# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Y-DNA haplogroups of ancient civilizations

## Maciamo

Here is a summary of the current genetic knowledge regarding ancient ethnic groups. This is based on Y-chromosomal haplogroups only.


*The ancient Egyptians*

Based on the modern population of Egypt, and removing the foreign elements, it is reasonable to assume that the Neolithic to Bronze Age Egyptians belonged primarily to haplogroups E1b1b, with minorities of G, R1b-V88 and T. There might have been some J1 too. 

Nowadays perhaps as much as 30% of the Egyptian paternal lines could be descended from post-Bronze Age invaders, notably from the Arabic peninsula (hg J1-P58, 20% of the population), but also from Greece (more E1b1b + I2a, J2, R1b-L23, R1a) and Anatolia (mostly J2 and R1b-L23, with some R1a).

*The ancient Persians*

Iran has a highly heterogeneous populations when it comes to Y-DNA. Percentages vary greatly between East and West, and from North to South. Ancient Persia was less diverse, but still very mixed by ancient standards. Its ethnic composition prior to the Greek, Arabic and Mongol invasions was probably made of about 35% of haplogroup J (J1 being more predominant in the South and J2 in the North), 20% of hg R1a, 15% of hg G, 15% of hg R1b, 5% of hg L, and 10% of other haplogroups.

*The ancient Babylonians*

Babylonians in southern Mesopotamia belonged primarily to haplogroups J1, J2 and T, with a minority of E1b1b and G. 

*The ancient Assyrians*

The Assyrians would have contrasted with their southern Babylonian neighbours by having much more J2 than J1 and a considerable amount of R1b-L23 (20 to 40%). They would also have had minorities of E1b1b, G and T lineages.

*The ancient Sarmatians & Scythians*

Descended from the Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-Europeans, the Scythians would have belonged mostly to haplogroup R1a (probably more than 50% of the paternal lineages), which is the only Y-DNA haplogroup that has been found in various Iron Age Scythian remains in eastern Europe and Central Asia to date. It is very likely that the Scythians also possessed a substantial minority of R1b, and smaller percentages of G1, G2a3b1, J2a, J2b2, Q1b and T1a1a. The Sarmatians would have been essentially the same, perhaps without the G1 and Q1b and with some eastern European I2a1b and E-V13.

*The ancient Slavs*

Present-day Slavs are descended from Bronze Age Steppe cultures descended from the Corded Ware culture (including the Catacomb and Srubna cultures), associated with the R1a-M458 and R1a-Z280 people, as well as the Neolithic population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (I2a1b-M423). Slavic Europeans belonged primarily to haplogroup R1a and I2. Southern Slavs descended from the Thracians, Dacians and Illyrians have a much higher proportion of I2a1b.

Eastern Europeans from the Danubian basin and the Balkans have also inherited a sizeable percentage of haplogroup E1b1b, G2a, J1, J2b and T from the expansion Neolithic farmers that started from northern Greece 7,000 years ago. These lineages survived at a higher frequency in non-Slavic populations of the Balkans, notably the Albanians, Romanians, Vlachs and Greeks.

*The Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians*

According to ancient sources, the Thracians were a fusion of Proto-Indo-European Steppe people with the Neolithic inhabitants of the Carpathians (Cucuteni-Trypillian culture). As such they probably belonged to R1a (about 30%), R1b (10%), I2a1b (25-30%), E-V13 (10-15%), G2a, J1, J2a, J2b, and T1a. The Dacians were closely related to the Thracians and would have carried a similar mixture of haplogroups. The Illyrians have more mysterious origins, but judging from the modern haplogroup frequencies in the Dinaric Alps, they surely were predominantly a blend of R1a and I2a1b.

*The ancient Greek & Romans*

=> See post #3 below.

*The ancient Celts*

It is now believed that the ancient Celts were by a very large majority R1b people. Many subclades of R1b divide the various geographic groups of Celts. 2500 years ago, British and Irish Celts belonged mostly to the subclade R1b-L21. Celts from Iberia and south-west Gaul were R1b-DF27, while the other Gauls, from central France to southern Germany to northern Italy, belonged to R1b-U152. Further subgroups exist for all these clades (see Haplogroup R1b).

*The ancient Germanic people*

The four main haplogroups associated with Germanic people are I1, I2a2a (M223), R1a (mostly the L664, Z283 and Z284 subclades) and R1b (mostly U106, but also L238 and DF19). Here is more information on Germanic I1, Germanic I2a2a, Germanic R1a, and Germanic R1b 

*The ancient Indians*

The Indo-Aryan people who invaded the Indian peninsula from Central Asia and Iran 3,500 years ago belonged mostly to haplogroups R1a-Z93, with a minority of G2a3b1, J2b2, R1b (both M269 and M73) and R2. This is known from the analysis of Y-DNA of the upper castes of Indian society (the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas), thought to be descended from the Indo-Aryans with minimal admixture on the paternal side. The native Dravidians belonged to the indigenous South Asian haplogroups C5, F, H and L.

*The ancient Chinese*

Haplogroup O is associated with the Han ethnicity, as well as most of the people of East Asia and Polynesia. Nowadays O3 is the most common in northern China while O1 dominates in southern China.

*The ancient Japanese*

Modern Japanese people are composed of two ancient ethnicities : the Yayoi people, who migrated from the Korean peninsula about 2,300 years ago, bringing with them agriculture; and the Jomon people, the hunter-gathers who had lived on the archipelago for millennia before that. The Yayoi were hg O people (mostly O2b and O3), like the northern Chinese and the Koreans. The Jomon belonged mostly to the rare haplogroup D (also found in Tibet and in the Andamans, some of the most isolated places on Earth), essentially the uniquely Japanese D2, but also a minority of C1 (also unique to Japan) and East Siberian C3. For more information see The Origin of Japanese people.

*The ancient Americans*

Be them nomadic tribes from North America, Aztecs, Mayas, Quechuas or cannibals from Amazonia, almost all native Americans belonged to haplogroup Q1a3a, but a minority of hg C existed in North America.

----------


## Mycernius

Just as I was looking for something like this you put up a post about it. There is a baka on Jref who seems to think that ancient Israelites are responsible for Buddhism amoung other starnge and weird ideas. His evidence is scripture. I mentioned DNA doesn't hold any of his shite to be true and he asked for sources. I put up two links, but this is an excellent link. Cheers :Cool:

----------


## Maciamo

A little update based on new information.

All haplogroups I are the indigenous people of Europe, the direct descendants of Cro-Magnon (it isn't R1b as previously thought). This is why I is found everywhere in Europe at low frequencies, except I1 which remained strong in Germanic countries. A pocket of I2a1a (M26) survived in Sardinia because of it's relative isolation. I2a1b (M423) seems to have adopted agriculture early on around the Carpathians and is thought to have migrated to the Dinaric Alps around 1000 BCE with the Illyrians, where it survives in over 50% of male lineages in most of Bosnia and Croatia.

*Ancient Greeks*

The *Pelasgians* (pre-Minoan Greeks, or Helladic Greeks) belonged to an admixture of I2, E1b1b, T and G2a. E-V13 and T probably arrived in Greece from the Levant (and ultimately from Egypt, hence the small percentage of T) in the early Neolithic, 8,500 years ago. G2a came from the Levant was picked up in Anatolia along the way by Levantine farmers and herders.

*Minoan* Greeks migrated from Mesopotamia via Anatolia. They were mostly J2 people, but probably had some E1b1b too.

*Mycenaean* Greeks arrived around 3,600 years ago from the Pontic steppes via the Balkans. They were an Indo-European people belonging to R1b-L23 and/or R1a. The Thracians, who emerged as a blend of Indo-European R1a and Neolithic I2a1b, are also responsible for the higher density of I2a1b and R1a in northern Greece.

Greece was invaded by the *Dorians* around 1200 BCE. Nobody knows who they were or where they came from, but the high percentage of R1b in the regions where they settled (Peloponese, Crete) strongly suggest that they were R1b people. The events are linked to the Sea Peoples (see below), who were probably R1b people from the north-east of the Black Sea, or early Celts from central Europe. 

Greek historians sometimes mention that the Dorians were the descendants of the Trojans who came back to avenge their ancestors. The *Trojans* were an Indo-European people related to the R1b Hittites (see below). This would also explain why there is about the same percentage of R1b and R1a in modern Greece. Each correspond to a different wave of Indo-European invader. They only make up 12% of the population (each) because the Neolithic farmers (especially E1b1b) were already well-established and numerous by that time.

*Ancient Anatolians*

Southern Anatolia was colonised early by Neolithic farmers and herders from the Fertile Crescent (E1b1b, G2a, J1, J2, T).

The Indo-European invasions brought the *Hittites* (1750 BCE), the *Lydians* and *Lycians* (1450 BCE), *Phrygians* (1200 BE) and the *Proto-Armenians* (1200 BCE). All were probably predominantly R1b-L23, considering its high percentage in the regions they settled. R1b Indo-Europeans are thought to have originated on the north-eastern shores of the Black Sea, just north of the Caucasus. They could have invaded northern Anatolia by crossing the Caucasus, sailing across the sea, or going around via the steppes through the Bosphorus. 

