European, because proto-Indo-European is entirely east European in origin.


I don't believe in Kurgan hypothesisYou don't understand this topic, and it's not a belief nor a hypothesis at this point.


so IE and R1b-M269 must be among Neolithic European settlersThat's a very intelligent point of view.


If I remember well Cavalli-Sforza said that there's no contradiction between Gimbutas (Kurgan) and Renfrew's (Anatolia) theories about the Indo-European spread in Europe.There's most certainly a contradiction. The Anatolian hypothesis must be revised in order to be compatible with the Kurgan theory. It's quite possible though that the proto-Indo-Europeans included/assimilated some Neolithic farmer ancestry already in the Yamnaya era.

Anyway, point here is, R1b has nothing to do with proto-Indo-European, anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what he's talking about and can be disregarded.

[Artek]

I don't think R1b is connected with IE. I understood that most ancient sublades on R1b come from Anatolia, so they probabily were farmer.
But the problem is that tested farmers were mostly G2a with E-V13 (and some slight I2 taken from hunters-gatherers) :D. I don't think that sample is too small to find R1b if it was really among them.

[Äijä]

Wonder when the N1c mongols came to scene.

[Artek]

Wonder when the N1c mongols came to scene.
Kunda Culture(?). Though eventual results(if tested) may be surprising.

[Äijä]

Kunda Culture(?). Though eventual results(if tested) may be surprising.

I dont expect many mongols but I expect an elite horse riding warrior class.

[blogen]

There are five Y DNA samples from the Cardium pottery culture from 5000BC, 4 were G2a-P15 and 1 was E1b1b-V13, in line with Y DNA from other Neolithic European farmers. There are over 30 Y DNA samples from Neolithic west Europe, not one is R1b. West European specific R1b L11 spread rapidly(does not have a clear place of origin because of that) and is estimated to be 5,000 years old. R1b1a2-M269 first appears in ancient west European Y DNA in German Bell Beaker 4,600 years ago, that is exactly where it was expected to be based on research on modern people. R1b L11 is constant with spreading with Indo Europeans because it arrived when Indo European cultures did, and has language or culture specific subclades(Germanic R1b-S21, Urnfield R1b-U152, Insular Celtic R1b-L21, etc.). mtDNA from the Bell Beaker site of the two R1b samples, were obviously of Indo European origin not native Neolithic origin, so they were probably early western Indo Europeans.

30 is not representative, this may be accidental yet. Especially that the Basques have one of largest proportions of the R1b and they are clearly not Indoeuropeans. Or this map is correlated with the early Danubian neolithic for example:

http://s27.postimg.org/k1rv6b8yr/Spread_of_Early_Neolithic_Farming_in_Europe_Resize 1.jpg

R1b (La Hoguette from the Cardium):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/R1b_Central_Europe.png/1024px-R1b_Central_Europe.png

I2a1 (LBK from the Balkan neolithic):
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

I2a2 (LBK from the Balkan neolithic):
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif

[Artek]

30 is not representative, this may be accidental yet. Especially that the Basques have one of largest proportions of the R1b and they are clearly not Indoeuropeans. Or this map is correlated with the early Danubian neolithic for example:
Basques belong to the downstream subclade of R1b which can't be a neolithic farmer. Probably too young.


I2a1 (LBK from the Balkan neolithic):
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif
Except it's mostly spread by Slavs as a Dinaric-N and Dinaric-S subclades and descending from hunters-gatherers.(see hunters from Motala).


I2a2 (LBK from the Balkan neolithic):
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif
Re-introduced to most areas probably by La-Tene Celts or other groups.

[Raven_]

I dont expect many mongols but I expect an elite horse riding warrior class.

do you think y-DNA N carriers came after Indo-Europeans?

[Sizzo]

Basques belong to the downstream subclade of R1b which can't be a neolithic farmer. Probably too young.


Except it's mostly spread by Slavs as a Dinaric-N and Dinaric-S subclades and descending from hunters-gatherers.(see hunters from Motala).


Re-introduced to most areas probably by La-Tene Celts or other groups.

Couldn't R1b be a young Indo-European haplogroup while R1a is the proto version?

[I've Her Son]

Look, ma! I'm demonstrating what happened 5,000 years ago based on a poorly understood combination of numbers and letters that a computer software program punched out on a screen!

[Artek]

Couldn't R1b be a young Indo-European haplogroup while R1a is the proto version?
I don't want to favour any of those haplogroups in such matter.

[Sizzo]

Another important thing, in my opinion, is the Nordicism: the Indo-Europeans carried in Eurasia Nordid phenotypes (e.g. Tarim), why not in Western Europe, then? There are Corded and Kurganoid phenotypes in many parts of Europe.

[HellLander87]

I think is IE migration is too recent to be attributed to one haplogroup.But r1a was probably the main one.

[Artek]

Another important thing, in my opinion, is the Nordicism: the Indo-Europeans carried in Eurasia Nordid phenotypes (e.g. Tarim), why not in Western Europe, then? There are Corded and Kurganoid phenotypes in many parts of Europe.
Phenotypes are connected with autosomal genetics, not with haplogroups. Of course there was once a connection between autosomals and haplogroups but it got blurred since neolithic.

[Vesuvian Sky]

It depends entirely on which sub-clade is under consideration.

The Bell Beaker culture was probably Proto-Italo-Celtic. But its spatial distribution based on c-14 dating is west to east rather then east to west. Its of course problematic because the Kurgan culture postulates an east to west distribution for the Indo-Europeanization of Europe in which the Corded Ware culture would have played a prominent role as an off-shoot of the Kurgan culture and spreads east to west based on c-14 dating.

R1b's parent clade probably was in Anatolia. When is difficult to say but it could have been as early as 10,000 BC. Eventually the sublcades would branch off but who knows the exact migratory path.

Some have postulated that maybe some of these clades arrived on the Pontic Caspian steppes at a time during the Mesolithic but then the particular paternal clan associated vanished from the steppes only to reappear in western Europe.

Its a longshot but anyway here is that phylogenetic tree from Eupedia:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml

It essentially postulates that m269 was on the Pontic Caspian steppes during the Calcolithic era. Eventually the P312/S116 people become Proto-Italo-Celtic. Eupedia says Proto-Italo-Celtic-Germanic but Germanic's linguistic position as being a part of such a hypothetical language family is not backed by any linguistic scholars that I know of. Most IE phylogenetic trees assign a greater association with it to Baltic and Slavic languages which are incompletely Satemized.

[Sizzo]

Phenotypes are connected with autosomal genetics, not with haplogroups. Of course there was once a connection between autosomals and haplogroups but it got blurred since neolithic.

Of course, but Autsomal DNA infacts has more importance than haplogroups. It would be very interesting to have some parameters to determine the "Aryan" admixture of European people.

[Hevo]

I don't know, that's why I wrote probably. It's unlikely every single male in and during the Yamnaya culture was 100% R1a-M17+, some males were probably of earlier non-PIE stock, and so on. R1b males also lived close to the Pontic-Caspian steppe, either in Anatolia or Central Asia.

possibly is a better term because we don't have any Y haplogroup results from the Yamnaya culture yet if i am not mistaken.

[Äijä]

do you think y-DNA N carriers came after Indo-Europeans?

Impossible to say as they where so close to each other, they could have mixed from the start.

[blogen]

Basques belong to the downstream subclade of R1b which can't be a neolithic farmer. Probably too young.

What clads punctually?


Except it's mostly spread by Slavs as a Dinaric-N and Dinaric-S subclades and descending from hunters-gatherers.(see hunters from Motala).

Or this carriers of the I2 came from Anatolia from the Anatolian-Caucasian refugium with the neolithic settlers.


Re-introduced to most areas probably by La-Tene Celts or other groups.

Definitely not in Iberia for example, where the majority of the non-Indoeuropean population existed in the Roman times!

So we your explanation onto this distribution?
http://s27.postimg.org/7tndmtfz7/cardiumvsbalkan.jpg

[Artek]

What clads punctually?
R1b-DF27 which is under R1b-P312.




Or this carriers of the I2 came from Anatolia from the Anatolian-Caucasian refugium with the neolithic settlers.
How do you explain, then, that mesolithic Swedish hunters-gatherers from Motala and hunter-gatherer from Loschbour(Luxembourg) belongs to the I2 clade that is ancestral to Dinaric and Disles clade?





So we your explanation onto this distribution?
http://s27.postimg.org/7tndmtfz7/cardiumvsbalkan.jpg
France, black hole of genetic testing. Don't even suggest yourself with that map.

[blogen]

R1b-DF27 which is under R1b-P312.

This is a local version only of the Western European R1b and not an unique verion in here.


How do you explain, then, that mesolithic Swedish hunters-gatherers from Motala and hunter-gatherer from Loschbour(Luxembourg) belongs to the I2 clade that is ancestral to Dinaric and Disles clade?

The refugiums! The the I2 carriers go into the refugiums and return later. But sometimes in an another route. For example pre LGM Eastern Europe --> LGM Caucasus --> mesolithic Anatolia --> neolithic Balkan


France, black hole of genetic testing. Don't even suggest yourself with that map.

These data exist.

[Artek]

This is a local version only of the Western European R1b and not an unique verion in here.
Yep. That's why it can't represent a farmer stock.




The refugiums! The the I2 carriers go into the refugiums and return later. But sometimes in an another route. For example pre LGM Eastern Europe --> LGM Caucasus --> mesolithic Anatolia --> neolithic Balkan
As you suggested, this I2 migrated with farmers. I tried to explain that it was here before the farmers and descends from hunters that were already in Europe.




These data exist.
In low-resolution, using outdated system, most of the time without SNP testing. France is a hole, French Canadians who do commercial tests struggle to improve the situation but they aren't representative enough.

[blogen]

Yep. That's why it can't represent a farmer stock.

I do not understand why not!


As you suggested, this I2 migrated with farmers. I tried to explain that it was here before the farmers and descends from hunters that were already in Europe.

Yes, the I2 was in Europe before the neolithic and came more with the neolithic!


In low-resolution, using outdated system, most of the time without SNP testing. France is a hole, French Canadians who do commercial tests struggle to improve the situation but they aren't representative enough.

They can to differ a haplotype maybe! And this is enought onto this map about the total R1b proportion.

