# Humanities & Anthropology > History & Civilisations >  Hittite, Luwic and Palaic people. What was their Y-dna?

## Piro Ilir

What was the Y-dna of Anatolian IE people? What do you think? My guess is that it would be R1b-PF7562. This subglade split off from its sister L23 during the early bronze age. This correlate with the linguistic study over IE languages we have until today. This makes IE homeland somewhere in Caucasus , northern or southern whether. If I remember well there are genetic studies over the IE-Anatolians which show no genetic affinities with EEHG nomads. The contrary is shown in other IE branches. This will make R1b the original IE speakers, while the R1a needs an explanation how it got assimilated into IE linguistic world.

----------


## Piro Ilir

I think the R1b explained history in Eupedia is wrong about R1b-Z2103. It has a Balkanic origin, and probably moved in Anatolia during the end of the bronze age circa 1200 bce with the so-called sea peoples.

----------


## markod

I find it unlikely that it will be anything but the same old J & G that was already found, but we'll see.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I find it unlikely that it will be anything but the same old J & G that was already found, but we'll see.


Do you have any source or link about Hittites Y-dna? Did they found anything yet? As long as they were speakers of a very old IE language, I presumed that the Y-dna R1b was one of the main lineages among them. I pointed to the old PF7562.

----------


## markod

> Do you have any source or link about Hittites Y-dna? Did they found anything yet? As long as they were speakers of a very old IE language, I presumed that the Y-dna R1b was one of the main lineages among them. I pointed to the old PF7562.


This paper had samples from Kalehöyük, one of the major Hittite sites after Hattusa:

https://science.sciencemag.org/conte.../6396/eaar7711

3x J2a, 1x G2a

The Greek paper had samples from Gondürle Hoyük, another major site which is a bit more western. The male was J1.

----------


## zanipolo

> What was the Y-dna of Anatolian IE people? What do you think? My guess is that it would be R1b-PF7562. This subglade split off from its sister L23 during the early bronze age. This correlate with the linguistic study over IE languages we have until today. This makes IE homeland somewhere in Caucasus , northern or southern whether. If I remember well there are genetic studies over the IE-Anatolians which show no genetic affinities with EEHG nomads. The contrary is shown in other IE branches. This will make R1b the original IE speakers, while the R1a needs an explanation how it got assimilated into IE linguistic world.


they had every haplogroup that was already in europe found from neolithic times................these are H, R, T, G, I, E and others

----------


## Ygorcs

> I think the R1b explained history in Eupedia is wrong about R1b-Z2103. It has a Balkanic origin, and probably moved in Anatolia during the end of the bronze age circa 1200 bce with the so-called sea peoples.


R1b-Z2103 was the foremost Y-DNA haplogroup of the Yamnaya culture (at least its core settlements), it was already found even earlier in the Late Khvalynsk culture. So, I doubt its origin is Balkanic, or at least the specific group of Z2103 males that expanded to several other areas.

As for the thread's main question, I find it very unlikely that the Hittites and other Anatolian IE speakers of the Middle-Late Bronze Age, with the cultures and states they are associated with (I stress that because I do not mean the Proto-Anatolian Indo-Europeans and other intermediary populations), belonged to just one or two major haplogroups. I also do not believe they were still mostly of Proto-Anatolian origin, quite on the contrary, I think the evidences point to a linguistic shift caused by elite dominance. So, I expect them to have a lot of J2a, perhaps some G2a, J1, G2b, J2B, R1b, even L (considering it was present in the neighbnoring Transcaucasia in the Early BA). I don't think their early ancestors replaced the local paternal lineages much, instead they absorbed many populations along the way and were probably not mostly "PIE-like" when they consolidated their Anatolian IE languages. 

Now, if you ask me what I think the major Y-DNA lineages of the Proto-Anatolian IE speakers were, since I still think it's more likely that they were somehow related to the Suvorovo-Novodanilovka expansion into the Balkans, I presume mostly R1b-M269 (Z2103? Probably) as well as I2 and G2 absorbed from EEF people... but anyone who's honest will tell you that we all just don't know, we can just conjecture. I think you may be onto something with the R1b-PF7562 assumption, it may even be ultimately wrong, but it sounds at least plausible.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> I think the R1b explained history in Eupedia is wrong about R1b-Z2103. It has a Balkanic origin, and probably moved in Anatolia during the end of the bronze age circa 1200 bce with the so-called sea peoples.