Later R1b were possibly (part of) the *Sea Peoples* that ravaged the ancient Near Eastern civilizations, from Greece to Egypt. Their advance military technology and sea-based culture make of them very good candidates.

The *Cimmerians* are probably the last wave of migration (around 700 BCE) from the Pontic Steppe. By that time the steppe would have been thoroughly overrun by R1a people, so that was probably the Cimmerians's main haplogroup. They are said to have be expelled from Anatolia and moved to Europe, where they joined the other R1b people. Germanic and Celtic people both claim (partial) Cimmerian ancestry.


*Romans, Celts and Germans*

Celtic, Italic and Germanic people are all descended from the same R1b-L11 stock. They split north of the Alps, in modern Germany. They also incorporated a sizeable minority of G2a3b1 and J2b2 lineages, especially the Celts and the Italics.

The *Italic* branch went south and mixed with the Terramare people who were I2a1a, G2a and E1b1b. Northern Italians have more Indo-European Celto-Italic blood, while southern Italian have more indigenous blood (the highest being Sardinia, then Basilicata).

The *Germanic* branch moved north and mixed with the indigenous I1 and I2a2 people, who had already mixed with R1a migrants from the Corded Ware (Battle Axe) culture. The new hybrid Germanic people retained the highest percentage of autochthonous haplogroup I.

*Celtic* people split in several groups : the Brythonic went to Britain and Ireland, the Gaulish to France, the Iberian to Spain and Portugal, and the Alpine remained around Austria, Switzerland, southern Germany, Eastern France and Belgium. All of them mixed with I2a1a, G2a and E1b1b people from the Megalithic cultures. The Alpine and Rhino-Danubian Celts also encountered I2a2 people. 

It is likely that the language of the indigenous Europeans influenced the various Celtic, Italic and Germanic dialects. Germanic languages diverted the most from the original European R1b language because it assimilated a very large part of aborigines.

From about 700 BCE, the *Etruscans* settled around Tuscany and the Greeks in southern Italy. Etruscans probably came from western Anatolia or some Aegean islands, and brought mostly haplogroups E1b1b, G2a, J2 and R1b-L23 with them. The Greeks in Italy brought a similar admixture, but with a higher proportion of E1b1b. The *Romans* progressively absorbed the Etruscans and Italian Greeks and mixed with them. By the time of Julius Caesar Roman citizens were probably composed of 45% of R1b, 20% of J, 15% of E1b1b, 15% of G2a and 5% of I2a1.

----------


## Maciamo

*The Phoenicians*

The unique colonization pattern of the Phoenicians and the isolation of some of their colonies (Ibiza, Sardinia, Malta) have made it easy to identify their genetic signature. The Phoenician population was already very mixed 3000 years ago : E-V22, J1, J2, J2a4b, J2a4b1, G2a, R1a and R1b1a. E-V22 and R1b1a are quite specific to Levantines (Syrians, Lebanese, Druzes, Jews, Palestinians).

----------


## Maciamo

*The Hungarians*

Modern Hungarians are virtually undistinguishable from their Austrian and Slovak neighbours in terms of Y-chromosome haplogroups. 

But Hungary is a notoriously difficult country for Y-DNA proportions. Percentages tend to vary widely from one study to another, depending on the regional populations sampled. Some studies have found over 60% of R1a in Hungary, although the average if half that figure. Some villages have a small percentage of CentralNorth Asian haplogroups N, Q or C, but they are otherwise quite rare. Interestingly neighbouring countries like Austria, Slovakia and Ukraine appear to have more C, Q and N than Hungary.

Hungary has a peculiar history due to its geography - a vast plain surrounded by mountains on every side (the Alps and the Carpathians). In Neolithic times, it was at the centre of the Danubian cultures, which was composed of E-V13 farmers from Thessaly and I2 hunter-gatherers (soon converted to farming). Then came the Slavic invasion (around 3,000 BCE), followed by the Proto-Italo-Celts and Alpine Celts (2,000 BCE to 200 BCE), who brought respectively R1a and R1b to the region.

Hungary was named after the Huns, who invaded Europe from 370 CE and partly settled in the Pannonian plain (now known as Hungarian plain). It isn't sure where the Huns came from, but it is generally believed that they descended from the Xiongnu peoples of Mongolia. They were a confederation and included various ethnic group under Hunnic leadership. It is likely that there were many R1a peoples (e.g. Scythians) from the Eurasian Steppe. The Huns themselves may have been an admixture of haplogroup Q and C. However less than 2% of the modern population belong to Q and C combined.

The next invaders were the Magyar, a Finno-Ugric people who arrived in Europe in the 9th century, and settled in Hungary in the 10th. Hungarian language is actually a descendant of Magyar, not Hunnic, despite the misleading name in "Hun-". The Magyar came from Central Asia, and are related to the modern Bashkirs of Russia. Modern Bashkirs have about 35% of haplogroup R1b1b2, 26% of R1a, 17% of N1c and 13% of R1b1b1. However, they were conquered by the Mongols, which may account for all the haplogroup C. In fact, the presence of C in Europe is usually attributed exclusively to the Mongols, and C is almost non-existent in Hungary anyway. 

A study compared the Y-chromosome of the Madjar tribe from Kazakhstan to the Magyars of Hungary, and found that some G lineages were related. The article doesn't specify the subcalde, but G1 is the dominant strain in Kazakhstan, and is also found in Hungary (but normally not elsewhere in Europe).

Another study compared the Y-DNA of Hungarians with other Finno-Ugric-speaking populations in order to understand why modern Hungarians have so little of the typical Uralic haplogroup N1c. They tested a few individuals from a 10th-century cemetery found out that half of the individuals belonged to N1c. The sample was small, and maybe "pure" Magyar, but it nonetheless suggests that the original Magyar had much more N1c than modern Hungarians. 

The Magyar population is thought to have suffered considerably from the 13th-century Mongol invasion of Europe, and from the 16th-century war against the Ottomans. Hungary was repopulated in great number by ethnic Germans/Austrians, which explains why modern Hungary is closest to Austria for its Y-DNA composition.

From all this can be deduced that the original Magyars were an admixture of N1c and R1a (predominant), with some G1, and maybe some R1b.

As haplogroup Q is neither associated with the Magyars not with the Mongols, it must be either be of Hunnic origin, or from other Asian tribes part of the various invaders from the steppes.

----------


## Denis B

> The Magyar came from Central Asia, and are related to the modern Bashkirs of Russia. Modern Bashkirs have about 38% of haplogroup C, 27% of R1a, 18% of N1c and 13% of R1b. However, they were conquered by the Mongols, which may account for all the haplogroup C. In fact, the presence of C in Europe is usually attributed exclusively to the Mongols, and C is almost non-existent in Hungary anyway.


You are mistaken.
According to paper by Russian geneticists - "Structure of gene pool of Bashkir subpopulations"
Bashkirs have (N=471)
47% R1b (35% R1b1b2, 13% R1b1b1)
26% R1a1
17% N1c
C haplogroup occurs in only 2.3% of Bashkir sample.

----------


## Maciamo

> You are mistaken.
> According to paper by Russian geneticists - "Structure of gene pool of Bashkir subpopulations"
> Bashkirs have (N=471)
> 47% R1b (35% R1b1b2, 13% R1b1b1)
> 26% R1a1
> 17% N1c
> C haplogroup occurs in only 2.3% of Bashkir sample.


Sorry I mistook while copying my sources. Thanks for pointing that out.

By the way, there are significant differences in haplogroup frequencies between subpopulations of Bashkirs. This indicate that each could have a different origin.

I managed to find the original study by Lobov et al. (in Russian only). Indeed the percentages vary widely according to the subpopulation. the Bashkirs total is 17% of N1c, 26% of R1a, 13% of R1b1b1, 35% of R1b1b2.

R1b1b2 (M269) is much more common the Baymaksky district of Bashkortostan (81%) and the Perm region (84%), but otherwise osciliates between 7% and 23%. 

R1b1b1 (M73) reaches an amazing 55% in the Abzelilovsky district, but otherwise does not exceed 2%.

N1c is very high in East Orenburg (65%) and Sterlibashevsky (54%), moderate in Samara & Saratov (20%) and low elsewhere (3% to 7%).

Samara & Saratov is the only Bashkir region with a reasonable amount of haplogroup C (17%) and O (6%).

But overall it is R1a that is the most common, reaching 38% in Sterlibashevsky district, 40% in West Orenburg, and 48% in Saratov & Samara.