[Fire Haired]

30 is not representative, this may be accidental yet. Especially that the Basques have one of largest proportions of the R1b and they are clearly not Indoeuropeans. Or this map is correlated with the early Danubian neolithic for example:

http://s27.postimg.org/k1rv6b8yr/Spread_of_Early_Neolithic_Farming_in_Europe_Resize 1.jpg

R1b (La Hoguette from the Cardium):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/R1b_Central_Europe.png/1024px-R1b_Central_Europe.png

I2a1 (LBK from the Balkan neolithic):
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

I2a2 (LBK from the Balkan neolithic):
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif

The fact that Sardinians R1b is all derived of Italian, west Asian, or Germanic clades is great evidence R1b did not exist in Neolithic west Europe. 80% of the Basque have Df27, which has is a brotherclade to U152 which can easily be associated with the Urnfield culture, R1b L21 which can easily be said to be the main paternal lineage of proto-Insular Celts, and a cousin clade to R1b S21 which is obvisouly a Germanic haplogroup. 80% of Basque have R1b yet not one of 5 Y DNA samples from early farmers from around the Basque country have R1b, and not one from over 30 from west European Neolithic Y DNA samples have R1b(including over 20 from central France, where over 60% modern inhabitants have R1b-P312). Just because the Basque and parts of France and Iberia who in pre Roman times were non-Indo European have a high amount of R1b-L11 doesn't mean it can't be a marker of Indo Europeans. There are plenty of non-Indo Iranian speaking people in central and west Asia who have a high amount of Indo Iranian R1b-Z93.

[Fire Haired]

Another important thing, in my opinion, is the Nordicism: the Indo-Europeans carried in Eurasia Nordid phenotypes (e.g. Tarim), why not in Western Europe, then? There are Corded and Kurganoid phenotypes in many parts of Europe.

Light hair probably first became popular somewhere in Neolithic Europe, because so far all samples of Mesolithic-Neolithic European hunter gatherers and farmers(two ancestral population of modern Europeans) have either black or dark brown hair. It is defintley possible that Indo Europeans and other groups who mainly spread during the bronze age are responsible for what have must of been the rapid spread of light hair.

Ancient DNA though has shown that the people of the proto-Indo European Yamna and Catcacomb cultures stretching from Bulgaria-Volga Russia were uniformly very dark pigmented, probably darker than any modern Europeans. So it s a good guess the same was true for most of the people who spread the language in Europe.

The supposed descendants of the Yamna culture in Asia though(people who spread Indo Iranian and Tocherian languages) were as light pigmented as modern northern and eastern Europeans, and bronze age proto-Germanic mummies, from around the same time in Denmark show some people with blonde hair. That means it is possible either by extremely quick evolution or by gene flow from an unknown light population many of the Indo Europeans who spread the language in Europe were very light pigmented.

[blogen]

Just because the Basque and parts of France and Iberia who in pre Roman times were non-Indo European have a high amount of R1b-L11 doesn't mean it can't be a marker of Indo Europeans.

No, this means, that we have a very serious problem. Something basically wrong whit this IE spread model. And the basic problem is not this, but this: the proportion of the R1b type decreases drastically towards east. This would support a spreading theory reversely only. Maybe the Celts were brutal barbarians, but even the Mongols were not so brutal according to what this model suggests. The kill'em all in a half continent was not the politics of the Celtic hordes.

So there is need for a new model here.

[Fire Haired]

No, this means, that we have a very serious problem. Something basically wrong whit this IE spread model. And the basic problem is not this, but this: the proportion of the R1b type decreases drastically towards east. This would support a spreading theory reversely only. Maybe the Celts were brutal barbarians, but even the Mongols were not so brutal according to what this model suggests. The kill'em all in a half continent was not the politics of the Celtic hordes.

So there is need for a new model here.

Figuring out where a haplogroup(maternal or paternal lineage) originated is not as simple as finding where it is most popular. You have to consider diversity, reproductive histories of regions, what archaeology and history tells us about the people that lived in certain regions in the past, etc., etc., etc. R1b is most popular in west Europe, but nearly all west European R1b is R1b-L11, which was born only around 5,000 years ago. R1b probably originated in west Asia because it is most diverse there. R1b outside of west Europe did not originate in west Europe. Not all R1b is west Europe is from the Celts either, there is Germanic-specific R1b S21, and Germanic specific clades of P312.

[Sizzo]

Light hair probably first became popular somewhere in Neolithic Europe, because so far all samples of Mesolithic-Neolithic European hunter gatherers and farmers(two ancestral population of modern Europeans) have either black or dark brown hair. It is defintley possible that Indo Europeans and other groups who mainly spread during the bronze age are responsible for what have must of been the rapid spread of light hair.

Ancient DNA though has shown that the people of the proto-Indo European Yamna and Catcacomb cultures stretching from Bulgaria-Volga Russia were uniformly very dark pigmented, probably darker than any modern Europeans. So it s a good guess the same was true for most of the people who spread the language in Europe.

The supposed descendants of the Yamna culture in Asia though(people who spread Indo Iranian and Tocherian languages) were as light pigmented as modern northern and eastern Europeans, and bronze age proto-Germanic mummies, from around the same time in Denmark show some people with blonde hair. That means it is possible either by extremely quick evolution or by gene flow from an unknown light population many of the Indo Europeans who spread the language in Europe were very light pigmented.

Yes, original Proto-Indo-Europeans weren't light-pigmented: they took these features in North Europe, I guess, and they spread them in Europe and Eurasia. Corded and Kurganoid (Eastern CM) features, instead, were true Aryan. Villar (well, a linguist but whatever) talk about CM remains in Kurgan area.

[Artek]

The fact that Sardinians R1b is all derived of Italian, west Asian, or Germanic clades is great evidence R1b did not exist in Neolithic west Europe. 80% of the Basque have Df27, which has is a brotherclade to U152 which can easily be associated with the Urnfield culture, R1b L21 which can easily be said to be the main paternal lineage of proto-Insular Celts, and a cousin clade to R1b S21 which is obvisouly a Germanic haplogroup. 80% of Basque have R1b yet not one of 5 Y DNA samples from early farmers from around the Basque country have R1b, and not one from over 30 from west European Neolithic Y DNA samples have R1b(including over 20 from central France, where over 60% modern inhabitants have R1b-P312). Just because the Basque and parts of France and Iberia who in pre Roman times were non-Indo European have a high amount of R1b-L11 doesn't mean it can't be a marker of Indo Europeans. There are plenty of non-Indo Iranian speaking people in central and west Asia who have a high amount of Indo Iranian R1b-Z93.

That's what I've tried to suggest, I just don't want to write the same things all the time. DF-27 is too young and it's presence among should indicate that they retained their neolithic language and culture despite most of previous male lineages being replaced.

[Fire Haired]

Yes, original Proto-Indo-Europeans weren't light-pigmented: they took these features in North Europe, I guess, and they spread them in Europe and Eurasia. Corded and Kurganoid (Eastern CM) features, instead, were true Aryan. Villar (well, a linguist but whatever) talk about CM remains in Kurgan area.

Who knows, there are alot of possibilities.

[awyr dywyll]

If I remember well Cavalli-Sforza said that there's no contradiction between Gimbutas (Kurgan) and Renfrew's (Anatolia) theories about the Indo-European spread in Europe.
As i know, the main difference between them is the time interval. First waves of IE, by classic Anatolian hypothezis moved to Europe about 6000-5000 BC, accordin to Kurgan hypothezis it happened much more later, closer to Early Bronze Age with metall producers.

[awyr dywyll]

I don't know, that's why I wrote probably. It's unlikely every single male in and during the Yamnaya culture was 100% R1a-M17+, some males were probably of earlier non-PIE stock, and so on. R1b males also lived close to the Pontic-Caspian steppe, either in Anatolia or Central Asia.

But R1b has no real match with Indo-European languages. That R1b is most common amongst Europeans in Western Europe, decisively means R1b is non-Indo-European, because proto-Indo-European is entirely east European in origin.

You don't understand this topic, and it's not a belief nor a hypothesis at this point.

That's a very intelligent point of view.

There's most certainly a contradiction. The Anatolian hypothesis must be revised in order to be compatible with the Kurgan theory. It's quite possible though that the proto-Indo-Europeans included/assimilated some Neolithic farmer ancestry already in the Yamnaya era.

Anyway, point here is, R1b has nothing to do with proto-Indo-European, anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what he's talking about and can be disregarded.

Y-DNA haplogroup R1b has turned up in two late Neolithic Bell Beaker skeletons from a site at Kromsdorf, eastern Germany, with one of the lineages further defined as R1b1b2 (M269+). This is a breakthrough, because for years, geneticists and genetic genealogists have been wondering which archeological culture to credit for the massive expansion of this haplogroup in Europe.

For a long time it was thought R1b was a Cro-Magnon marker native to Western Europe, but that theory fell by the way side when its ancestor R1 was found to be only 18,500 years old (see here). There was then some talk about R1b being a proto-Indo-European lineage, which expanded with Yamnaya pastoralists from the Eastern European steppe. This was a notion mostly entertained by hobby genetic genealogists from Western Europe and the US, but it never really made any sense, due to the paucity of R1b in modern-day Ukraine and Southern Russia.

However, many others, including myself, always had a suspicion that the Bell Beaker folk played an important role in the spread of R1b across Western Europe. Indeed, I mentioned them last week in my blog post about ancient DNA from the Swedish Neolithic, saying they probably had an impact on the genetics of Scandinavians during the Copper Age (see here).

A couple of mtDNA sequences from the samples in this study - those belonging to haplogroups K1 and I1 - are apparently showing haplotype hits in Portugal, as reported here. That's important, because the Bell Beaker "phenomenon" is thought to have originated in present-day Portugal, and then expanded into other areas of Western Europe via maritime routes, before moving onto Central Europe. However, both K1 and I1 are native to the Near East, and most likely arrived in Iberia after the Ice Age. Indeed, the same can probably be said about R1b. What this suggests is that the elements that crystallized into the Bell Beaker Culture in Iberia during the late Neolithic came from the Near East during the Neolithic.
If we take radio carbon data into account which tells us the earliest Bell Beakers occurred in Iberia, an out-of-Iberia DF27 expansion becomes even more intriguing. Finally, if we take the definition of the North South cluster as one with a Northern and Southern coastal distribution, it aligns with the expansion of Maritime Bell Beakers along the Atlantic and Mediterranean coasts. Maritime Bell Beaker cluster seems more appropriate at this time than North-South cluster. There has finally been an Iberian L165 sample found, which would mean the 10x Isles sample bias may be in play.

If we look at the variance of DF27′s siblings, we see that they are younger than DF27 and may have been involved in the later Bell Beaker reflux expansions. The ordering of variance (1. DF27 2. U152 3. L21) is also a good match for radio carbon dating that shows Bell Beaker age as oldest in Iberia/S. France/N. Italy and then progressively younger as one goes north and east.

[awyr dywyll]

Another important thing, in my opinion, is the Nordicism: the Indo-Europeans carried in Eurasia Nordid phenotypes (e.g. Tarim), why not in Western Europe, then? There are Corded and Kurganoid phenotypes in many parts of Europe.
Don't you think that they can formed already there, in Western Europe from local reduced CM?

http://i056.radikal.ru/1406/26/488f130d3509.jpg (http://www.radikal.ru)

[blogen]

An Iberian starting point for the R1b is totally acceptable theory for me.