Not true, because it's of the West Asian variety. I would associate it with the Hattic-Kaskian branch.

I now believe in a hybrid Anatolian hypothesis, by the way, with LPIE spreading to Sredny Stog with C-T (Urheimat in Central Anatolia, same area as the very old Catalhoyuk on the Konya plain and basically the bulk source of Danubian farmers in Europe). It explains so much, from the very early similarity with Kartvelian (presumably a Halafian East Anatolian variety that spread to Leyla Tepe and then Maykop) to the lack of a word for wheel and axle. I also think Steppe L23 didn't speak IE but a Dene-Caucasian language, perhaps literally proto-Dene-Caucasian. So, Yamnaya speaking Dene-Caucasian and Corded Ware speaking Indo-European. The main difficulties with the former (nobody doubts the latter, except for Carlos from indo-european.eu) are the Sino-Tibetan and Dene-Yeniseian language families. The former can be explained by Afanasievo (also true for Yeniseian), the Na-Dene part of the latter can be explained more controversially by a crossing of the Bering strait (can be seen by similarities between Nivkh and the rest of the Almosan language family, as well as of course that infamous North American R1b and also copper working suddenly appearing out of nowhere as part of the Old Copper Complex). North Caucasian language family would be K-A/Trialetian derived, itself with probable Yamnaya elements as shown by Eurogenes and others. Vasconic is obviously explained by this theory too, and Burushaski is the remainder.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> R1b-Z2103 was the foremost Y-DNA haplogroup of the Yamnaya culture (at least its core settlements), it was already found even earlier in the Late Khvalynsk culture. So, I doubt its origin is Balkanic, or at least the specific group of Z2103 males that expanded to several other areas.
> 
> As for the thread's main question, I find it very unlikely that the Hittites and other Anatolian IE speakers of the Middle-Late Bronze Age, with the cultures and states they are associated with (I stress that because I do not mean the Proto-Anatolian Indo-Europeans and other intermediary populations), belonged to just one or two major haplogroups. I also do not believe they were still mostly of Proto-Anatolian origin, quite on the contrary, I think the evidences point to a linguistic shift caused by elite dominance. So, I expect them to have a lot of J2a, perhaps some G2a, J1, G2b, J2B, R1b, even L (considering it was present in the neighbnoring Transcaucasia in the Early BA). I don't think their early ancestors replaced the local paternal lineages much, instead they absorbed many populations along the way and were probably not mostly "PIE-like" when they consolidated their Anatolian IE languages. 
> 
> Now, if you ask me what I think the major Y-DNA lineages of the Proto-Anatolian IE speakers were, since I still think it's more likely that they were somehow related to the Suvorovo-Novodanilovka expansion into the Balkans, I presume mostly R1b-M269 (Z2103? Probably) as well as I2 and G2 absorbed from EEF people... but anyone who's honest will tell you that we all just don't know, we can just conjecture. I think you may be onto something with the R1b-PF7562 assumption, it may even be ultimately wrong, but it sounds at least plausible.


On your first paragraph, I think you got me a bit wrong here. My point about Z2103 was that all Z2103 prezent today in Anatolia and Armenia is due to the migration of people from Balkans during the end of Bronze age circa 1200, recorded as sea peoples, aka 'Mushki , Phrygians, and even possibly partly Lydians. I know that Z2103 originated in Steppes, and we have found one from current northern Serbia circa old 2775 bce. I found a bit difficult that Z2103 was the Hittite R1b glade.