----------


## ordinary_guy

You did not mention the Avars. Their khaganane was centered in and around the present-day Hungarian city of Debrecen and their presence in the Carpathian Basin lasted several centuries until 800 AD. The presence of the Huns, even when compared with that of Avars, was insignificant in terms of the time spent there. Also, you mention Hungary as the name that originates from the name Hun. The territory was called Pannonia since the Roman times and long after the fall of the empire. The name Hungary is much younger and comes from the word On Ogur the Bulgarians gave to the 10 (?) Asian tribes that invaded the Carpathian Basin in 896 AD. As for the Mongol invasion of 1242, it lasted only 1 or 2 years, which is too short, in my opinion, to leave any genetic trace in the population, though I agree that the country, especially the plains (probably inhabited by the Magyars) was almost depopulated. The highlands (Romania, Slovakia) offered better refuge to the locals (Vlachs, Slavs), so their population was largely preserved.

----------


## Maciamo

The Avars were steppe people from Central Asia, so they must have been predominantly R1a, with maybe some J2, R1b and/or C3.

----------


## JackMack

> A little update based on new information.
> 
> All haplogroups I are the indigenous people of Europe, the direct descendants of Cro-Magnon (it isn't R1b as previously thought). This is why I is found everywhere in Europe at low frequencies, except I1 which remained strong in Germanic countries. A pocket of I2a2 survived around Croatia because of it's relative isolation, outside the Danubian corridor used by new waves of immigrants/invaders. I2a1 survived at high frequency in Sardinia simply because it is the most isolated place in Europe.
> 
> *Ancient Greeks*
> 
> *Pelasgians* (pre-Minoan Greeks, or Helladic Greeks) belonged to an admixture of I, E-V13, T and G2a. E-V13 and T probably arrived in Greece from the Levant (and ultimately from Egypt, hence the small percentage of T) in the early Neolithic, 8,500 years ago. G2a came from the Caucasus approximately 6,000 years ago as herders of sheep and goats (and early miners ?).
> 
> *Minoan* Greeks migrated from Mesopotamia via Anatolia. They were mostly J2 people, but probably had some E too.
> ...


This was extremely informative and very helpful. :Grin:

----------


## Maciamo

*The ancient Basques*

Although modern Basques belong predominantly to haplogroup R1b with a minority of I2a, there is little alternative but to suppose that Neolithic Basques were I2a, prior to the Indo-European invasions (that brought R1b). Modern Basque would have retained a lot of ancient autosomal characteristics through female lineages. Modern Basque have dark hair and eyes, and it is probable that ancient I2 people from continental Europe were also dark-haired and dark-eyed, although with fairer skin that their closest cousins, the Near/Middle Eastern J2 and J1. 

Ancient mtDNA indeed indicate that prehistoric Basques were closer to modern Near Easterners.

----------


## JackMack

> *The ancient Basques*
> 
> Although modern Basques belong predominantly to haplogroup R1b with a minority of I2a, there is little alternative but to suppose that Neolithic Basques were I2a, prior to the Indo-European invasions (that brought R1b). Modern Basque would have retained a lot of ancient autosomal characteristics through female lineages. Modern Basque have dark hair and eyes, and it is probable that ancient I2 people from continental Europe were also dark-haired and dark-eyed, although with fairer skin that their closest cousins, the Near/Middle Eastern J2 and J1. 
> 
> Ancient mtDNA indeed indicate that prehistoric Basques were closer to modern Near Easterners.


Just out of curiosity, can you give us the links to the scientific papers that will verify your suppositions about color in these people?

----------


## Maciamo

> Just out of curiosity, can you give us the links to the scientific papers that will verify your suppositions about color in these people?


It is my own supposition based my knowledge of the modern Basque people. That's why I said "it is probable". If DNA had been conducted on the ancient, pre-Indo-European Basques proving that they indeed had dark hair and eyes, I would have said "it has been proved". I cannot see how they would have fair hair or eyes before the R1b Indo-European invasion.

----------


## Arahari

> *The ancient Egyptians*
> 
> Based on the modern population of Egypt, and removing the foreign elements, it is reasonable to assume that the ancient Egyptians belonged primarily to haplogroups E1b1b and T. Nowadays about half of the Egyptian paternal lines could be descended from invaders, notably from the Arabic peninsula (hg J1, about 1/3 of the population), but also from Greece, Anatolia and Persia.
> 
> *The ancient Persians*
> 
> Iran has a heterogeneous populations when it comes to Y-DNA. Percentages vary greatly between East and West, and from North to South. Ancient Persia was less diverse, but still very mixed by ancient standards. Its ethnic composition prior to the Greek, Arabic and Mongol invasions was probably made of about 40% of haplogroup J (J1 being more predominant in the South and J2 in the North), 25% of hg R1a, 15% of hg F (possibly including G's), 10% of hg G and 10% of hg H, I, K and L.
> 
> *The ancient Babylonians*
> ...


I believe that it is a mistake, albeit a common one to assume one of two things:

1. That the haplogroups of the masses necessarily represents the founding element of the civilisation that they adhere to and:

2. That the present populations of certain civilisation areas genetically corelate to the original founding populations of the civilisations concerned.

----------


## Maciamo

> I believe that it is a mistake, albeit a common one to assume one of two things:
> 
> 1. That the haplogroups of the masses necessarily represents the founding element of the civilisation that they adhere to and:
> 
> 2. That the present populations of certain civilisation areas genetically corelate to the original founding populations of the civilisations concerned.


1. Let's see if I understand what you mean. Supposing that the Romans might have been predominantly R1b (just a supposition for the argument's sake), but surrounded by I2, G2a, J2 and E1b1b people. You would consider that the "founding element of the Roman civilisation" is therefore R1b. 

2. I have already pruned haplogroups representing later migrations. But it's true that the percentage can vary over time even without migrations.

In some periods of history the ruling class had more children (kings could father hundreds of children through concubines) and more of them survived into adulthood because they had more food and lived in better conditions. In other periods of history, the poor had more children (like now, because they are less concerned about their career and comfort level). Some regions might suffer serious epidemics that might wipe out a big part of the population. All these factors can change the haplogroup frequency of a region over the centuries. Furthermore, some haplogroups may confer increased fertility, or be associated with azoospermia.

----------


## JackMack

> 1. Let's see if I understand what you mean. Supposing that the Romans might have been predominantly R1b (just a supposition for the argument's sake), but surrounded by I2, G2a, J2 and E1b1b people. You would consider that the "founding element of the Roman civilisation" is therefore R1b. 
> 
> 2. I have already pruned haplogroups representing later migrations. But it's true that the percentage can vary over time even without migrations.
> 
> In some periods of history the ruling class had more children (kings could father hundreds of children through concubines) and more of them survived into adulthood because they had more food and lived in better conditions. In other periods of history, the poor had more children (like now, because they are less concerned about their career and comfort level). Some regions might suffer serious epidemics that might wipe out a big part of the population. All these factors can change the haplogroup frequency of a region over the centuries. Furthermore, some haplogroups may confer increased fertility, or be associated with azoospermia.


Where is the proof that R1b contributed fair hair and eyes to Europe? Isn't R1b also closely linked to the Amerindians and others who have dark hair and eyes. Didn't blue eyes develop somewhere around the Baltic sea- not the area of introduction of R1b near the Black sea around Georgia and the Ukraine? How are the people of Italy's southern heel, Apulia for example, much lighter then most of central western Europe? They are nearly up to 50% blond according to the recent maps and I thought from your previous posts that they are really Greco-Roman and not Italo-celtic (as you put it- although I'm am still looking for proof of the term Italo-celtic) How did you come up with your beliefs since they are not based on fact?

----------


## Maciamo

> Where is the proof that R1b contributed fair hair and eyes to Europe? Isn't R1b also closely linked to the Amerindians and others who have dark hair and eyes. Didn't blue eyes develop somewhere around the Baltic sea- not the area of introduction of R1b near the Black sea around Georgia and the Ukraine? How are the people of Italy's southern heel, Apulia for example, much lighter then most of central western Europe? They are nearly up to 50% blond according to the recent maps and I thought from your previous posts that they are really Greco-Roman and not Italo-celtic (as you put it- although I'm am still looking for proof of the term Italo-celtic) How did you come up with your beliefs since they are not based on fact?


In what way is that related to what I wrote in the post you quoted or about this thread ? Please refrain to post off-topic comments. Each thread has its own discussion.

R1b isn't found in pre-Colombian Amerindians as far as is currently known. It is common in modern native Americans because Western European colonists killed a lot of native men in the 16th and 17th centuries and procreated with their women.

----------


## Manuel

Can you indicate the publication(s) relating cromagnon to hp y I(s) ?
Thank you
Manuel Costa
<[email protected]>

----------


## Maciamo

> Can you indicate the publication(s) relating cromagnon to hp y I(s) ?


I am not sure if there is any scientific publication on the matter. Cro-Magnon have not been tested for Y-DNA yet, so nobody can be 100% sure. 

Nevertheless, it is now widely accepted in the genetic genealogy community that haplogroup IJ or I are the only haplogroup that could be associated with Cro-Magnon, based on logical elimination and chronology. Logic combined to data analysis is a totally valid scientific argument. But scientists like to publish test results (often with poor analysis due to a blatant lack of historical and archeological background).

Here is why Paleolithic and Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers (aka Cro-Magnons) could not have belonged to other haplogroups than I.