[awyr dywyll]

No, this means, that we have a very serious problem. Something basically wrong whit this IE spread model. And the basic problem is not this, but this: the proportion of the R1b type decreases drastically towards east. This would support a spreading theory reversely only. Maybe the Celts were brutal barbarians, but even the Mongols were not so brutal according to what this model suggests. The kill'em all in a half continent was not the politics of the Celtic hordes.

So there is need for a new model here.
It can be explained, not by extremly warlike IE invaders, but their long time presence in Europe,and their large scale expansion, not with chariots or carts but boats, which in comparison with the latter more rapid and much more cargo lifter.

[Sizzo]

An Iberian starting point for the R1b is totally acceptable theory for me.

So Iberia = Kelts? The dream of every façader.

[awyr dywyll]

An Iberian starting point for the R1b is totally acceptable theory for me.
Add to this Egyptian pharaoh of 18th dynasty with RM-269, and it's one more argument to smth Neolithic and maritime character of their spreading

[Sizzo]

Don't you think that they can formed already there, in Western Europe from local reduced CM?

http://i056.radikal.ru/1406/26/488f130d3509.jpg (http://www.radikal.ru)

Corded and Kurgan are Eastern traits.

[awyr dywyll]

So Iberia = Kelts? The dream of every façader.
I wouldn't like to spekulate about it, but it is look like the truth, remember what wrote Herodot, about Celts. He located them somwhere beyond Gibraltar strait on the far west, and it is 5 century BC, La Tene at this time just began to appear around Rhine.

[Sizzo]

I wouldn't like to spekulate about it, but it is like like to truth, remember what wrote Herodot, about Celts. He located them somwhere beyond Gibraltar strait on the far west, and it is 5 century BC, La Tene at this time just began to appeare around Rhine.

The Italo-Keltic branch of R1b came from the Danube (Golasecca, Scamozzina, Canegrate, Polada, Villanova were related with Hallstatt).

[awyr dywyll]

Corded and Kurgan are Eastern traits.
Maybe, they're mainly replaced by Neolithic settlers in other parts of Europe, as i know partialy there's a huge problem with preserved remains in the West, on account of acid soil, and partialy of specific burial traditions

[Sizzo]

Maybe, they're mainly replaced by Neolithic settlers in other parts of Europe, as i know partialy there's a huge problem with preserved remains in the West, on account of acid soil, and partialy of specific burial traditions

What do you think about Aryan blood type? B type? There are tons of it in Northern India.

[awyr dywyll]

The Italo-Keltic branch of R1b came from the Danube (Golasecca, Scamozzina, Canegrate, Polada, Villanova were related with Hallstatt).
I guess, there were another stage of Celtic expansion, pre-historic,which began maybe even before Halstatt C-D periods. In this case Halstatt cultural phenomenon linked with trading and social stratification rather than with Celtic genesis.In other words not Halstatt culture spawned Celts, but some Celts (their eastern branch) spawned Halstatt with cooperation with some aboriginal population.

[awyr dywyll]

What do you think about Aryan blood type? B type? There are tons of it in Northern India.
Not ready to talk about India and Aryans there.What's your point?

[Sizzo]

Not ready to talk about India and Aryans there.What's your point?

I mean: there were a specific blood type carried by Indo-Europeans or not? R1a is usually in combination with B type, in Northern India. But of course, there are only 4 blood types, quite meaningless.

[LightHouse89]

I am going to laugh my fucking ass off when all of these different stupid haplogroups (R1b, R1a, etc) thought to be instrumental to the Bronze-age peopling of Europe are going to be revealed as having a much more recent and less spectacular origin, and a link between intermingles with Negroids in colonial times.

not really moron....you niggers have an obsession with us being related to you....why so you can steal our achievements? LOL too bad.

[LightHouse89]

I mean: there were a specific blood type carried by Indo-Europeans or not? R1a is usually in combination with B type, in Northern India. But of course, there are only 4 blood types, quite meaningless.

R1b came from Asia.... or in central Russia [Eurasia] originally. I have read articles on this.

[gold_fenix]

i think you are confusing a thing, some claim R1b is associated with celts but really we are speaking of proto or preceltic populations, strongly associted with atlantic zones, there was indeed a culture before of celts in the zones of atlantic which have elements who celts too had it but this is before of they, it has been said that Tartessos was a interchange zone and now is the theory that Tartessos languaje was a proto celtic language

[awyr dywyll]

I mean: there were a specific blood type carried by Indo-Europeans or not? R1a is usually in combination with B type, in Northern India. But of course, there are only 4 blood types, quite meaningless.
Is there something similar closer to Europe?

[Sizzo]

i think you are confusing a thing, some claim R1b is associated with celts but really we are speaking of proto or preceltic populations, strongly associted with atlantic zones, there was indeed a culture before of celts in the zones of atlantic which have elements who celts too had it but this is before of they, it has been said that Tartessos was a interchange zone and now is the theory that Tartessos languaje was a proto celtic language

I think that the true meaning of "Celtic" is Hallstatt and La Tène, so Central Europe (like Italics). People like Tartessians or Ligures could be pre-Celtic people but, maybe, related with R1b as well (if R1b isn't Indoeuropean).

[LightHouse89]

i think you are confusing a thing, some claim R1b is associated with celts but really we are speaking of proto or preceltic populations, strongly associted with atlantic zones, there was indeed a culture before of celts in the zones of atlantic which have elements who celts too had it but this is before of they, it has been said that Tartessos was a interchange zone and now is the theory that Tartessos languaje was a proto celtic language

proto-western europeans.

[blogen]

So Iberia = Kelts? The dream of every façader.

No. Iberia = non Indoeuropean Bell Beakers, the R1b peoples. The proportion of the R1b decreases towards east, so evident, that the origin of the type was in the west somewhere. Iberia is a good start.

[blogen]

Add to this Egyptian pharaoh of 18th dynasty with RM-269, and it's one more argument to smth Neolithic and maritime character of their spreading

If the Oriental maritime colonization of Iberia is the connection between Iberia and the Near East. Maybe the Spanish colonisation in America (http://www.irwinator.com/126/1-14.jpg) was a similar event in the history (http://oi56.tinypic.com/e6anoh.jpg).

Los Millares: 3200–2300 BC
Bell Beaker: 2800 – 1800 BC,

"The Millares Horizon has attracted international interest, as a reference point for the beginning of unequal societies. The singularity of the Millares site, where a large village with stone walls co-exists with a necropolis of tholoi and more than ten small forts, led to consider it as a central place, first as a colonial foundation (metallurgic prospectors from Eastern Mediterranean) and then as the centre of a hierarchical society."
source: Pedro V. Castro-Martínez, Trinidad Escoriza-Mateu, Joaquím Oltra-Puigdomenech: Social hypotheses for the communities of the Iberian Mediterranean basin (From the VI to II millennia BC) - Oxford, "British Archaeological Reports, International series". S1525: 117-131.

The R1b comes:
http://www.minoanatlantis.com/pix/Minoan_Ship_Sail.jpg

[Sizzo]

No. Iberia = non Indoeuropean Bell Beakers, the R1b peoples. The proportion of the R1b decreases towards east, so evident, that the origin of the type was in the west somewhere. Iberia is a good start.

What about the Gedrosian admixture? Seems high in the R1b Europe (not Iberia).

[LightHouse89]

If the Oriental maritime colonization of Iberia is the connection between Iberia and the Near East.

Los Millares: 3200–2300 BC
Bell Beaker: 2800 – 1800 BC,

"The Millares Horizon has attracted international interest, as a reference point for the beginning of unequal societies. The singularity of the Millares site, where a large village with stone walls co-exists with a necropolis of tholoi and more than ten small forts, led to consider it as a central place, first as a colonial foundation (metallurgic prospectors from Eastern Mediterranean) and then as the centre of a hierarchical society."
source: Pedro V. Castro-Martínez, Trinidad Escoriza-Mateu, Joaquím Oltra-Puigdomenech: Social hypotheses for the communities of the Iberian Mediterranean basin (From the VI to II millennia BC) - Oxford, "British Archaeological Reports, International series". S1525: 117-131.

The R1b comes:
http://www.minoanatlantis.com/pix/Minoan_Ship_Sail.jpg

it originated in Central Asia and then from there broke into two waves....one that went into Europe and one that went into Africa. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_(Y-DNA) I do not think it came from West Asia but the people who carried R1b went through West Asia on their journey to western europe.

[blogen]

What about the Gedrosian admixture? Seems high in the R1b Europe (not Iberia).

Yes, supports this hypothesis:

http://s27.postimg.org/bskl5n4mb/Gedrosian.jpg

[blogen]

it originated in Central Asia.

18,500 years ago yes.


and then from there broke into two waves....one that went into Europe and one that went into Africa. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_(Y-DNA) I do not think it came from West Asia but the people who carried R1b went through West Asia on their journey to western europe

Agree.

[Sizzo]

Yes, supports this hypothesis:

http://s27.postimg.org/bskl5n4mb/Gedrosian.jpg

It could explain a Gedrosian-Balochistan origin of R1b, than Iberian.

[Hong Key]

I believe King Tut was bi or tri racial but did have some R1B and part alien lol. Since he was only 3,000 year ago this may or may not help the conversation but thought I'd add it.

King Tut’s DNA is Western European
http://www.eutimes.net/2010/06/king-tuts-dna-is-western-european/

I have heard people who believe in the old mythologies argue the druids came out of Sumer priest class and even some say the opposite from Iberia druids went into Egypt then Sumer. The main thing I get out of it is people were traveling farther and more often then many believed previously. So is it not possible that it had an eastern origin that went west and then later spread east? I love reading these conversation I just wish I could add to them :(

I call pre IE invasion peoples, Original Europeans but you guys are saying Europe had 2 or 3 migrations in Europe plus CM who were already there before IE's showed up 5,000 or 6,000 yrs ago? And PIE is when and where? Russian Steepes/Anatolia before 6,000 yrs ago?

[blogen]

It could explain a Gedrosian-Balochistan origin of R1b, than Iberian.

An if this theory is true, then the Bell Beaker peoples were the proto-Basques and maybe the Etruscans and Raetians were the last remains of the once huge Cardium populated area.

[LightHouse89]

What about the Gedrosian admixture? Seems high in the R1b Europe (not Iberia).

doesnt matter r1b and r1a are both neanderthals :p

[LightHouse89]

18,500 years ago yes.



Agree.

Also I think r1b and r1a were neanderthals [well before all of these somewhat more sophisitcated cultures evovled after they arrived in europe].