My best candidate would be PF7562 because it split earlier from the L23. This coincide with the linguistic studies on Anatolian language. It did split from its mother language long before the rest of other IE languages. Looks like the best candidate for Hittites homeland would be Maykop culture. Maykop culture was the oldest known bronze age society, but not part of Yanmaya steppe world. This makes R1b- M297 the true proto proto IE people. Another thing important is that Anatolians hadn't any steppe autosomal heritage, which point further more for the Maikop's homeland.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> they had every haplogroup that was already in europe found from neolithic times................these are H, R, T, G, I, E and others


Probably true. I know. My guess is what was the IE Y-dna of them. They were IE people and their ruling class should have been R1b-PF7562. This glade split earlier from other branches, soon after 4000 bce. It is the perfect candidate for the ruling class of Anatolia during the bronze age. The rest of Y-dna there probably were just subjugated by IE ruling class, as slaves and working class.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Not true, because it's of the West Asian variety. I would associate it with the Hattic-Kaskian branch.
> 
> I now believe in a hybrid Anatolian hypothesis, by the way, with LPIE spreading to Sredny Stog with C-T (Urheimat in Central Anatolia, same area as the very old Catalhoyuk on the Konya plain and basically the bulk source of Danubian farmers in Europe). It explains so much, from the very early similarity with Kartvelian (presumably a Halafian East Anatolian variety that spread to Leyla Tepe and then Maykop) to the lack of a word for wheel and axle. I also think Steppe L23 didn't speak IE but a Dene-Caucasian language, perhaps literally proto-Dene-Caucasian. So, Yamnaya speaking Dene-Caucasian and Corded Ware speaking Indo-European. The main difficulties with the former (nobody doubts the latter, except for Carlos from indo-european.eu) are the Sino-Tibetan and Dene-Yeniseian language families. The former can be explained by Afanasievo (also true for Yeniseian), the Na-Dene part of the latter can be explained more controversially by a crossing of the Bering strait (can be seen by similarities between Nivkh and the rest of the Almosan language family, as well as of course that infamous North American R1b and also copper working suddenly appearing out of nowhere as part of the Old Copper Complex). North Caucasian language family would be K-A/Trialetian derived, itself with probable Yamnaya elements as shown by Eurogenes and others. Vasconic is obviously explained by this theory too, and Burushaski is the remainder.


I thought the same about Kaskian, but I think Z2103 in Anatolia has a late bronze age origin which came via Balkans with the so called sea peoples, whose part were the Armenians too, 1200 bce. At this time we have a large mass of intrusion into Anatolia, which caused the crumble of Hittite hegemony over Anatolia.

As for Basques, I think it is explained well till today. Their Y-dna is irrelevant. Autosomal component is strongly autochtonous there. Don't underestimate the importance of mt-dna. Our mothers are important too, especially at these Neolithic farmers of Iberia.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> This paper had samples from Kalehöyük, one of the major Hittite sites after Hattusa:
> 
> https://science.sciencemag.org/conte.../6396/eaar7711
> 
> 3x J2a, 1x G2a
> 
> The Greek paper had samples from Gondürle Hoyük, another major site which is a bit more western. The male was J1.


Thank you for your post. Anyway, my thread here is about the Hittites ruling class. They were IE speakers, hence they most have been at least a minority of R1 people. The rest of haplos are irrelevant. They probably were just enslaved or exploited by the IE warrior elite. Just remember the bronze age society which was based in the so called, palace economy.

----------


## Piro Ilir

Asko Parpola believes that the language of the Botai culture cannot be conclusively identified with any known language or language family. He speculatively suggests that the Proto-Ugric word *lox for "horse", (reconstructed on the basis of Hungarian ló, Mansi lū and Khanty law, all meaning "horse"), which is neither of Uralic nor Indo-European origin, nor it does closely resemble any of the words for "horse" from known Eurasian language families, is a borrowing from the language of the Botai culture. Compare Ket qɨ̄ĺa, Yugh χɨ̄ĺa, and Kottish harā, all of which derive from Proto-Yeniseian *χVr-, meaning “quick”. Note that there are no Proto-Uralic words which end in *r, and that *x never occurs in word-initial position.

In my opinion R1a people weren't originally IE, but their language was a different one. The original language of R1a people got lost forever. They were probably the first horse riders. Then it was passed into the R1b tribes of southern Yanmaya (R1b-L23) and Maykop (R1b-PF7562).

----------


## markod

> Thank you for your post. Anyway, my thread here is about the Hittites ruling class. They were IE speakers, hence they most have been at least a minority of R1 people. The rest of haplos are irrelevant. They probably were just enslaved or exploited by the IE warrior elite. Just remember the bronze age society which was based in the so called, palace economy.