Cro-Magnon arrived in Europe from the Middle East some 30,000 years ago.
Based on the ISOGG age estimates of Y-DNA haplogroups (=> chronology), only haplogroups P, IJ, G and E1b existed between North Africa and the Middle East at the time. 

Haplogroup R1a and R1b did not develop until about 20,000 years ago, and it is also generally accepted that haplogroup R appeared in Central Asia, based on the presence of R2 exclusively in South Asia, R1a from Eastern Europe to South Asia, and the oldest subclades of R1b all in Central or Western Asia. Besides the chronology of R1b subclades in Europe clearly follow of East to West migration pattern, not West to East. (see R1b migration map).

So haplogroup R1a and R1b can be effectively ruled out as possible Cro-Magnon haplogroups. 

Virtually all population geneticists agree that haplogroups E and J came to Europe via Greece with the spread of agriculture during the Neolithic period. Many also add haplogroup G, though the migration pattern was obviously different from E and J, as the pockets in mountain areas of southern Europe attest. 

Haplogroup G is thought to have originated somewhere between the Caucasus and South Asia. Most Europeans belong to G2a, which is less than 10,000 years old. There is a higher genetic diversity of G is Central Asia than Europe. Furthermore haplogroup G is nearly absent from Scandinavia and North-East Europe, which would be a region where the hunter-gatherer descendants of Cro-Magnon would be most likely to survive in considerable number after the arrival of Near-Eastern agriculturalists.

So, unless Cro-Magnon belonged to some completely extinct Y-DNA haplogroup (quite unlikely), the best, and indeed only candidate is haplogroup I. I am convinced that several subclades of I disappeared over time. There might not have been just I1, I2a and I2b, but probably other extinct subclades too. Given the huge bottleneck apparent from the phylogeny of I1, there might have been a lot of pre-I1 subclades, probably pruned by regular waves of stronger glaciations reducing the I1 population to only a few male individuals.

----------


## RealIllyrian

Maciamo, you make a very big mistake by calling Albanians Greeks, and trying to explain history as it is greek as you have been told. 
hehehe...
Pellasgians were not greek. 
may I recommend you to read teh constitution of 1827 of the greek nation and find out what it really is. May I also recommend you to read the accounts of travelers and authors who wrote on the people who populated what you call greece up to the 19th century maintaining their original ethnic name? 
It is so funny to see that people who are obviously intellilgent at the same time are so ignorant simply because they undermine the oldest language in the region Albanian. 
you really need to correct what you write. There is nothing Pellasgian about what you call greeks, as greek is not an ethnic term but a religious term. 
Pellasgian means people of the land of water. 
In Albanian: Pellg = body of water, 
gia = land, thing, earth 
and greek is derived from the Language of the pellasgian, and the funny thing about it is that it is Albanian (SHQIP) that is the langauge that is closest to theirs, the language which translates literally the so called greek and egyptian gods which people like you who call them greeks, think are god names. 
you really need to understand history a little better and find out that it is precisely the albanians who are fully in sync with the results presented on this website as far as evolution of the balkans goes. You have no idea what greek is from what I can tell by reading your comments. Unless you call Albanians greeks, and that's a different story altogether. 
Find out what greek means, and understand that the historical terms that you are using are highly inaccurate as portrayed in the past 2 centuries. I don't want to ruin the surprise and give it away.

----------


## RealIllyrian

and the trojans dear friend were also pellasgians. the historical accounts support that fully. 
Troy is also an Albanian word for which the modern word is TROJE, meaning "our land" 

you really have no idea what ancient history really is do you? 
You shouldn't write things you have no idea about for the sake of writing them dear friend. You might be thinking you are helping people understand, but while you are from a scientific point of view, historically you are bastardizing the facts simply because of your own ignorance to a language that perhaps you think is irrelevant. 

I will give you two quotes: 
Ernst Maximilian Lambertz: "The world will not know its true history until Albanians participate in its writing" 

And Edith Durham" Empires came and went, and passed over the Albanian as does the water off a duck's back" 

I will be more than happy to explain you a few things that will only make you understand even better the science that you are presenting through a historical and linguistics viewpoint that only supports what you are presenting, which you seem to have no idea about.

----------


## Maciamo

> Maciamo, you make a very big mistake by calling Albanians Greeks, and trying to explain history as it is greek as you have been told. 
> hehehe...
> Pellasgians were not greek.


By definition, the Pelasgians are the autochthonous (native) inhabitants of Mesolithic Greece. They did not speak Greek, but their language _may_ have contributed to a few loan words in ancient Greek.




> may I recommend you to read teh constitution of 1827 of the greek nation and find out what it really is.


You are talking about the modern definition of "Greek" as related to the Greek nation. I don't see how this relates to genetic studies on ancient populations. For example, the modern country of Iran is not composed entirely of people descended from Iranian-speaking tribes - far from it. The same is true for Greece. Modern Greece is a melting pot. The Pelasgians were first there (probably haplogroup I2), then came early farmers from the Near East (E1b1b and J2), herders from the Caucasus and Anatolia (G2), then the Mycenaeans (I would think R1a), the Dorians (possibly R1b) and others. 

Ancient Greek language and religion is surely an admixture of all this, although the Indo-European component is stronger than the rest. I suppose that this is because the Mycenaeans and Dorians were the last invaders, whose language and culture eventually stuck, after some adaptation to local idiosyncrasies.




> It is so funny to see that people who are obviously intellilgent at the same time are so ignorant simply because they undermine the oldest language in the region Albanian.


Undermine ? How ? Not much is known about the actual origins of Albanian language. Although officially classified as Indo-European, it is obviously a creole with one or several other languages. I would make sense that this was the language spoken by the Neolithic E-V13, J2b and G2a population.




> you really need to correct what you write. There is nothing Pellasgian about what you call greeks, as greek is not an ethnic term but a religious term.


Greek is a religious term ? And what religion would that be ancient Greek polytheism or Greek Orthodox Christianity ? What about the Minoans ? Weren't they Greek at all ?




> Pellasgian means people of the land of water. 
> In Albanian: Pellg = body of water, 
> gia = land, thing, earth


So what ?




> you really need to understand history a little better and find out that it is precisely the albanians who are fully in sync with the results presented on this website as far as evolution of the balkans goes. You have no idea what greek is from what I can tell by reading your comments. Unless you call Albanians greeks, and that's a different story altogether. 
> Find out what greek means, and understand that the historical terms that you are using are highly inaccurate as portrayed in the past 2 centuries. I don't want to ruin the surprise and give it away.


It's funny to see that you think you know what "Greek" mean when your definition is narrower than Bill Clinton's definition of "sex".

----------


## Maciamo

> and the trojans dear friend were also pellasgians. the historical accounts support that fully. 
> Troy is also an Albanian word for which the modern word is TROJE, meaning "our land"


So you are basing your assertion simply on the presumed linguistic of the word Troy, which is, as you should know, a Greek word (Τροία), not a Trojan one.

The Trojans spoke Luwian, an Indo-European language closest to Hittite. The Hittite word for Troy is _Wilusa_.




> you really have no idea what ancient history really is do you?


Were you addressing yourself ?




> I will be more than happy to explain you a few things that will only make you understand even better the science that you are presenting through a historical and linguistics viewpoint that only supports what you are presenting, which you seem to have no idea about.


OK, go ahead. Let's have some fun.

----------


## Marianne

> and the trojans dear friend were also pellasgians. the historical accounts support that fully. 
> Troy is also an Albanian word for which the modern word is TROJE, meaning "our land" 
> 
> you really have no idea what ancient history really is do you? 
> You shouldn't write things you have no idea about for the sake of writing them dear friend. You might be thinking you are helping people understand, but while you are from a scientific point of view, historically you are bastardizing the facts simply because of your own ignorance to a language that perhaps you think is irrelevant. 
> 
> I will give you two quotes: 
> Ernst Maximilian Lambertz: "The world will not know its true history until Albanians participate in its writing" 
> 
> ...


(quote for both your posts)
Oh My God!

I would never expect to find in this forum the same Albanian Propaganda I read by all illiterate people of your nation again and again but I have to admit your posts make me (and everybody else with basic history knowledge) laugh. 

All I ready by people who share your points of view is how every word in the universe derives from an Albanian one and how all that we know in this life is a result of the Albanian ancient knowledge... Get serious...

Please, there is no one here you will be able to convince with your views simply because people who post in this forum are people with a certain level of knowledge about European (and not only) history. So keep your propaganda for forums where members didn't manage to finish elementary school and might actually "buy" it... :Laughing: 

I won't even bother to counterattack your views because there is no point convincing brainwashed people...

Maciamo no matter what you tell him he will have something to reply so your efforts to prove him that he is wrong will go wasted...

----------


## Nicolas Peucelle

Maciamo... you are THE Master..! Thank you for all these wonderful informations.