[LightHouse89]

I wouldnt say the map was incorrect...infact some say all of the megalithic sites in britain, gaul and ireland were created by these earlier waves of people. however moving the stones that weigh in the thousands of tons is hard to explain.

[LightHouse89]

I believe King Tut was bi or tri racial but did have some R1B and part alien lol. Since he was only 3,000 year ago this may or may not help the conversation but thought I'd add it.

King Tut’s DNA is Western European
http://www.eutimes.net/2010/06/king-tuts-dna-is-western-european/

I have heard people who believe in the old mythologies argue the druids came out of Sumer priest class and even some say the opposite from Iberia druids went into Egypt then Sumer. The main thing I get out of it is people were traveling farther and more often then many believed previously. So is it not possible that it had an eastern origin that went west and then later spread east? I love reading these conversation I just wish I could add to them :(

I call pre IE invasion peoples, Original Europeans but you guys are saying Europe had 2 or 3 migrations in Europe plus CM who were already there before IE's showed up 5,000 or 6,000 yrs ago? And PIE is when and where? Russian Steepes/Anatolia before 6,000 yrs ago?

I would say the most indigenous would be I geneitc groups.....then r1b/r1a which to me are the same thing....they both originated in central Asia [and came from neanderthals who inhabited the same exact area]. Look up neanderthal genome project for more info....dont by this nonsense we all came out of africa crap.....

[blogen]

I believe King Tut was bi or tri racial but did have some R1B and part alien lol. Since he was only 3,000 year ago this may or may not help the conversation but thought I'd add it.

King Tut’s DNA is Western European
http://www.eutimes.net/2010/06/king-tuts-dna-is-western-european/

I have heard people who believe in the old mythologies argue the druids came out of Sumer priest class and even some say the opposite from Iberia druids went into Egypt then Sumer. The main thing I get out of it is people were traveling farther and more often then many believed previously. So is it not possible that it had an eastern origin that went west and then later spread east? I love reading these conversation I just wish I could add to them :(

I call pre IE invasion peoples, Original Europeans but you guys are saying Europe had 2 or 3 migrations in Europe plus CM who were already there before IE's showed up 5,000 or 6,000 yrs ago? And PIE is when and where? Russian Steepes/Anatolia before 6,000 yrs ago?

Anatolia. And the weaves of the colonization of Europe from the neolithic to the Bronze age:

http://s27.postimg.org/y5sbsg5k3/coloneurop.jpg

[Sizzo]

But, about autosomal DNA, which is the more indicative (Proto-Indo-European) component on calculators like Dodecad or Eurogenes?

[Ulla]

But, about autosomal DNA, which is the more indicative (Proto-Indo-European) component on calculators like Dodecad or Eurogenes?

To be honest autosomal DNA and calculators like Dodecad or Eurogenes leave me very puzzled. Because is always a person who must decide which is the marker or the component.

[Sizzo]

To be honest autosomal DNA and calculators like Dodecad or Eurogenes leave me very puzzled. Because is always a person who must decide which is the marker or the component.

The situation is not better with 23&Me, but there would be a clue about the PIE component.

[Vesuvian Sky]

Really, in order to determine who's admixture components are most like PIE, they'd have to sample the suspected population and then run stats (specifically f-statistics) to determine which modern day populations are genetically close.

This has been done a myriad of times already to see which populations were closest to the Mesolithic La Brana specimen (Finns and Estonians surprisingly) and Neolithic Oetzi (Sardinians and Basque) based on autosomal components. Most hunter gatherers based on haplotype per the Bramanti and Malmstrom studies turned out to be closest to Finns and Estonians.

If you believe PIE speakers = Calcolithic Kurgan culture pastoralists then we'll have to wait and see because they've done some autosomal analysis but haven't released autosomal components yet and how they relate to modern populations.

All we have now is how Mesolithic vs. Neolithic you may be but not Calcolithic.

[Austrvegr]

Anatolia.

Sure, that is why the Anatolian IE languages were basically pre-IE languages with an IE superstratum.

[blogen]

Sure, that is why the Anatolian IE languages were basically pre-IE languages with an IE superstratum.

What is not true. Yes, the Hittite had a Hatti substrate, but this proves nothing, since not whole Anatolia was the PIE homeland presumably and we do not know the Hattic preshistory!

[Austrvegr]

What is not true. Yes, the Hittite had a Hatti substrate, but this proves nothing, since not whole Anatolia was the PIE homeland presumably and we do not know the Hattic preshistory!

All Anatolian IE languages from West to East and from North to South Anatolia (Hittite, Luwian and Palaic) had huge pre-IE substratum, so they were obviously imported into Anatolia from elsewhere.

[blogen]

All Anatolian IE languages from West to East and from North to South Anatolia (Hittite, Luwian and Palaic) had huge pre-IE substratum, so they were obviously imported into Anatolia from elsewhere.

Since when? For example the case of the Luwian substrate in the Hatti:

Petra Goedegebuure: Central Anatolian languages and language communities in the Colony period: The Luwian substrate of Hattian and the independent Hittites (https://www.academia.edu/350837/Central_Anatolian_languages_and_language_communiti es_in_the_Colony_period_The_Luwian_substrate_of_Ha ttian_and_the_independent_Hittites)

The concept of the Hatti natives and the IE invaders are not solid.

[Rugevit]

Indo-European is a haplogroup that occurs in high proportion among Indians, Iranians and Europeans. Neither Indians nor Iranians have R1b in high proportion. So, R1a is Indo-European.

[Austrvegr]

Since when? For example the case of the Luwian substrate in the Hatti:

Petra Goedegebuure: Central Anatolian languages and language communities in the Colony period: The Luwian substrate of Hattian and the independent Hittites (https://www.academia.edu/350837/Central_Anatolian_languages_and_language_communiti es_in_the_Colony_period_The_Luwian_substrate_of_Ha ttian_and_the_independent_Hittites)

The concept of the Hatti natives and the IE invaders are not solid.

This is the only reasonable explanation for the overwhelming pre-IE substratum in all Anatolian IE languages.

[blogen]

This is the only reasonable explanation for the overwhelming pre-IE substratum in all Anatolian IE languages.

Firstly, the Hattic substrate was not significant. Secondly, cannot be proven the pre-IE origin of the Hattic substratum in this situation.

[Vesuvian Sky]

Indo-European languages are the obvious invaders to Anatolia. That's why the IE Anatolian languages are like a creole language, half IE and half non-IE. This has been discussed countless times already.

[Austrvegr]

Firstly, the Hattic substrate was not significant. Secondly, cannot be proven the pre-IE origin of the Hattic substratum in this situation.

IE vocabulary is minority in Anatolian IE languages. Hattic is majority.

Hattic sub-stratum is pre-IE, otherwise it would be ad- or super-stratum.

[blogen]

IE vocabulary is minority in Anatolian IE languages. Hattic is majority.

"Hittite is an unmistakably Indo-European language in all respects. All sure influence from other languages, such as Hattic, Hurrian and Akkadian is confined to loanwords. Earlier claims about heavy non-Indo-European substrate effects on Hittite were grossly exaggerated.

Even in the case of vocabulary, the borrowing of words is largely limited to expected areas: terms relating to aspects of the cult, items of higher culture, and the names for some flora and fauna. The impression that Hittite replaced most of its inherited vocabulary is false, being based merely on the fact that most of our documentation relates to ritual practice. At least 75 percent of the core vocabulary is based on inherited Indo-European material."
H. Craig Melchert: Indo-European languages of Anatolia (http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/Melchert/cane.pdf)


Hattic sub-stratum is pre-IE, otherwise it would be ad- or super-stratum.

Yes, this is fact (there was Hattic loanwords in the Hittite), but not this was the main point. Read the linked publication!

[Austrvegr]

Even in the case of vocabulary, the borrowing of words is largely limited to expected areas: terms relating to aspects of the cult, items of higher culture, and the names for some flora and fauna.
H. Craig Melchert: Indo-European languages of Anatolia (http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/Melchert/cane.pdf)


People do not take words for flora and fauna of their native land from alien languages.

[blogen]

People do not take words for flora and fauna of their native land from alien languages.

This depends on the kind of the animals and plants and the specific linguistic situations.

[Sizzo]

Indo-European is a haplogroup that occurs in high proportion among Indians, Iranians and Europeans. Neither Indians nor Iranians have R1b in high proportion. So, R1a is Indo-European.

What about Tocharians?

[Rugevit]

What about Tocharians?

You are a question about haplogroup R1b. Tocharians were not a haplogroup but they did speak an Indo-European language.

[Vesuvian Sky]

BTW, they released Kurgan/Yamna culture mtDNA lineages. They can be found here with in the Copper/Bronze Age section with relevant sources cited:

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml

The studies were Wilde 2014 and Newton 2011.

Here are just a few: H, N1a, U5, T1a, T2a1b1a, U2e1a, K, I, W, X, C4a6

The Bell Beaker mtDNA was as follows: U2e, W5a, U5a1, K1, T1, H5a3, H13a1a2c etc.

No Y-DNA thus far from Yamna culture though. :/

[Altaylardan Tunaya]

r1b is hardcore asian.

[Sizzo]

You are a question about haplogroup R1b. Tocharians were not a haplogroup but they did speak an Indo-European language.

Tocharians were R1b, an Eastern tribe of Indo-Europeans, like Indo-Aryans and Iranics, even if not R1a.

[Altaylardan Tunaya]

Uyghurs (turkics) are descendants of tokhars. Not the europeans^

[Rugevit]

Tocharians were R1b, an Eastern tribe of Indo-Europeans, like Indo-Aryans and Iranics, even if not R1a.

How do you know Tocharians were R1b? Any proof?

[Rugevit]

The Tarim mummies are a series of mummies discovered in the Tarim Basin in present-day Xinjiang, China that date from 1800 BCE to the first centuries BCE.[1][2] Although the evidence is inconclusive, the mummies, particularly the earlier ones, are frequently associated with the presence of the Indo-European Tocharian languages in the Tarim Basin.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarim_mummies

And Tarim mummies are R1a. Although unclear which branch of R1a. But irrelevant as the question is about R1b being an Indo-European haplogroup which it isn't.

[Sizzo]

The Tarim mummies are a series of mummies discovered in the Tarim Basin in present-day Xinjiang, China that date from 1800 BCE to the first centuries BCE.[1][2] Although the evidence is inconclusive, the mummies, particularly the earlier ones, are frequently associated with the presence of the Indo-European Tocharian languages in the Tarim Basin.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarim_mummies

And Tarim mummies are R1a. Although unclear which branch of R1a. But irrelevant as the question is about R1b being an Indo-European haplogroup which it isn't.

Who carry R1b into Central Asia (isolated group) if not Tocharians?

[Austrvegr]

Who carry R1b into Central Asia (isolated group) if not Tocharians?