This is wishful thinking. Read the Iberia paper.

No R1b in high status Maykop graves either, just J, G & L.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> I thought the same about Kaskian, but I think Z2103 in Anatolia has a late bronze age origin which came via Balkans with the so called sea peoples, whose part were the Armenians too, 1200 bce. At this time we have a large mass of intrusion into Anatolia, which caused the crumble of Hittite hegemony over Anatolia.
> 
> As for Basques, I think it is explained well till today. Their Y-dna is irrelevant. Autosomal component is strongly autochtonous there. Don't underestimate the importance of mt-dna. Our mothers are important too, especially at these Neolithic farmers of Iberia.


But you're wrong. Anatolian Z2103 is far older than that, and it spread from the Caucasus as it is the West Asian variety. Your theory is wrong, so show some flexibility in changing it. There's no shame, I've changed a theory I held for a long time and was pretty confident in after the Maykop paper. The Anatolian Z2103 may have expanded in the Bronze Age, but it still goes back to that variety which spread south from the Steppe through the Caucasus mountain range.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

I can't help but think that somehow you're going to relate this back to being Albanian too

----------


## markod

> I can't help but think that somehow you're going to relate this back to being Albanian too

----------


## Jovialis

> What was the Y-dna of Anatolian IE people? What do you think? *My guess is that it would be R1b-PF7562*. This subglade split off from its sister L23 during the early bronze age. This correlate with the linguistic study over IE languages we have until today. This makes IE homeland somewhere in Caucasus , northern or southern whether. If I remember well there are genetic studies over the IE-Anatolians which show no genetic affinities with EEHG nomads. The contrary is shown in other IE branches. This will make R1b the original IE speakers, while the R1a needs an explanation how it got assimilated into IE linguistic world.


I agree, I think it is possible:

----------


## Ernekar

> I can't help but think that somehow you're going to relate this back to being Albanian too


If he did relate this haplogroup to albanians it would not be wrong of him. Albanians have one of the highest, if not the highest, percentages of this specific haplogroup, just in the same way as many other ethnicities have haplogroups that are more common in their group than in other groups. Nothing special or extraordinary there. He has every right to bring up theories about, or be more interested in, the haplogroups that he relates to the most.
If you disagree with his theories, you have every right to point out the flaws, but stop radiating these albanophobic sentiments everytime you see albanians posting something in here.

----------


## bigsnake49

> I can't help but think that somehow you're going to relate this back to being Albanian too


Amazing isn't it? First they have to prove they are actually the heirs to the Illyrians and not some small group from Dacia or Pannonia displaced by the either the Slavs or Avars.

----------


## Ernekar

> Amazing isn't it? First they have to prove they are actually the heirs to the Illyrians and not some small group from Dacia or Pannonia displaced by the either the Slavs or Avars.


There is no "proving" when it comes to past events. There are just theories, and lots of them.
The one theory that has gained most favor both nationally and internationally regarding the origin of albanians, is that they descend largely from some of the ancient western balkan tribes dubbed the Illyrians.
The reason i say 'largely', is because no group of people remains unchanged for thousands of years, it is just impossible.
Just look at ancient greeks, even though they had a rich literary culture, they can not even be linked fully to modern greeks beyond any doubt, as we actually have pretty hard evidence that there were huge slavic and albanian migrations towards especially thessaly, euboea, boetia, attica and peloponnes in greece during the middle ages. All those slavs and albanians did not magically disappear, but they were assimilated into what we today call modern greeks.

----------


## Jovialis

@everyone,

Let us stick to the topic of discussion, and avoid conflict.

----------


## LABERIA

> Amazing isn't it? First they have to prove they are actually the heirs to the Illyrians and not some small group from Dacia or Pannonia displaced by the either the Slavs or Avars.


The answer is in the Albanian language. Albanian language is a separate branch of the Indo-European family of languages and it is also an Paleo-Balkanic language. How much is possible that a small group of tribes somewhere in Dacia or Pannonia preserved for thousands of year their language meanwhile the other Paleo-Balkanic languages including the ancient Greek are now dead languages? It was not spoken by some small group of tribes. 
Of course there are other evidences but i think this can be discussed in other threads.