----------


## albanopolis

> ΟΥΚ ΕΣΤΕ ΑΛΗΘΕΣ, 
> that is not true and you know it since you are already more than a year in a forum. 
> besides since no link or a name of the writter means 'air talk'
> 
> 
> you just spread whatever.


Take a look at Wikipedia and then its up to you to believe or not the story.

----------


## Twilight

> I agree, Maciamo gets it right in terms of y dna composition of ancient cultures. The only thing I disagree is characterization of Pellasgians as Greeks. Greek historians wrote that, when they arrived in present day Greece they found another people inhabiting the area, namely Pellasgians. In their history books they write that 1500 years before Christ Pellasgians were still speaking their language and having separate villages from Greeks. Pellasgians also inhabited Albania before the Illyrians arrived, and Central and south Italy. In terms of Dna and physical look the pellasgians the closest ,who resembled them are present day Kosovo Albanians. I am not saying that Kosovan Albanians are Pellasgians since Kosovo Albanians have the Illyrian layer also. So, none of present day Ballkan people can not claim Pellasgians as their ancesters.


Interesting, I wonder what Prehistoric culture the Pellasgians belong too if discovered. :)




> eastern balkans in the home of the original thracians .....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odrysian_kingdom
> 
> the northern Thracians of Dacians and Getae seemed to have been slightly different.
> 
> eastern balkans is also part of the pontic race 
> 
> many thracians settled in Britain as part of the roman legions





> where Pellasgians the Dorian people, because that's what you are describing





> ?????
> 
> source of which ancient greek writer said the underline?





> The Dorians are invaders of Greece. The came from north it is said. They rampaged the old Greek civilization and later became part of it. Pellasgians predate Greeks. The were in Greek lands a lot earlier than the real Greeks( Hellens) Today's geeks are hardly Hellens.. Greeks invaded the lands were they reside today. Invasion a lot of times its done without war. North America is an example. At the beginning Europeans and American Indians were eating turkey together( We call it Thanksgiving nowadays) And then the soft invasion happened. Or in today's North America there is no war between Mexicans that are invading US and present population. But Mexican numbers in US are staggering. When the word cup in soccer happened this June Americans were stunned that Mexicans could be from many South American countries. Anyway, Pellasgians are the first inhabitants of South Europe. Later the Hellens came, Illyrians, Thracians and many others. This is recorded by Greek Historians 2000 yrs BC. After that they became part of invaders.





> Google " Pellasgians" in Greek language and you will find it. I have heard the story from Albanian TV. Today the name Larissa remains as a reminder of Pellasgian heritage. Larissa is not a Hellenic word. Lisus in Albania is another one. I am not a professional historian to exactly direct you to the source. But its recorded in ancient Greek history books.





> See Wikipedia! Type pellsgians!





> ΟΥΚ ΕΣΤΕ ΑΛΗΘΕΣ, 
> that is not true and you know it since you are already more than a year in a forum. 
> besides since no link or a name of the writter means 'air talk'
> 
> 
> you just spread whatever.





> Why can't you just look at Wikipedia under the title" Pelasgians".? There are so many ancient Greek authors mentioned about the topic. There are exact authors and their books to look at. Start with Homer at his book "Iliad". He is the first who mention them and the Illyrians. He is the first ancient historian that documents the existence of Illyrians. I am discouraged to read about the topic from the TV Program I was watching. They were basically saying that its unrealistic to say that ancestors of modern Albanians are the Pellasgians because Greeks can have the same claim and so Central and south Italy,


Whoa, did I just stir up something?  :Laughing:  Thanks btw

----------


## Yetos

> Take a look at Wikipedia and then its up to you to believe or not the story.


I wrote about pelasgians,
I am the one who brought discuss in forum about them,
I made your will about Pelasgians, searching wiki, upon which I send many disaml...
what are you are saying?

can you make it more easy?

----------


## Yetos

> The Dorians are invaders of Greece. The came from north it is said. They rampaged the old Greek civilization and later became part of it. Pellasgians predate Greeks. The were in Greek lands a lot earlier than the real Greeks( Hellens) Today's geeks are hardly Hellens.. Greeks invaded the lands were they reside today. Invasion a lot of times its done without war. North America is an example. At the beginning Europeans and American Indians were eating turkey together( We call it Thanksgiving nowadays) And then the soft invasion happened. Or in today's North America there is no war between Mexicans that are invading US and present population. But Mexican numbers in US are staggering. When the word cup in soccer happened this June Americans were stunned that Mexicans could be from many South American countries. Anyway, Pellasgians are the first inhabitants of South Europe. Later the Hellens came, Illyrians, Thracians and many others. This is recorded by Greek Historians 2000 yrs BC. After that they became part of invaders.


what are talking about?

----------


## Ike

> what are talking about?


He just hates being connected with Greeks so much, that he is using any possible means to construct a historic continuity with any Balkan people with confirmed non-Greek ethnicity.

----------


## Dianatomia

Given that Cyprus was colonized by Greeks in the Mycenean era and that Cyprus has higher rates of Balkanic EV-13 than R1b, it would be plausible to assume that Myceneans already had considerable Neolithic ancestry and were not predominantly R1b. 

In that case we have to distinguish between proto-Hellenes and Mycenean Greeks. The proto-Hellenes may well have been predominantly R1b as the author of this thread suggest. But they must have mixed with Neolithic farmers before the Mycenean era.

----------


## Twilight

It has come to my attention that ancient Greek historians have been claiming that the Ionians mixed with the Carians on several accounts and the Ionian town of *Phocaea migrated and had tradeing ports in Spain, France and Italy.* *
Source:* http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phocaea
http://www.palaeolexicon.com/Carian

----------


## Salmon

Actually, it's not likely Ancient Egyptians were E1b1b. E1b1b males are likely descended from African males that adapted to Eurasian invaders.

Agriculture, domestication of animals, and civilization coincide with the arrival of the K haplogroups. All of the civilized parts of Earth have y-chromosome haplogroups descended from K.

Chinese and Japanese are dominated by 0
Western Europe and MesoAmerica(Aztecs, Mayans, Incans) are dominated by Q and R which are products of P.


Somewhere in Asia haplogroup K domesticated wolves and goats. They starts domesticating plants and animals. They started branching off. They integrated I and J haplogroups in Scandinavia and the Middle East.

E1b1b is descended from an ancient male line related to Andaman Island natives, Japanese Ainu, and Australoids. They don't have y-chromosome mutations found in the IJK haplogroups. They split off a long time ago. There are no E haplotypes in the areas where agriculture was created or Eurasian animals were domesticated.

We can assume that E1b1b are male lines that adapted to Eurasian culture, survived the onslaught of Eurasian peoples and picked up their ways. They could be descended from males enslaved by J and R haplogroups that invaded North Africa or somehow got integrated. 

E1b1b is not dominant North Africa, just common. It's found in North Africa but between R, J, and other Eurasian haplogroups... they're in the minority towards Egypt and the Levant. The people who took civilization to North Africa couldn't have been E1b1b because they lack the y-chromosome mutations found deep in Asia and the DE haplogroups have mutations independent to them not found in the other big Eurasian haplogroups.

Also, the Africans mostly have L haplogrup mtdna. This means that very few Eurasian women settled in Africa. Alongside the L mtDNA you will find R, J, I haplogroups in considerable concentrations in North Africa. All this points to a massive Eurasian male invasion.

E1b1b male ancestors were likely survivors of Egyptians, not the Egyptians.

----------


## nr9

We need more ancient DNA samples. It's early to comment about ancient civilisations via haplogroups...

----------


## Tomenable

> The native Dravidians belonged to the indigenous South Asian haplogroups C5, F, H and L.


Where the Dravidians native, though? I've seen a theory that they could be descended from the Elamites of the Middle East.

In such case the natives would only be the Negrito tribes, today called Adivasi (they are about 8,6% of India's population).

----------


## Sile

> We need more ancient DNA samples. It's early to comment about ancient civilisations via haplogroups...


there are 98 ancient samples in europe, how many more do you need?

----------


## Fluffy

> there are 98 ancient samples in europe, how many more do you need?


I'm sorry, but 98 samples just doesn't cut it, we need at least 300 or more samples to get a better idea.

----------


## noUseForAname

[QUOTE=Maciamo;350063]Here is a summary of the current genetic knowledge regarding ancient ethnic groups. This is based on Y-chromosomal haplogroups only.





> *The ancient Slavs*
> 
> Present-day Slavs are descended from Bronze Age Steppe cultures descended from the Corded Ware culture (including the Catacomb and Srubna cultures), associated with the R1a-M458 and R1a-Z280 people, as well as the Neolithic population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (I2a1b-M423). Slavic Europeans belonged primarily to haplogroup R1a and I2. Southern Slavs descended from the Thracians, Dacians and Illyrians have a much higher proportion of I2a1b.
> 
> Eastern Europeans from the Danubian basin and the Balkans have also inherited a sizeable percentage of haplogroup E1b1b, G2a, J1, J2b and T from the expansion Neolithic farmers that started from northern Greece 7,000 years ago. These lineages survived at a higher frequency in non-Slavic populations of the Balkans, notably the Albanians, Romanians, Vlachs and Greeks.
> 
> *The Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians*
> 
> According to ancient sources, the Thracians were a fusion of Proto-Indo-European Steppe people with the Neolithic inhabitants of the Carpathians (Cucuteni-Trypillian culture). As such they probably belonged to R1a (about 30%), R1b (10%), I2a1b (25-30%), E-V13 (10-15%), G2a, J1, J2a, J2b, and T1a. The Dacians were closely related to the Thracians and would have carried a similar mixture of haplogroups. The Illyrians have more mysterious origins, but judging from the modern haplogroup frequencies in the Dinaric Alps, they surely were predominantly a blend of R1a and I2a1b.