Whoever. We know that the Tarim mummies (most probably ancestors of Tocharians) were all R1a.

[Austrvegr]

This depends on the kind of the animals and plants and the specific linguistic situations.

No, this does not. IE Anatolians took words for Anatolian flora and fauna from Hattic because they came to Anatolia from outside.

[Sizzo]

Whoever. We know that the Tarim mummies (most probably ancestors of Tocharians) were all R1a.

The Bashkirs have some R1b U152 too. Interesting dispersal.

[blogen]

No, this does not. IE Anatolians took words for Anatolian flora and fauna from Hattic because they came to Anatolia from outside.

Which words for example?

[Rugevit]

Who carry R1b into Central Asia (isolated group) if not Tocharians?

Don't know who carried. Of all candidates the best are Tarim Basin mummies, who don't have R1b.

[Austrvegr]

Which words for example?



Even in the case of vocabulary, the borrowing of words is largely limited to expected areas: terms relating to aspects of the cult, items of higher culture, and the names for some flora and fauna.
H. Craig Melchert: Indo-European languages of Anatolia (http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/Melchert/cane.pdf)

[blogen]

No, this is not an answer onto my question. And this is it what Melchert wrote: "and the names for some flora and fauna" :)

So what are these few plants and animals?

[Austrvegr]

No, this is not an answer onto my question. And this is it what Melchert wrote: "and the names for some flora and fauna" :)

So what are these few plants and animals?

You tell me. Did Hittites take from Hattic names for extra-Anatolian flora and fauna?

[Volscian]

It depends entirely on which sub-clade is under consideration.

The Bell Beaker culture was probably Proto-Italo-Celtic. But its spatial distribution based on c-14 dating is west to east rather then east to west. Its of course problematic because the Kurgan culture postulates an east to west distribution for the Indo-Europeanization of Europe in which the Corded Ware culture would have played a prominent role as its an off-shoot of the Kurgan culture and spreads east to west based on c-14 dating.

R1b's parent clade probably was in Anatolia. When is difficult to say but it could have been as early as 10,000 BC. Eventually the sublcades would branch off but who knows the exact migratory path.

Some have postulated that maybe some of these clades arrived on the Pontic Caspian steppes at a time during the Mesolithic but then the particular paternal clan associated vanished from the steppes only to reappear in western Europe.

Its a longshot but anyway here is that phylogenetic tree from Eupedia:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml

It essentially postulates that m269 was on the Pontic Caspian steppes during the Calcolithic era. Eventually the P312/S116 people become Proto-Italo-Celtic. Eupedia says Proto-Italo-Celtic-Germanic but Germanic's linguistic position as being a part of such a hypothetical language family is not backed by any linguistic scholars that I know of. Most IE phylogenetic trees assign a greater association with it to Baltic and Slavic languages which are incompletely Satemized.


What do you think of the Western Europe as a huge founder effect after an east to west migration?

[LightHouse89]

The Bashkirs have some R1b U152 too. Interesting dispersal.

thats being proven to be the general location where R1b came from [or one of the places].

[blogen]

You tell me. Did Hittites take from Hattic names for extra-Anatolian flora and fauna?

I don't know. I do not have a list from the Hattic loanwords.

[Vesuvian Sky]

What do you think of the Western Europe as a huge founder effect after an east to west migration?

I think Haak et al. 2013 basically affirmed that was what in essence happened:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/257.abstract

Although he was using mtdna as a proxy but nonetheless all the y-chromosome lineages of the Bell Beaker folk were R1b based on aDNA studies. The Bell Beaker cultural horizon is viewed as a primary genetic layer for making western Europeans what they are as concluded in his study. So in essence, a significant founder effect did occur.

[Volscian]

I think Haak et al. 2013 basically affirmed that was what in essence happened:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/257.abstract

Although he was using mtdna as a proxy but nonetheless all the y-chromosome lineages of the Bell Beaker folk were R1b based on aDNA studies. The Bell Beaker cultural horizon is viewed as a primary genetic layer for making western Europeans what they are as concluded in his study. So in essence, a significant founder effect did occur.

If the Kurgan hypothesis is wrong, we are talking of a wave from Anatolia after the neolithic ones and the founder effect could explains the variety of subclades in Europe and the lack in Anatolia, IMO.

[arcticwolf]

Doubt it. Wonder how they picked up Indo-European language?

[Vesuvian Sky]

If the Kurgan hypothesis is wrong, we are talking of a wave from Anatolia after the neolithic ones and the founder effect could explains the variety of subclades in Europe and the lack in Anatolia, IMO.

The funny thing about the BBC is that regardless of its spatial distribution, it exhibits the same cultural characteristics to that of the Yamna, Corded ware culture:

-single barrow kurgan like graves
-evidence of horse domestication (and actually ridden use for the first time in Europe)
-use of metalliurgy (Calcolithic)
-and next to no evidence of permanent settlement

They truncate the previous megalithic builder traditions much the same way the CWC people did. Its said that at the megalithic Newrange site of Ireland, the Beaker folk show up as 'squatters'.

In terms of where the migration was, I believe Haak postulates it begins up through the western Mediterranean which corresponds with where the earliest BBC sites are.

However, and if you read earlier in this thread, you will see how R1b-m269 was found on the steppes in the Afanisievo culture by Kylosov. Its not published yet as Hevo pointed out but it may show that the R1b-m269 men were forced off the steppe and took a rather extreme coastal route to get to Western Europe.

[Volscian]

The funny thing about the BBC is that regardless of its spatial distribution, it exhibits the same cultural characteristics to that of the Yamna, Corded ware culture:

-single barrow kurgan like graves
-evidence of horse domestication (and actually ridden use for the first time in Europe)
-use of metalliurgy (Calcolithic)
-and next to no evidence of permanent settlement

They truncate the previous megalithic builder traditions much the same way the CWC people did. Its said that at the megalithic Newrange site of Ireland, the Beaker folk show up as 'squatters'.

In terms of where the migration was, I believe Haak postulates it begins up through the western Mediterranean which corresponds with where the earliest BBC sites are.

However, and if you read earlier in this thread, you will see how R1b-m269 was found on the steppes in the Afanisievo culture by Kylosov. Its not published yet as Hevo pointed out but it may show that the R1b-m269 men were forced off the steppe and took a rather extreme coastal route to get to Western Europe.

If I understand correctly the route is from steppe via Mediterranean up to Portugal and then to Central Europe or from steppe via land up to Portugal and back to Central Europe?

[Vesuvian Sky]

If I understand correctly the route is from steppe via Mediterranean up to Portugal and then to Central Europe or from steppe via land up to Portugal and back to Central Europe?

The first IMO may indeed be plausible. It seems extreme but at the same time there may not be any reason to assume all these migrations were nice and neat and uniform.

Here's what was said over at Eurogenes:


1) The current mainstream theory positing the origin of the Bell Beaker Culture in Portugal is wrong, and the earliest Bell Beakers expanded from East Central Europe, as was once thought.

2) The latest R1b phylogeography is based on limited sampling, and many more individuals need to be tested from former Bell Beaker areas in Iberia and France to catch the basal R1b subclades in these regions.

3) The people who were to become the Bell Beakers in Iberia originally came from the southern Balkans, via maritime routes across the Mediterranean, and then dominated Western and Central Europe via a series of migrations and back migrations. The latest R1b phylogeography is simply not intricate enough to properly describe this complicated process.

Note: the earliest Bell Beakers are still from Iberia as far as I know based on c-14 dating. So part of what is said in point 1 I don't agree with.

In regards to point three, they may have originated on the steppes then left via the Balkans by a maritime route to Western Europe.

[Sacrificed Ram]

My theory:

The originals PIE were J2 and G y-DNA. After this group divided in two wings, one "indoeuropeanized" the R1a carries, the other "indoeuropeanized" the R1b carries, therefore both populated Europe in different occasions and circumstances.

:thumb001:

[Volscian]

Note: the earliest Bell Beakers are still from Iberia as far as I know based on c-14 dating. So part of what is said in point 1 I don't agree with.

In regards to point three, they may have originated on the steppes then left via the Balkans by a maritime route to Western Europe.

I agree with you.
Time will tell. :)

[Prisoner Of Ice]

I think Haak et al. 2013 basically affirmed that was what in essence happened:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/257.abstract

Although he was using mtdna as a proxy but nonetheless all the y-chromosome lineages of the Bell Beaker folk were R1b based on aDNA studies. The Bell Beaker cultural horizon is viewed as a primary genetic layer for making western Europeans what they are as concluded in his study. So in essence, a significant founder effect did occur.

Archaeology says bell beaker probably comes out of iberia. It definitely doesn't come from the east

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/05/bell-beakers-from-germany-y-haplogroup.html

mtdna is a mishmash of local stuff, so probably this is not the origin of r1b. You can't really go from a polyglot to a more pure combo of r1b and h like we get in lots of europe. It had to have started that way and then mixed over time.

r1b probably came as r* before ice age, in spite of what swarty fantasists say about its supposed recent origin.

[Vesuvian Sky]

mtdna is a mishmash of local stuff, so probably this is not the origin of r1b...

Stop!:stop00010:

We're talking about R1b-m269, the major subclade that dominates Western Europe. Again, there's a difference between haplotype and haplogroup you know.

[blogen]

Archaeology says bell beaker probably comes out of iberia. It definitely doesn't come from the east

Definitely come from the Eastern Mediterranean regions, since the origin of the Bell Beaker peoples connected to the Oriental maritime colonisation of Iberia.

[Sizzo]

Definitely come from the Eastern Mediterranean regions, since the origin of the Bell Beaker peoples connected to the Oriental maritime colonisation of Iberia.

Italian R1b-M269 didn't come from Iberia.

[blogen]

Italian R1b-M269 didn't come from Iberia.

Italy is in halfway between the Near East and Iberia.

[Sizzo]

Italy is in halfway between the Near East and Iberia.

The U152 came from the Alps region (Italo-Celtic branch).

[blogen]

The U152 came from the Alps region (Italo-Celtic branch).

Then clearly origin from the Bell Beaker or partially BB origin peoples. (http://r1b.org/?page_id=242)The Bell Beaker colonisation was huge and "brutal" in Europe, more extensive than an another Iberian colonisation, the Spanish in America.

[Kale]

Just something I want to point out...

Highly divergent clades does NOT necessarily mean most ancient presence, nor do lowly divergent clades necessarily mean recent presence.

Considering (view attached map) is the supposed route of R1b and its ancestors...are a couple back and forths through that tiny little section called Europe really that farfetched?

We know a lot of shit went down wiping out the majority of older types.

- Where's I2a in Scandinavia now?
- HG I supposedly formed 10,000+ years after the initial settlement of Europe, where's the F's and C's and whatever else was there?
- O right sorry, I forgot, we have the C1a2 army standing 3 people strong.