----------


## Angela

This is not a thread for the discussion of Albanian foundation stories. Next thing you know we're going to get the mad Serb who thinks everyone famous was Serbian and everything wonderful was invented by Serbians. 

BACK ON TOPIC, or there will be consequences. You're not going to take over and ruin every thread here. Am I clear?

----------


## Dreptul Valah

I say it's safe to stay out of these fine Old Habsburg rivalries...



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gkt4AzXC3eM

----------


## Ygorcs

> Not true, because it's of the West Asian variety. I would associate it with the Hattic-Kaskian branch.
> 
> I now believe in a hybrid Anatolian hypothesis, by the way, with LPIE spreading to Sredny Stog with C-T (Urheimat in Central Anatolia, same area as the very old Catalhoyuk on the Konya plain and basically the bulk source of Danubian farmers in Europe). It explains so much, from the very early similarity with Kartvelian (presumably a Halafian East Anatolian variety that spread to Leyla Tepe and then Maykop) to the lack of a word for wheel and axle. I also think Steppe L23 didn't speak IE but a Dene-Caucasian language, perhaps literally proto-Dene-Caucasian. So, Yamnaya speaking Dene-Caucasian and Corded Ware speaking Indo-European. The main difficulties with the former (nobody doubts the latter, except for Carlos from indo-european.eu) are the Sino-Tibetan and Dene-Yeniseian language families. The former can be explained by Afanasievo (also true for Yeniseian), the Na-Dene part of the latter can be explained more controversially by a crossing of the Bering strait (can be seen by similarities between Nivkh and the rest of the Almosan language family, as well as of course that infamous North American R1b and also copper working suddenly appearing out of nowhere as part of the Old Copper Complex). North Caucasian language family would be K-A/Trialetian derived, itself with probable Yamnaya elements as shown by Eurogenes and others. Vasconic is obviously explained by this theory too, and Burushaski is the remainder.


There's absolutely no way that that hypothesis may be correct. Dené-Caucasian is not just a highly disputed and far from consensually accepted macro-family in the field of linguistics, but it also _necessarily_ dates to a very, very old time, because some of its constituent language families, which were already _extremely_ divergent, are estimated to have started splitting themselves between 5000 and 6000 years ago - that is, even before the Yamnaya and Afanasievo cultures. Sino-Tibetan, with all its characteristics, was probably already spoken 6000 years ago, Dené-Yeniseian dates to at least 5000-6000 years ago, too. Dené-Caucasian, if it ever existed (I highly doubt so), was most definitely a Mesolithic or even Late Pleistocene language. This assumption assumes that the Dené-Caucasian language branches would be roughly as old as the particular branches of Indo-European, but that couldn't be further from the linguistic evidences, which point to an _extremely_ higher linguistic divergence between the supposed Dené-Caucasian language subgroups compared to the Indo-European ones. Just to make it clearer, let's remember that while Afro-Asiatic is almost a consensus among linguists even though its constituent branches are extremely different from each other and its usual dating usually ranges from 10,000 to 20,000 years go, Dené-Caucasian is deemed as too tenuous to be accepted by most.