Maciamo, if we are talking only based on dna, isn't that proto Slavs are majority R1a (60%) and instead of giving I2a as their second major group we should rather give it to R1b for the following reasons:

1: If the name slavs came only after the balto-slavic PEI (correct me if im wrong please) then its obvious that it came from corded ware (mostly R1a) and also a slight Yamna (R1b). Then is it logical to say that proto Slavs are today Belarus and west Russia?

2: Because we know were the approximate roots of !2a1 is (current Croatia, Bosnia, West Montenegro, South west Serbia) *before* Balto-Slavic PEI (3,400 ypb) they weren't even Slavic at any point?....rather they were predominantly I2a1 with slight E-V13 and others and obviously R1a by lowest at only 5%.

3: Isn't it obvious that proto slavs R1a came from the far north only after 3,000 ybp with balto-slavic PEI and spread PEI to those areas (described above) of I2a1?
Therefore by today language is from the roots of balto-slavic like serbo-croatian (900 ybp), even Slovak language (500 ybp) is of balto-slavic roots, therefore i am supposing that all this locations are not a descendants of proto slavs but they have adopted their language fully. Maybe because small numbers of Slavs from the very north R1a have fully colonized these areas around 1,500 ybp and therefore we have much lower R1a at current Bosnia, Croatia (especially south), west Montenegro and west Serbia.
Even Bulgarians have adopted balto-slavic language (pretty late) as Bulgarian is only 500 ybp, however Bulgarians are not proto Slavs but rather very ancient inhabitants (around the same current locations) with majority of !2a1 then following E-V13 and a bit of J1(before 1,500 ybp). and of course the *same inhabitants* should have had their own ancient language....
https://theoreticalecology.wordpress...nguage-family/


Therefore i give (suppose) the following major groups to proto Slavs: R1a (60%) with a possible slight R1b (10%)

----------


## Tomenable

> Because we know were the approximate roots of !2a1 is (current Croatia, Bosnia, West Montenegro, South west Serbia)


We actually don't know from which area did I2a-Din originate. Highest frequency today, does not equal the place of origin.

After all for example R1b did not originate in Ireland, did it ???

The distribution of I2a-Din looks like it could spread to the south, east and west from the Belarusian-Ukrainian borderland.

----------


## Hauteville

> We don't know from which area did I2a-Din originate.
> 
> Highest frequency does not equal the place of origin.
> 
> After all R1b did not originate in Ireland, did it ???


True, it's like the question of G2a.

----------


## noUseForAname

> We actually don't know from which area did I2a-Din originate. Highest frequency today, does not equal the place of origin.
> 
> After all for example R1b did not originate in Ireland, did it ???
> 
> The distribution of I2a-Din looks like it could spread to the south, east and west from the Belarusian-Ukrainian borderland.



Having that it mind than also it does not mean that just because those regions speak from the balo-slavic roots they are proto-slavic or even descent from slavs (because i have explained it above) thats why i suppose that slavs might had I2a but at much lower rate than R1b.


Of course not in Ireland, however if we keep going back then even R1a or all groups originated in Africa, therefore the key here is to find the migration timeframes.

This is what i don't have info with. If slavic name came only after PEI?
If so then we cannot claim that even before 3,4000 ybp R1a is a slavic, i was mostly talking in genetical meaning only and was not talking into account language nor culture nor religion. Therefore all those current Countries i listed above including Bulgaria are not slavic at all nor descend from slavs, they have just adopted slavic language fully.

----------


## LeBrok

> Of course not in Ireland, however if we keep going back then even R1a or all groups originated in Africa, therefore the key here is to find the migration timeframes.


Actually no, R1a and R1b, and most of other main haplogroups are 20 thousand years old. At this time all world, except America, was populated by people. There was one individual R1 found in Siberia, and was dated at 24 kya. This mean that R1a and b happened afterword.

----------


## arvistro

> Actually no, R1a and R1b, and most of other main haplogroups are 20 thousand years old. At this time all world, except America, was populated by people. There was one individual R1 found in Siberia, and was dated at 24 kya. This mean that R1a and b happened afterword.


Not necessarily.
If I find R1* today it does not mean R1a will only appear tomorrow.

----------


## LeBrok

> Not necessarily.
> If I find R1* today it does not mean R1a will only appear tomorrow.


 I said R1, not R1*. R1 existed before R1a and R1b.

----------


## arvistro

And as soon as first R1a born all R1 magically died?

----------


## Sile

> And as soon as first R1a born all R1 magically died?


no they are not dead, but the numbers are shrinking due to genetic scholars creating/finding more markers downstream and allocating these markers to either R1a or R1b or just R1 ( as both R1a&R1b have it )

----------


## noUseForAname

> Actually no, R1a and R1b, and most of other main haplogroups are 20 thousand years old. At this time all world, except America, was populated by people. There was one individual R1 found in Siberia, and was dated at 24 kya. This mean that R1a and b happened afterword.



I will have to reiterate again, if we go way back every single group is descend from Y chromosome with its homeland Africa

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...timeline.shtml

----------


## arvistro

> no they are not dead, but the numbers are shrinking due to genetic scholars creating/finding more markers downstream and allocating these markers to either R1a or R1b or just R1 ( as both R1a&R1b have it )


That is what I am saying.
If you find R1 20k years ago it does not necessarily mean that R1a and/or R1b came later.
First of all R1a son was born to one of many R1 dads. And he had some R1 brothers as well.
If you catch one of those R1 20,000 years later it does not prove that his bro or uncle was not R1a already. Or maybe R1a was born to another R1 1000 of miles away and few hundred years ago and you catch R1 extinct line.

----------


## Sile

> That is what I am saying.
> If you find R1 20k years ago it does not necessarily mean that R1a and/or R1b came later.
> First of all R1a son was born to one of many R1 dads. And he had some R1 brothers as well.
> If you catch one of those R1 20,000 years later it does not prove that his bro or uncle was not R1a already. Or maybe R1a was born to another R1 1000 of miles away and few hundred years ago and you catch R1 extinct line.


ok
but R1a and R1b came from R1 origins and whatever SNP's they share clearly shows this

Before R1 formed, it came from R....when R split, it split between R1 and R2 and later split between R1a and R1b

----------


## LeBrok

> I will have to reiterate again, if we go way back every single group is descend from Y chromosome with its homeland Africa
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...timeline.shtml


 Of course you will go back to Africa, but not with creation of R haplogroups. I don't mind if they happened in Africa, but they didn't. The Y chromosome mutated to the form that we describe as R1a or R1b somewhere in Asia, judging by genetic analyzes of ancient bones.

----------


## LeBrok

> And as soon as first R1a born all R1 magically died?


 Look at it this way. All R1b and R1a = R1 people, R1 still exists and has subgroups of R1a and R1b. However at about 20kya there was only R1, and it didn't develop any mutations for R1a or R1b yet, therefore these two happened after R1 came to existence. Other-words R1a and R1b are younger than R1, they are the kids of R1.




> First of all R1a son was born to one of many R1 dads


 Exactly. Who was first father or son? It is not chicken or egg game. ;)




> If you catch one of those R1 20,000 years later it does not prove that his bro or uncle was not R1a already.


 Technically the both are R1 at the base. But if this R1 comes from father R1a, then this R1 will be also R1a. Unless this R1 went through many genetic mutations to delete all genes/markers of his father's R1a. I'm not sure what would be the chance, one in a Zillion?

----------


## arvistro

You are still not getting it.
How do you know that 20k ago R1a was not developed yet for sure? 
Because you found R1 that has no known R1a or R1b mutations???

I can ask again. This time a bit different - R1a and R1b came from same R1, correct?
Were they born same date? If no, then surely R1 tribe who created his first child r1a/r1b was still there to create his second child AFTER first child was born already. And I can bet this AFTER did not happen same place and same century.

Which means that R1 and R1a could live on this planet simultaneously.

Think into it.

Also. Have they checked for ALL mutations on this Malta boy? Or just for all known? Or just for those they could?

Btw, Malta boy IS characterised as R1* not R1 as you tried to correct me...

I am not saying R1a WAS there 20k years ago, I am stating that in general finding one R1* 20k years ago is not an evidence for R1a age. Not in my court :)

----------


## Fire Haired14

MA1 is R*. And actually modern R2 and R1 share mutations MA1 lacks, and MA1 has mutations R1'2 lack.