Just saying...if you are going to say R1b isn't old in Europe SOLELY because there are not a lot of divergent clades...that doesn't really mean much of anything. I'm pretty sure there's more evidence out there than that, throw it in there.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Just something I want to point out...

Highly divergent clades does NOT necessarily mean most ancient presence, nor do lowly divergent clades necessarily mean recent presence.

Considering (view attached map) is the supposed route of R1b and its ancestors...are a couple back and forths through that tiny little section called Europe really that farfetched?

We know a lot of shit went down wiping out the majority of older types.

- Where's I2a in Scandinavia now?
- HG I supposedly formed 10,000+ years after the initial settlement of Europe, where's the F's and C's and whatever else was there?
- O right sorry, I forgot, we have the C1a2 army standing 3 people strong.

Just saying...if you are going to say R1b isn't old in Europe SOLELY because there are not a lot of divergent clades...that doesn't really mean much of anything. I'm pretty sure there's more evidence out there than that, throw it in there.

Huge divergence probably actually means that these are remnants of offshoots that came from other areas. In the main area, new clades should be developing and replacing old ones.

[Sacrificed Ram]

Not! There are R1b clades in Africa that predates PIE origin.

[Sizzo]

Not! There are R1b clades in Africa that predates PIE origin.

So the presence of Turkish and Jewish R1a means that R1a is not PIE? R-M269 in place like Sudan is a (recent) founder effect.

[gold_fenix]

I think i have said this other times but Europe had different neolithic waves, perhaps the R1b invasor were early neolithic invasors and of course different and speaking of farmers even in the mesolithic in Europe existed farmer people were they they were very small in comparition with the neolithic period

[gültekin]

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b_World.png

[Sacrificed Ram]

So the presence of Turkish and Jewish R1a means that R1a is not PIE? R-M269 in place like Sudan is a (recent) founder effect.


My theory:

The originals PIE were J2 and G y-DNA. After this group divided in two wings, one "indoeuropeanized" the R1a carries, the other "indoeuropeanized" the R1b carries, therefore both populated Europe in different occasions and circumstances.

:thumb001:

[Kale]

The originals PIE were J2 and G y-DNA. After this group divided in two wings, one "indoeuropeanized" the R1a carries, the other "indoeuropeanized" the R1b carries, therefore both populated Europe in different occasions and circumstances.

Indo-Europeans were conquesting people. As such if they were G and J2 they should leave some trace of that. Like in Lithuania, with one of the best preserved (or of most archaic origin) Indo-European languages. They have 0% of G, and 0% of J2.

[Sizzo]

http://i61.tinypic.com/2a7z9d3.jpg

Third component of Cavalli-Sforza. It shows an expansion from Kurgan area. I think the main part of Europe is pre-Indo-European but for sure you can't replace a language without any migration; this needs people, army, weapons and strength. R1a Proto-Indo-European? Probably yes, but R1b was quite involved in those migrations. It makes sense to me.

[Sacrificed Ram]

Hmmm, maybe isn't correct try associate a cultural phenomenon like languages with genetic phenomenons.

Language is much more related with woman than males, because children tend learn to talk with their mothers and other relative women than with their male parents and relatives.

I remember my father, he had a vestige of italian accent because he grew with his grandmother (italian). As I grew with my mother and her relatives I don't have this accent.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Not! There are R1b clades in Africa that predates PIE origin.

Those prove my point completely. The r1b in africa is an archaic type.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Hmmm, maybe isn't correct try associate a cultural phenomenon like languages with genetic phenomenons.

Language is much more related with woman than males, because children tend learn to talk with their mothers and other relative women than with their male parents and relatives.

I remember my father, he had a vestige of italian accent because he grew with his grandmother (italian). As I grew with my mother and her relatives I don't have this accent.

There's a lot of ways language can spread and the main one is trade. There were 6k+ languages not that long ago now there's 600. No doubt originally every tribe had a somewhat divergent language. To interact with others they'd have to learn a new one. In short language changes a lot faster than dna.

[gold_fenix]

Those prove my point completely. The r1b in africa is an archaic type.

the r1b in Camerun it seems comes from Asia from an ancient migration, E1b is presnet in Africa and it comes from Asia

[Hong Key]

Could the IE have been old Europeans who moved east into Russian Steppes tamed the horse and then rode back west into Europe proper?

Anyone able to speculate on old European religions? Is Odin/Zeus indigenous to Europe? If Whites have a desire to go back to our original religions, is Wotanism and what not really indigenous to our people?

[Sacrificed Ram]

There's a lot of ways language can spread and the main one is trade. There were 6k+ languages not that long ago now there's 600. No doubt originally every tribe had a somewhat divergent language. To interact with others they'd have to learn a new one. In short language changes a lot faster than dna.

Yes, despite my maternal lineage is black, I'm not speak none african language. Most brazilian and USA black are indo-european speakers despite they are "E3a".

Sometimes you learn a new language due acquaintanceship reasons.


the r1b in Camerun it seems comes from Asia from an ancient migration, E1b is presnet in Africa and it comes from Asia

There are other very basal R1b lineage in Africa too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_%28Y-DNA%29#R1b_.28R-M343.29

[The Sun King]

It doesn't matter, because no R1b was present amongst the proto-Indo-Europeans. Regardless of what Maciamo and Jean Manco say, it just wasn't there.

Maciamo pisses me off. He will fight to death to argue that R1b is indo european. That and he always clumps haplogroups E,J,G and T together like they originated in the same place. He also refuses to accept scientific facts like the fact that Haplogroup R arose in South East Asia.

[Sacrificed Ram]

J2 is definitely not PIE but probably connected with the bronze age migration of indo-persian/aryan/morebuzzwords through Anatolia. It was also found in a recent hungarian study if I remember correctly and it also corresponds with the phrygian theories.

Remember most Sub-Saharan African countries are or have important contingent of Indo-European speakers despite absence of Y-DNA, like G2a, J2, R1a,R1b,E1b1b,etc.

Trade, or a caste system rule can impose a language too, without genetic contact. Like gypsies being H y-dna in their root, they have a very old branch of sanskrit a original language.

[Vesuvian Sky]

Something to consider here as well:

There usually are not absolute correlations with genetic traits and language. However, more often then not, there certainly are positive correlations.

Most of these language families however in their initial proto- state did indeed spread with a limited amount of clans. This makes sense too if we consider social evolution and how prehistoric societies were probably more micro then macro if you will.

After dispersal and resettlement, however, plus moving further away from the late Calcolithic-early Bronze age to late Bronze-early Iron Age, you then get a far less correlation with genes and languages due to the complexity of societies reached which would by then have incorporated more clans.

Still, even after that, it could be argued you have periods of crystallization and then fragmentation. It's all rather cyclical really.

[Void]

Isn't it a possibility that both R1a and R1b are IE? Both groups appear to have arrived in Europe around the same time.

In nomadic times it could have been custom to exchange females between tribes, which would explain a fairly common language while having very divergent paternal origins. It is only in recent times that tribalism was replaced by nationalism.

It is hard to explain how IE spread all over Europe without R1a being all over Europe.

[Sacrificed Ram]

Isn't it a possibility that both R1a and R1b are IE? Both groups appear to have arrived in Europe around the same time.

In nomadic times it could have been custom to exchange females between tribes, which would explain a fairly common language while having very divergent paternal origins. It is only in recent times that tribalism was replaced by nationalism.

It is hard to explain how IE spread all over Europe without R1a being all over Europe.

I remember the legends I did read in old books about when britons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britons_%28Celtic_people%29) arived in Armorica (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armorica) from britsh isles, they killed the all roman men and cutted the tongue of the women for children didn't learn the latin language from their mothers. Curious stories about tribal peoples.

[moonwalker]

R1B is western European - proto west eurasian - South Saharan Cameronian

[Vesuvian Sky]

Isn't it a possibility that both R1a and R1b are IE? .....

In a word yes.

R1b almost certainly doesn't originate where it was speculated by Semino et al 2000 an older outdated position that's been mostly dropped based on the limited data presented in that paper. Or even in the paper that postulated Anatolia, whichever one that was. Given what we know about 'Malta Boy' being Y-DNA R and that he was found in Siberia c. 24,000 BC, a steppic/Eurasiatic origin for both R1a1a and R1b-m269 seems completely reasonable at this point.

R1a1a could easily be viewed to represent Satem IE migrations while R1b-M269 and its derivatives Kentum.

[Sacrificed Ram]

In a word yes.

R1b almost certainly doesn't originate where it was speculated by Semino et al 2000 an older outdated position that's been mostly dropped based on the limited data presented in that paper. Or even in the paper that postulated Anatolia, whichever one that was. Given what we know about 'Malta Boy' being Y-DNA R and that he was found in Siberia c. 24,000 BC, a steppic/Eurasiatic origin for both R1a1a and R1b-m269 seems completely reasonable at this point.

R1a1a could easily be viewed to represent Satem IE migrations while R1b-M269 and its derivatives Kentum.

But this difference between Satem and Centum could still be a result of this my theory:


My theory:

The originals PIE were J2 and G y-DNA. After this group divided in two wings, one "indoeuropeanized" the R1a carries, the other "indoeuropeanized" the R1b carries, therefore both populated Europe in different occasions and circumstances.

:thumb001:

Despite I also did read about Satem that became centum and centum that became Satem spontaneously just because a coincidental convergence. This difference Satem/Centum is seen even into groups of celtic languages.

[Vesuvian Sky]

But this difference between Satem and Centum could still be a result of this my theory:



Despite I also did read about Satem that became centum and centum that became Satem spontaneously just because a coincidental convergence. This difference Satem/Centum is seen even into groups of celtic languages.

Satemization is a relatively recent effect but the fully Satemized languages are Indo-Iranian. Balto-Slavic was Satemized in theory due to close proximity to the Indo-Iranian world. Most IE languages continue to soften their velars but its not really a random occurrence thing.

G2a is the primary lineage of early Neolithic and perhaps so is J2. Linguistic paleontology suggests that PIE was a Calcolithic-Bronze age language since all of the daughter languages have terminology for domesticated horse, metallurgy and wheeled vehicles. Ergo, I am extremely skeptical that G2a bearers of the Cardial Ware horizon and LBK horizon, the earliest early farmer cultures of Neolithic Europe who are largely defined by the ENF autosomal category per the Lazeridis paper were PIEs.

Both R1b and R1a1a have been found in the Calcoltithic-Bronze age cultures long associated with IE invasion within the Kurgan culture paradigm like Corded Ware, Bell Beaker, and Andronovo. Yet both these lineages are conspicuously absent in the early Neolithic farmer cultures where only G2 is present and I1 and so forth....