There's also the problem that Ukraine Neolithic and Eneolithic ancestry _does not seem_ at all to be the main source of ancestry for the latter CWC, Bell Beaker, Sintashta and so on. More eastern (east of the Don river) sources in Khvalynsk and the Piedmont Steppe look much more plausible, and that in fact fits the archaeological evidences that point to a strong expansion of broadly Khvalynsk-derived culture (and presumably people) westward into Ukraine, changing Sredny Stog gradually into the more homogeneized cultural horizon of Yamnaya.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> There's absolutely no way that that hypothesis may be correct. Dené-Caucasian is not just a highly disputed and far from consensually accepted macro-family in the field of linguistics, but it also _necessarily_ dates to a very, very old time, because some of its constituent language families, which were already _extremely_ divergent, are estimated to have started splitting themselves between 5000 and 6000 years ago - that is, even before the Yamnaya and Afanasievo cultures. Sino-Tibetan, with all its characteristics, was probably already spoken 6000 years ago, Dené-Yeniseian dates to at least 5000-6000 years ago, too. Dené-Caucasian, if it ever existed (I highly doubt so), was most definitely a Mesolithic or even Late Pleistocene language. This assumption assumes that the Dené-Caucasian language branches would be roughly as old as the particular branches of Indo-European, but that couldn't be further from the linguistic evidences, which point to an _extremely_ higher linguistic divergence between the supposed Dené-Caucasian language subgroups compared to the Indo-European ones. Just to make it clearer, let's remember that while Afro-Asiatic is almost a consensus among linguists even though its constituent branches are extremely different from each other and its usual dating usually ranges from 10,000 to 20,000 years go, Dené-Caucasian is deemed as too tenuous to be accepted by most.
> 
> There's also the problem that Ukraine Neolithic and Eneolithic ancestry _does not seem_ at all to be the main source of ancestry for the latter CWC, Bell Beaker, Sintashta and so on. More eastern (east of the Don river) sources in Khvalynsk and the Piedmont Steppe look much more plausible, and that in fact fits the archaeological evidences that point to a strong expansion of broadly Khvalynsk-derived culture (and presumably people) westward into Ukraine, changing Sredny Stog gradually into the more homogeneized cultural horizon of Yamnaya.


Well that Dene-Caucasian theory made the most sense to me given Bell Beakers probably spoke Vasconic and I still like the idea the PIE was spoken by Anatolians originally.

It does seem far-fetched, but so does the whole Dene-Caucasian language family. R1b L23 PC Steppe-derived cultures were the only Urheimat cultures I could see that were spread far enough to explain Dene-Caucasian (given CW-derived cultures are so obviously IE), if D-C is legit I still can't think of any other way to explain it. The impression I get is that D-C languages show a distinct link to one another but that it seems somewhat absurd given the distances involved, so linguists don't like it. I bet if this were the case with the Caucasian languages it would have more acceptance.

Also, given the huge influence native cultures would have had on all these areas compared with the I-E expansion (higher levels of replacement in general with much less isolation), can glottochronology really be considered that accurate here? Does glottochronology take into account things like influence of "replaced" languages?

----------


## Piro Ilir

> This is wishful thinking. Read the Iberia paper.
> 
> No R1b in high status Maykop graves either, just J, G & L.


I didn't knew that they have Y-dna samples yet, from Maykop sites. Here in Eupedia I have read that they don't have yet any sample.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> But you're wrong. Anatolian Z2103 is far older than that, and it spread from the Caucasus as it is the West Asian variety. Your theory is wrong, so show some flexibility in changing it. There's no shame, I've changed a theory I held for a long time and was pretty confident in after the Maykop paper. The Anatolian Z2103 may have expanded in the Bronze Age, but it still goes back to that variety which spread south from the Steppe through the Caucasus mountain range.


Z2103, was found near Danube at early third millennium bce. Proto-Illyrian. It doesn't mean it is exclusively Illyrian. It was probably Phrygian and Armenian as well. It is considered the eastern branch of L23. I don't know if there is any Z2103 found in Anatolian bronze age sites so far.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I can't help but think that somehow you're going to relate this back to being Albanian too


Sure, it's the main branch of Albanian R1b Y-dna. It makes Albanians being IE speakers. Furthermore, Z2103 is important in Armenians too. The original proto Armenian homeland was Balkans too. So it makes sense.
Z2103 is the same as L51 for the Celtic branch.
It makes sense; Germanic, Italics, Gauls in one branch and Albanian, Armenian, Phrygians at the other R1b branch.
Considering the linguistic difference between Anatolian and other IE languages, PF7562 correlate well with the earlier split between the two's.
Anatolians were IE speakers, and has no sense at all , if they had neither from the two IE major lineages, R1b or R1a either.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> 


Is this map showing, it picks in Kosova? That's kinda strange.
Unfortunately, this map has no percentage estimates. It would be helpful

----------


## Piro Ilir

> @everyone,
> 
> Let us stick to the topic of discussion, and avoid conflict.


I think they got me wrong. I'm not linking Albanians with Hittites. It's quite the contrary. I link mostly proto Albanians with the R1b-Z2103. This is my humble opinion.

----------


## Piro Ilir

Do we have any Y-dna Maykop samples so far?

----------