Also, looking at human mtDNA and Y DNA we can see many many many many lineages died out. There were probably 100s of R1s who died out., The same is true for every mtDNA and Y DNA haplogroup. Even in recent times this has occurred. Look at modern European Y DNA. Of the millions of men who lived in Europe 6,000-5,000 years ago, just 3(R1b-L11, R1a-Z283, I1a-DF29) makeup over 50% of West and North European paternal lineages.

----------


## LeBrok

> You are still not getting it.
> How do you know that 20k ago R1a was not developed yet for sure? 
> Because you found R1 that has no known R1a or R1b mutations???


 Because we didn't find them, but found something else instead, like R* (thanks for correction). The estimated age of both is right there, so either only few people had it or it wasn't still there. My point was that R1 had to be before R1a, right? Father before son.




> I can ask again. This time a bit different - R1a and R1b came from same R1, correct?
> Were they born same date? If no, then surely R1 tribe who created his first child r1a/r1b was still there to create his second child AFTER first child was born already. And I can bet this AFTER did not happen same place and same century.


 They can be even separated by few thousand of years.




> Which means that R1 and R1a could live on this planet simultaneously.


 A father can live at the same time as a son. However I'm not familiar how many mutations separates these two, if many than the spread might be few generations.
Just keep in mind the evolutionary forcing in play. There were tough times, many bottle-neckings happened and founder effects. Now we are almost exclusively R1a and R1b, R* and R1* are gone or almost all gone. That's how it is.




> Think into it.
> 
> Also. Have they checked for ALL mutations on this Malta boy? Or just for all known? Or just for those they could?


 I'm not sure what mutations were checked. I would assume that R1a and b turned negative. Why don't you read and learn and inform us?




> Btw, Malta boy IS characterised as R1* not R1 as you tried to correct me...


 I was talking about hypothetical father of R1a and b. Mal'ta was R*, related more to R1 than to R1a or b.




> I am not saying R1a WAS there 20k years ago, I am stating that in general finding one R1* 20k years ago is not an evidence for R1a age. Not in my court :)


 It goes well with all we know about age of R1a and b. *The most important point is that it didn't turn contradictory to our understanding of haplotype age.
*

----------


## noUseForAname

> *Ancient Greeks*
> The *Pelasgians* (pre-Minoan Greeks, or Helladic Greeks) belonged to an admixture of I2, E1b1b, T and G2a. E-V13 and T probably arrived in Greece from the Levant (and ultimately from Egypt, hence the small percentage of T) in the early Neolithic, 8,500 years ago. G2a came from the Levant was picked up in Anatolia along the way by Levantine farmers and herders.


Wouldn't Pelasgians (pre ancient Greeks) have a majority of E-V13 following with slight I2 and G2a for the following reasons?

As per Homer they lived in south Greece and Peloponnese. (before minoans and ancient greeks)
South Greece and Peloponnese areas have especially highest % of E-V13 (even today).
E-V13 have roots at south Greece and Peloponnese since 8,000 ybp

if I2 is indigenous from around Carpathian mountains early as you mention, and it is known that Pelasgians were always at the very south Greece, if they have came from Carpathian's it would be less likely to spread there earlier than 3,000 ybp because as you mention I2 spread from Carpathian to Dalmatia 3,000 ybp, Pelasgians would have been at least since 5,000 ybp at the very south.

I2 already a majority in Carpathian's and probably around there since 5,000 it might less llikely to find home that fast because Pelasgians were probably already settled at south Greece/Peloponnese at least 5,000 ybp.

----------


## F117stealth

_"Slavic Europeans belonged primarily to haplogroup R1a and I2. Southern Slavs descended from the Thracians, Dacians and Illyrians have a much higher proportion of I2a1b."_

Was just curious to know why I2 might be slavic? Why do you think Neolithic population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian was slavic? From a genetic point of view is not the majority of the Y DNA haplogroup type that counts? I belive that I2 and R1a are quite distinct Y haplogroups and which one is the most representative for the two cultures?

----------


## Maciamo

> _"Slavic Europeans belonged primarily to haplogroup R1a and I2. Southern Slavs descended from the Thracians, Dacians and Illyrians have a much higher proportion of I2a1b."_
> 
> Was just curious to know why I2 might be slavic? Why do you think Neolithic population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian was slavic? From a genetic point of view is not the majority of the Y DNA haplogroup type that counts? I belive that I2 and R1a are quite distinct Y haplogroups and which one is the most representative for the two cultures?


I2a1b tribes in the Carpathian region were assimilated by R1a PIE in the Bronze Age. Keep in mind that the Proto-Slavs did not appear until 5th century CE, 3500 years after the onset of the Corded Ware culture. That gave plenty of time for I2a1b people to be assimilated and to spread alongside R1a people in several waves across Europe. Founder effects and dominant royal lineages later on are probably what caused the variations in haplogroup frequencies between R1a and I2a1b.

----------


## Maciamo

> Wouldn't Pelasgians (pre ancient Greeks) have a majority of E-V13 following with slight I2 and G2a for the following reasons?
> 
> As per Homer they lived in south Greece and Peloponnese. (before minoans and ancient greeks)
> South Greece and Peloponnese areas have especially highest % of E-V13 (even today).
> E-V13 have roots at south Greece and Peloponnese since 8,000 ybp
> 
> if I2 is indigenous from around Carpathian mountains early as you mention, and it is known that Pelasgians were always at the very south Greece, if they have came from Carpathian's it would be less likely to spread there earlier than 3,000 ybp because as you mention I2 spread from Carpathian to Dalmatia 3,000 ybp, Pelasgians would have been at least since 5,000 ybp at the very south.
> 
> I2 already a majority in Carpathian's and probably around there since 5,000 it might less llikely to find home that fast because Pelasgians were probably already settled at south Greece/Peloponnese at least 5,000 ybp.


You quoted a 6-year old post. Since then I have revised the origin of E-V13 are Mesolithic and originating in Mediterranean Europe (southern Italy or Greece) after E-M78 crossed over from North Africa during the Late Paleolithic. 

The Pelasgians came much later, but there were surely big regional variations in a country as parcelled and mountainous as Greece. So it is very possible that E-V13 was already higher in the Peloponnese in the Early Bronze Age, and that G2a and I2 were higher in the north.

----------


## Garrick

Pelasgians can be G2a carriers.

Researchers reconstructed language *Phaistos disk* as *Colchian Kartvelian/Caucasian*!

*Prof. Nana Shengelaila*

On Decipherment of the Phaistos Disk and Linear A Inscriptions in Colchian Language by Gia Kvashilava

http://www.academia.edu/2545249/Prof...Gia_Kvashilava

The overview of the data of the ancient population of the Peloponnese (Pelasgia), Asia Minor, Aegean islands before the Indo-European migrations show that indigenous inhabitants of this area were of non-Indo-European and non-Semitic origin. According to some researchers (P. Kretschmer, F. Schachermeyr, J. Chadwick, E. J. Furnée, Th. V. Gamkrelidze, V. V. Ivanov and others) they were Proto-Kartvelian tribes whose language formed an influential substratum for the Greek dialect after the invasion of the Greek tribes of the Peloponnese and Eagean islands.

*Besides, the analysis of archaeological, ethnological, historical, linguistic and biological material, the typological study of graphical qualities of Linear A granted well-grounded Linear A inscriptions in the Colchian** language.*

----------


## Maleth

> Pelasgians can be G2a carriers.
> 
> Researchers reconstructed language *Phaistos disk* as *Colchian Kartvelian/Caucasian*!
> 
> *Prof. Nana Shengelaila*
> 
> On Decipherment of the Phaistos Disk and Linear A Inscriptions in Colchian Language by Gia Kvashilava
> 
> http://www.academia.edu/2545249/Prof...Gia_Kvashilava
> ...


Thats a possible hypothesis too. Could they be related to the builders of Gobekli teppe? (in southern Modern Turkey) on the way to reach the Agean and also Sumer? (non semetic people surrounded by Semetic people) Maybe pushed down by the LGM? Both languages (Summerian and Karvelian) seem not to be related to either indo european or Semitic languages.

----------


## arvistro

One more indirect clue that Early Farmers spoke Caucasian-ish languages before Indo-Europeans arrived.
Maybe they should try to de-cypher Vinca by puting Caucasian linguists to work.

----------


## Maleth

> One more indirect clue that Early Farmers spoke Caucasian-ish languages before Indo-Europeans arrived.
> Maybe they should try to de-cypher Vinca by puting Caucasian linguists to work.


It is believed that the Starcevo Culture were the Vinca culture is thought to have stemmed from is also non Indoeuropean and probably not Semitic either, so a Caucasian-ish (as you put it) population could also quality. However Vinca Culture seems to differ from the more southern cultures, although if they have been separated by thousands of years and inhabiting different climate conditions it would be natural to adopt different ones. Not sure if one can fit the puzzle. G's are dominant in most Neolithic sites in Europe. 