[Linebacker]

Aren't the I haplogroups the only ones who are Indo-European?

[Vesuvian Sky]

Aren't the I haplogroups the only ones who are Indo-European?

More likely Mesolithic leftovers. That is if I2. I1 starts popping up in the Neolithic. Here is a useful aDNA database:

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/

[blogen]

Few years ago, my observation:

http://img.ie/2iv3z.jpg
(unetice = proto-Celts, tumulus = early Celts)

And conclusion, based on my common sense:

If the Oriental maritime colonization of Iberia is the connection between Iberia and the Near East. Maybe the Spanish colonisation in America (http://www.irwinator.com/126/1-14.jpg) was a similar event in the history (http://oi56.tinypic.com/e6anoh.jpg).

Los Millares: 3200–2300 BC
Bell Beaker: 2800 – 1800 BC,

"The Millares Horizon has attracted international interest, as a reference point for the beginning of unequal societies. The singularity of the Millares site, where a large village with stone walls co-exists with a necropolis of tholoi and more than ten small forts, led to consider it as a central place, first as a colonial foundation (metallurgic prospectors from Eastern Mediterranean) and then as the centre of a hierarchical society."
source: Pedro V. Castro-Martínez, Trinidad Escoriza-Mateu, Joaquím Oltra-Puigdomenech: Social hypotheses for the communities of the Iberian Mediterranean basin (From the VI to II millennia BC) - Oxford, "British Archaeological Reports, International series". S1525: 117-131.

The R1b comes:
http://www.minoanatlantis.com/pix/Minoan_Ship_Sail.jpg


Yes, supports this hypothesis:
http://s27.postimg.org/bskl5n4mb/Gedrosian.jpg


Anatolia. And the weaves of the colonization of Europe from the neolithic to the Bronze age:
http://s27.postimg.org/y5sbsg5k3/coloneurop.jpg

And here is:
"Y-chromosome analysis
We determined Y-chromosome haplogroups for the 54 male Beaker-associated individuals. Individuals from the Iberian Peninsula carried Y haplogroups known to be common across Europe during the earlier Neolithic period, such as I2a (n=3) and G2 (n=1). In contrast, Beaker-associated individuals outside Iberia (n=44) largely carried R1b lineages (84%), associated with the arrival of Steppe migrants in central Europe during the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age. For individuals in whom we could determine the R1b subtype (n=22), we found that all but one had the derived allele for the R1b-S116/P312 polymorphism, which defines the dominant subtype in western Europe today.

https://i.img.ie/0AA.jpg
https://i.img.ie/0A4.jpg

Finding this early predominance of the R1b-S116/P312 polymorphism in ancient individuals from central and northwestern Europe suggests that people associated with the Beaker Complex may have had an important role in the dissemination of this lineage throughout most of its present-day distribution."
source: The Beaker Phenomenon and the Genomic Transformation of Northwest Europe (http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/05/09/135962.full.pdf)
:victory0:

[wvwvw]

Genetically Indo-European, linguistically no.

[blogen]

Genetically Indo-European, linguistically no.

Conversely! Genetically Bellbeaker, linguistically Indoeuropeanized.

[Peterski]

Conversely! Genetically Bellbeaker, linguistically Indoeuropeanized.

... :picard1:

From page 3 of Olalde paper:

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/05/09/135962.full.pdf


Beginning with the Beaker period, and continuing through the Bronze Age, all British individuals harboured high proportions of Steppe ancestry and were genetically closely related to Beaker-associated individuals from the Lower Rhine area.

And from pages 6-7:


British Beaker Complex individuals (n=19) show strong similarities to the central European Beaker Complex both in genetic profile (Extended Data Fig. 1) and in material culture: the great majority of individuals from both regions are associated with “All Over Corded” Beaker pottery. The presence of large amounts of Steppe-related ancestry in the British Beaker Complex (Fig. 2a) contrasts sharply with Neolithic individuals from Britain (n=35), who have no evidence of Steppe genetic affinities and cluster instead with Middle Neolithic and Copper-Age populations from mainland Europe (Extended Data Fig. 1). Thus, the arrival of Steppe ancestry in Britain was mediated by a migration that began with the Beaker Complex. A previous study showed that Steppe ancestry arrived in Ireland by the Bronze Age, and here we show that – at least in Britain – it arrived by the Copper Age / Beaker period.

Among the different continental Beaker Complex groups analysed in our dataset, individuals from Oostwoud (Province of Noord-Holland, The Netherlands) are the most closely related to the great majority of the Beaker Complex individuals from southern Britain (n=14). They had almost identical Steppe ancestry proportions (Fig. 2a), the highest shared genetic drift (Extended Data Fig. 4b) and were symmetrically related to other ancient populations using f4-statistics (Extended Data Fig. 4a), showing that they are consistent with being derived from the same ancestral population without additional mixture into either group.

And from page 66:

Individuals with R1b had more of Steppe ancestry than those without R1b:


Overall, Y-chromosome haplogroups [of Bell Beaker men] are highly correlated with steppe ancestry proportions in the nuclear genome...

Six individuals outside Iberia without R1b Y-chromosomes were excavated in Hungary (n=4), Germany (n=1) and England (n=1). Interestingly, most of these individuals presented low amounts of steppe ancestry in the nuclear genome as compared to other individuals from the same regions (Figure S1).

Do you know where is "Steppe" located?

Surely not in Syria, as your map claims: :picard1:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?129874-R1b-Indo-European-or-not/page8&p=2739235#post2739235

===============

For people who still believe that there is a chance that R1b is not Indo-European:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA

[blogen]

Do you think, the Bellbeakers were Indoeuropeans? Because these first R1b carriers in Britain were Bellbeakers. :D

So one thing is clear: this so called steppe ancestry is definitely unindoeuropean.

[de Burgh II]

To summarize concisely:

R1b and R1a in Europe was brought/mediated by Steppe peoples from the Pontic–Caspian steppe; proximal between Ukraine/Russia and Western Kyrgyzstan. That brought Indo European languages that 'Indo-Europeanized" pre-Indo European languages into the larger Indo European linguistic family. That also gave Europeans a degree of Steppe admixture on top of their Mesolithic Hunter-gatherer and Neolithic farmer ancestry.

I1* and I2* are hunter-gatherer haplogroups native to Europe; all European populations have a good degree of native WHG ancestry along with SHG and EHG.

G2* came during the early Neolithic via Neolithic farmers that intermingled with the Hunter-gatherers along with E* and J* before the coming of the Steppe peoples via the Bronze Age.

[Fantomas]

Surely not in Syria, as your map claims: :picard1:


1.The highest ENA reached in Caucasus and Iranian ChL is the main part of "Steppe", its not far away from Syria

2.Part of ENF in Andronovo/Sintashta even higher, than Iranian ChL in West European Bronze Age cultures

3.ENF expancion was the strongest impact of all in Europe, including "Steppe" area. So the most logical conclusion would be: ENF were the first IE in Europe and Iranian ChL were their Indo-Iranian branch

[Peterski]

Do you think, the Bellbeakers were Indoeuropeans? Because these first R1b carriers in Britain were Bellbeakers. :D So one thing is clear: this so called steppe ancestry is definitely unindoeuropean.

Yes, British Bell Beakers were IE. Iberian Bell Beakers were not R1b and had no Steppe admixture, this info is in the same paper. Central European Bell Beakers were IE, and were not descended from Iberian Bell Beakers. Those were simply two different populations despite having a similar culture.

Listen to what prof. David Reich says about Central Euro and British Bell Beakers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZjbp_LepPM#t=28m58s

https://gnxp.nofe.me/2017/05/29/open-thread-5292017/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZjbp_LepPM

[Hamlet]

The answer is yes and you're retarded if you think otherwise, just because lots of R1b came through Neolithic settlements doesn't mean it wasn't originally IE.

[Danaan]

Do you think, the Bellbeakers were Indoeuropeans? Because these first R1b carriers in Britain were Bellbeakers. :D

So one thing is clear: this so called steppe ancestry is definitely unindoeuropean.

Do you think the the language of Megalithic Western European cultures could have been related to IE, as something like sister languages?

[Fantomas]

Yes, British Bell Beakers were IE. Iberian Bell Beakers were not R1b and had no Steppe admixture, this info is in the same paper. Central European Bell Beakers were IE, and were not descended from Iberian Bell Beakers. Those were simply two different populations despite having a similar culture.

Once again, so called "Steppe admixture" determined by different proportions of WHG,ENF and Iran ChL, of course there's some distance between Iberian and British BB's, just like between todays populations, but there's no anything about absence of Iran ChL in Iberian Beakers mentioned by D. Reich.
What about R1b in south-western BB's, yes there're some, among 11 samples from Iberia,Southern France and Italy 6 were R1b and they're more ancient than either British or Central European ones.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f_9s-3Xd-AfRasuLGc_8s4IHpnLzBZwbvfxne2X09bQ/edit#gid=998207542

[Fantomas]

Do you think the the language of Megalithic Western European cultures could have been related to IE, as something like sister languages?
Surely, archaeology, genetic and anthropology point that Megalithic and Bell Beaker cultures are closely related and that they were the last big movements of populations in west Europe. So the most credibly that ancestors of Italics in Central Europe and Celts along Atlantic coastline were adopted there exactly at that time

[blogen]

Do you think the the language of Megalithic Western European cultures could have been related to IE, as something like sister languages?

Of course not. The original megalith builders presumably were the direct descendants of the mesolithic hunters, the first neolithic peoples were near-eastern migrants of the Cardial-ware peoples, the basic R1b carriers were the descendants a near-eastern origin bronze age maritime colonization of Iberia: the Bellbeakers. The indoeuropaization of Western Europe is a very young phenomenon, basically the spread of the proto-Celtic/Celtic peoples from the Celtic homeland (Unetice culture) and maybe their relatives in the British isles from the Hilversum culture:

https://i.img.ie/0Aw.jpg
https://i.img.ie/0At.jpg
https://i.img.ie/0A1.jpg
https://i.img.ie/0A7.jpg

The second important wave of the indoeuropaization was the Latinization after the Roman conquest. But this is an unfinished process (Basques as the presumably last Bellbeaker survivors still exists).

[Fantomas]

Of course not. the basic R1b carriers were the descendants a near-eastern origin bronze age maritime colonization of Iberia: the Bellbeakers. The indoeuropaization of Western Europe is a very young phenomenon, basically the spread of the proto-Celtic/Celtic peoples from the Celtic homeland (Unetice culture) and maybe their relatives in the British isles from the Hilversum culture:

Hilversum, like British and Armorican cultures directly come from Bell Beakers (proto-Celts), Unteice as well from BB's. but from another branch of them and more likely they're proto-Italics, through Urnfield/Villanova cultures


The original megalith builders presumably were the direct descendants of the mesolithic hunters, the first neolithic peoples were near-eastern migrants of the Cardial-ware peoples,
We've got mtdna of Megalitics and they're almost identical with the first farmers, the difference is only with growing part of WHG, with proportion of 70% ENF and 30% WHG


The indoeuropaization of Western Europe is a very young phenomenon,
In between 4000 and 2500 BC, no later.

https://i.img.ie/0Aw.jpg
Great map. one more nail in the coffin of "Kurgan hypothezis"

[Peterski]

Do you think the the language of Megalithic Western European cultures could have been related to IE, as something like sister languages?

There was no any R1b in Megalithic Western Europe.


so called "Steppe admixture" determined by different proportions of WHG,ENF and Iran ChL

No, Steppe admixture is simply actual Steppe admixture:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/04/population-geneticists-often-not-very.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/steppe-invaders-in-bronze-age-balkans.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/first-ancient-genomes-from-portugal.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/a-few-more-ancient-genomes-from-balkans.html

[brennus dux gallorum]

It's not Indo-European, it's aquitnian

If we consider that Indo-Europeans existed, as this is not even settled

[Fantomas]

There was no any R1b in Megalithic Western Europe.
Despite that current value of frequency pre-Bronze age samples in west Europe close to zero we have already four of R1b's there: El Trocs, Villabruna, Blatterhohle and Quedlinburg




No, Steppe admixture is simply actual Steppe admixture:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/04/population-geneticists-often-not-very.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/steppe-invaders-in-bronze-age-balkans.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/first-ancient-genomes-from-portugal.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/a-few-more-ancient-genomes-from-balkans.html

When analysed in the light of this gradient, later ancient and modern samples from Europe still display an excess of Steppe component, however this excess is less pronounced than previously estimated.

Horseshit. Nothing's changed.
Real scientific dispute, :)

However, if "Steppe admixture" is some unaltered constant, as you say, its presence in BA west European cultures must indicate real involvement of "Steppe migrants" in population formation in west Europe? So, "steppe" proportions in Bell Beakers and Cordeds, ChL+EHG in other words, must match for initial "Steppe" samples in their homeland, right?

Thereby, that's the real picture of Steppe admixture in ancient populations:

http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll171/Fantomas305/II/p1_zpsps6e1wwp.png (http://s288.photobucket.com/user/Fantomas305/media/II/p1_zpsps6e1wwp.png.html)http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll171/Fantomas305/II/p1q_zps353yedsr.png (http://s288.photobucket.com/user/Fantomas305/media/II/p1q_zps353yedsr.png.html)

No more than 10-35% of newcomers. From another side, more likely, that new language was brought in Europe when 80-90 % of preceding population in Europe was replaced!!!

http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll171/Fantomas305/II/Fig_1_Portuguese_ancient_genomes_zps4xyy0jvl.png (http://s288.photobucket.com/user/Fantomas305/media/II/Fig_1_Portuguese_ancient_genomes_zps4xyy0jvl.png.h tml)

[Peterski]

four of R1b's there: El Trocs, Villabruna, Blatterhohle and Quedlinburg

Els Trocs was African R1b-V88, others were also not R1b-M269 but different branches. Also Quedlinburg is not in Western Europe, and Blätterhöhle were EHG immigrants from the East.

[Fantomas]

Els Trocs was African R1b-V88, others were also not R1b-M269 but different branches. Also Quedlinburg is not in Western Europe, and Blätterhöhle were EHG immigrants from the East.
There're different branches of R1b's among Mesolithic-Neolithic cultures and is a good marker that homeland of all of the R1b's must be somewhere there as well

[Peterski]

There're different branches of R1b's among Mesolithic-Neolithic cultures and is a good marker that homeland of all of the R1b's must be somewhere there as well

There is far more of R1b in Eastern Europe, including Mesolithic Latvia, Ukraine and Russia. Check my old thread about this (I need to add new Eastern European samples of R1b published since then):

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?202513-Homelands-of-R1a-and-R1b-people-until-6000-years-ago&p=4225322&viewfull=1#post4225322

For example the map I posted there shows no R1b in Ukraine, but now we already have some.


This is where 9 out of 13 of the oldest samples of R1a and R1b have been found:

The "core" territory of R1 people >6000 years ago:

http://i.imgur.com/S8mZq20.png

List of nine samples from the map:

1) Karelia, ca. 8850-8000 (avg. 8425) years ago - R1a
2) Latvia, ca. 7800-7600 (avg. 7700) years ago - R1b
3) Samara, ca. 7650-7560 (avg. 7605) years ago - R1b
4) Latvia, ca. 7250-6800 (avg. 7025) years ago - R1b
5) Khvalynsk, ca. 7200-6000 (avg. 6600) years ago - R1b
6) Khvalynsk, ca. 7200-6000 (avg. 6600) years ago - R1a
7) Ukraine, ca. 6470-6290 (avg. 6380) years ago - R1a
8) Latvia, ca. 6200-5930 (avg. 6065) years ago - R1b
9) Smolensk, around 6000 (avg. 6000) years ago - R1a

I posted that in February 2017. Now we have even more R1b samples in Eastern Europe.

[Fantomas]

There is far more of R1b in Eastern Europe, including Mesolithic Latvia, Ukraine and Russia. Check my old thread about this (I need to add new Eastern European samples of R1b published since then):

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?202513-Homelands-of-R1a-and-R1b-people-until-6000-years-ago&p=4225322&viewfull=1#post4225322

For example the map I posted there shows no R1b in Ukraine, but now we already have some.



I posted that in February 2017. Now we have even more R1b samples in Eastern Europe.

Have you got info, what is the total list of analized Y- samples in Europe?

[brennus dux gallorum]

R1b is megalithic-cro-magnon-aquitanian-basque = non-indoeuropean

[Atheas]

R1b is megalithic-cro-magnon-aquitanian-basque = non-indoeuropean

How so?No R1b has been found among Europeans before the IE invasion.Yamna samples all came up as R1b,many Bell Beaker samples came up as R1b too,it could be found among modern IE language speakers even in asia altough sporadically but literally zero R1b before the bronze age in europe so how is it non-IE again?
Maybe before the actual ydna and adna tests done on the yamna culture it could have been debated but now its pretty damn clear.

[Zroota]

Indo-European, but not really European.

R1b is also hypothesised to come from Anatolia. This is West Asia, not Europe.

[Peterski]

Indo-European, but not really European.

R1b is also hypothesised to come from Anatolia. This is West Asia, not Europe.

Actually, the oldest currently known samples of R1b-M269 are from European Russia and Eastern Europe, while Neolithic Anatolia was mostly G2a and no R1b was found there.

BTW, I have received my Big Y results recently.

I belong to the same subclade as some Iberians, but I also have 24 private SNPs (unnamed variants), which means that the common ancestor of me and these Iberians probably lived over 3000 years ago. Unless in the future some other Iberian gets tested and turns out to be closer related to me.

It seems that there are also people with my subclade in Scotland.

So far I have directly traced my genealogy back to around year 1800 (so 200 years back), but my uncle claims that our family has at least 400-500 years of history in the same region of Poland.

My sample is currently being analyzed by YFull.

[Zroota]

Actually, the oldest currently known samples of R1b-M269 are from European Russia and Eastern Europe, while Neolithic Anatolia was mostly G2a and no R1b was found there.
Perhaps. We may not know. But why are so many Semitic-speaking Assyrians R1b-M269? 40% of us belong to that haplogroup, when we don't speak an Indo-European language. Never understood that.

I guess that's why I thought maybe the Anatolian hypothesis made more sense.

[Atheas]

There were IE migrations from northern caucasus/steppe to the south,thus some ethnicities having R1b in the middle-east is not surprising and actually fits quiet well,its still originally an eastern european haplogroup and doesnt have its origins in the middle-east.

[Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić]

R1b >>> R1a

[Zroota]

Indo-European, but not really European.

R1b is also hypothesised to come from Anatolia. This is West Asia, not Europe.
Okay, I'm not sure why I got thumbs down for this. I guess I should've been specific.

To reiterate, R1b was diversified and multiplied in Europe of course. And the Indo-European languages started in the steppe regions there 5000 years ago or so. However, go back thousands of years prior to that, before Proto-IE language formed, R1b would have had its origins in western Asia.

I guess I conflated the language with the R1b Y-DNA.

[sailormoon]

https://aleximreh.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/r1b-z2103-tree.png?w=640

R1b-Z2103 (R-M269, R1b1b2a) is a genetic signature of Indo-European ancestry, which spread to Europe with Yamnaya steppe pastoralists around 4,500 years ago. European R1b is dominated by R-M269, which is also known as R1b1a1a2. Any other pre-existing R1b subclades in Europe are not Indo-European. For instance, R1b1a was carried by Villabruna 1, who lived circa 14,000 years BP in northern Italy.

https://i.postimg.cc/02xTCMt4/R1b-U152-tree.png


Y-DNA R1b-Z36 (U152/S28)

The OP's R1b-S28 is also known as R1b1a2a1a2b. It originated in Bronze Age Central Europe (2500-2000 BCE). R1b-S28 is clearly a descendant of the Indo-European R1b haplotype, which means that the OP's Y-DNA is 100% Indo-European.




We generated genome-wide data from 69 Europeans who lived between 8,000–3,000 years ago by enriching ancient DNA libraries for a target set of almost 400,000 polymorphisms. Enrichment of these positions decreases the sequencing required for genome-wide ancient DNA analysis by a median of around 250-fold, allowing us to study an order of magnitude more individuals than previous studies1–8 and to obtain new insights about the past. We show that the populations of Western and Far Eastern Europe followed opposite trajectories between 8,000–5,000 years ago. At the beginning of the Neolithic period in Europe, 8,000–7,000 years ago, closely related groups of early farmers appeared in Germany, Hungary and Spain, different from indigenous hunter-gatherers, whereas Russia was inhabited by a distinctive population of hunter-gatherers with high affinity to a 24,000-year-old Siberian6. By 6,000–5,000 years ago, farmers throughout much of Europe had more hunter-gatherer ancestry than their predecessors, but in Russia, the Yamnaya steppe herders of this time were descended not only from the preceding eastern European hunter-gatherers, but also from a population of Near Eastern ancestry. Western and Eastern Europe came into contact 4,500 years ago, as the Late Neolithic Corded Ware people from Germany traced 75% of their ancestry to the Yamnaya, documenting a massive migration into the heartland of Europe from its eastern periphery. This steppe ancestry persisted in all sampled central Europeans until at least 3,000 years ago, and is ubiquitous in present-day Europeans. These results provide support for a steppe origin9 of at least some of the Indo-European languages of Europe.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048219/

[Altaylardan Tunaya]

https://abload.de/img/resimmmsgk3c.jpg