Just from Memory I believe a boy buried close to Stonehenge (4400 BP) (which was built later) was a G too. A burial site was also found close by but I dont think any dna has been taken due to bones being cremated. 

The Neolithic temple bone remains in Malta (5600 BP) are not identified (were statues of women goddesses were found and also mentioned by Marija Gimbutas). 

Now we have Gobekteppi (8430BP) were so far no human remains were found but digging is still in progress. 

The three cultures have huge megaliths in common. Again they can be totally different people and cultures. But if we would be so lucky to have bones samples one can have a better picture to see from where they originate and if they are interconnected and maybe with later emerging sub cultures. They also seem to be connected to agriculture

----------


## Garrick

> One more indirect clue that Early Farmers spoke Caucasian-ish languages before Indo-Europeans arrived.
> Maybe they should try to de-cypher Vinca by puting Caucasian linguists to work.


It seems that Vinca culture (named after the village Vinca in Serbia near capital Belgrade) was built by early farmers *G2a and F* carriers and I2a carriers* who had transition from hunter gatherers to farmers. Maybe we can have elements of language of G2a carriers (Pre Proto Cartvelian language?) and language of I2a carriers. Some scientists think Vinca culture developed first letter.

 

"Some scholars believe that the *Vinča symbols represent the earliest form of writing ever found, predating ancient Egyptian and Sumerian writing by thousands of years*. Since the inscriptions are all short and appear on objects found in burial sites, and the *language represented is not known*, it is highly unlikely they will ever be deciphered."

http://www.omniglot.com/writing/vinca.htm

----------


## Maleth

> It seems that Vinca culture (named after the village Vinca in Serbia near capital Belgrade) was built by early farmers *G2a and F* carriers and I2a carriers* who had transition from hunter gatherers to farmers. Maybe we can have elements of language of G2a carriers (Pre Proto Cartvelian language?) and language of I2a carriers. Some scientists think Vinca culture developed first letter.
> 
>  
> 
> "Some scholars believe that the *Vinča symbols represent the earliest form of writing ever found, predating ancient Egyptian and Sumerian writing by thousands of years*. Since the inscriptions are all short and appear on objects found in burial sites, and the *language represented is not known*, it is highly unlikely they will ever be deciphered."
> 
> http://www.omniglot.com/writing/vinca.htm


However the Vinca symbols can only be termed as symbols and not alphabet as unfortunately it does not seem to have evolved into a uniformed kind of text or alphabet, unless some discoveries are made in the future.

----------


## F117stealth

Sure. 
I was strictly referring to genetic print (Y DNA of ancient civilizations). Current population of carphatian basin is far from being a R1a majority, as well as balkanic one. Who assimilated who? I was not thinking at the linguistic, cultural or whatever else type of human community intermingling, influence & transformation.

_"P__resent-day Slavs are descended from Bronze Age Steppe cultures descended from the Corded Ware culture (including the Catacomb and Srubna cultures), associated with the_ _R1a-M458 and R1a-Z280__ people, as well as the Neolithic population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (__I2a1b-M423__)."_ 

Just thinking - if a certian population with a certain Y dominant haplogroup (corded ware culture - R1a, for instance) influences or culturally dominates & conquers another population (Cucuteni-Trypillian - I2a, for instance) and slavic Y genetic core is believed to be closer to R1a then it is difficult to assume (even after ~3700 years of cultural mixture) that Y slavs are genetically descendents of both cultures. Y I2a Cucuteni-Trypillian got influenced and probably survived through the more developed cultures of bronze age, iron age, during and after slavic expansion. 


Continuity theory perhaps that should be also considered here.

----------


## EAB

This is a great topic and it is really interesting as it raised a sore point with many cultures, but especially sensitive Greeks. We have things like "my ancestors weren't black" and comments like "you're saying someone was there before the Greeks?". It seems in almost every culture, regardless of where they go, someone has always been there first. Yet there are many founding stories of nonsense which say something like "no one else was there first". Of course this is down to the claim to land, but we live on a globe where people are often wondering. A typical example is trying to apply European concept borders to the middle east when the Bedouin don't consider themselves part of a geographical nation. Some Bedouin are trapped in Israel and Kuwait with no official paperwork from this decision to apply borders to areas where people were wondering. The whole point about Greece is that it set up city states that sidelined those who didn't live in the cities and had a competitive advantage over those who didn't work together. It is almost unthinkable there wouldn't be people who appeared to be black back then within the city states of Greece. In my village in England a skull was found from 1000 years ago that was proven to be of an African girl who must have drowned in a river. Does that mean I am black? No, but it isn't unfair to say black people lived in England thousands of years ago. Then we have someone saying that culture must have spread with K haplogroups because perhaps K haplogroups first domesticated the dog. There are Baboons that have dogs as pets, and someone wants me to believe any one haplogroup domesticated the dog? Whilst the majority of Greeks were probably not black, the racial boundaries back then were probably not pure. I wouldn't be surprised at all if people by modern standards would be called black in Europe existed in Europe. Greek culture was not a race, but more like America or the European Union is today, where people of all histories are expected to work together towards a united goal. Whether they do or not is another story.

----------


## RobertColumbia

> MA1 is R*. And actually modern R2 and R1 share mutations MA1 lacks, and MA1 has mutations R1'2 lack....


If MA1 has a mutation that neither R1 nor R2 has, is that enough to say that MA1 could be described as "R3"?

----------


## SoberBalkanite

Marriane and Maciamo, 

As an ethnic Albanian, I certainly am interested in revealing more about the ancient origins of Albanians and ancient peoples and cultures ( all of them) but I feel a need to say that I certainly do not share the presentation style of the user called RealIllyrian ( e.g. addressing anyone with words like: "_ you really have no idea what ancient history really is do you? 
You shouldn't write things you have no idea_..." and the like is something I find really inappropriate for any mature conversation, nor do I uphold some of his views on connection between Albanian and some ancient cultures (e.g. the connection between Pellasgians, Trojans and Albanians needs some more scientific evidence). Luckily, no seriously educated or simply sober Albanian would uphold the presentation style and some historical vies presented by our learned colleague called Real Illyrian, with all due respect I have for him ( or anyone else here as a person).

Now, going back to my original inquiry- revealing more about the connection between modern Albanians and ancient peoples (including Illyrians, Trhacians etc.).

1. Generally, there are a few theories regarding the origin of Albanians, including the two that address their conection with ancient Illyrians, Thracians and /or Daco-Mysians.
The Illyrian connection is supported by ancient Greek and Roman sources that locate Illyrians in the territory of modern day Albanian, with their capital at modern day Shkodra ( ancient Scodra). Some other pro-Illyrian argument include the fact that there is no arrival of Albanians into Albania recorded anywhere in historical sources, certain decorative concentric circles and zig-zag patterns found in both Illyrian remains and traditional Albanian clothing, certain illyrian vocabulary that happens to math Albanian words (Illyrian-Albanian: Andizetes-Andja, Bardhylis-Bardhyl, Bindo-Bind,Daesitiates-Dash, Delmatae-Delme, Hyllus-Hyll, Rinos-Re, Sika-thika, Teutana-tetane, Thanae-Zana, Vendo-Vend, etc.) but onomastics and ethnolinguistics in this area certainl need to be studied in much more detail and cautiously. The counter-Illyrian arguments inlcude the proposal of some linguists that Illyrian language was Centum, while Albanian is Satem (although athors like Noel Malcolm asserts that we actually do not know for certain if Illyrian was Centum, and if Messapic was Illylrian language at all). 

The more recent counter-Illyrian argument is found in the DNA results, where it is supposed that the Illyrians were mainly R1a and I2a1b, while majority of Albanians are E1b1b/E-V13, just like some Pelasgians and Etruscans (as indicated in your post above). However, as no ethnicity is "pure", so to speak, nor has it ever been ( as haplogroups came before any ethnicites or nations were created), it is likely that even these ancient peoples we are taling about ( Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians etc) were a certain haplogourp mixture.

In that sense I have several questions:

1. How did we arrive at the conclusion that anciant Illyrians were mainly R1a and I2a1b? (what was the sample and the variables, not only for Illyrians for these haplogroup results)?

2. Is it possible that Ilylrians too had some E1b1b/E-V13, and to what extent?

3.Do the haplotype results suggest that Albanians existed in the Balkans at the same time as Illyrians ( or even before the Illrians were formed), what ancient people were they, and could they have mixed to some extent with Illyrians?

4. If we refute the pro-Illyrian tehory of the origin of Albanians, ad take the Thracian or Daco-Mysian one insted, we know that the Daco-Mysian territory corresponds to a large extend with modern Romania and the Vlach people in general. However, the controversy here is that while the Daco-Mysian proponents of Albanian oprigin see Vlachs as the ancestors of modern Albanians, the DNA shows that the Vlachs have dominantly the I2a1b haplotype, not the E-V13, like the majority of Albanians? What is the way to come around this little puzzle?

Best Regards

SoberBalkanite

----------


## SoberBalkanite

I just remembered one more question:

what was the dominant haplogroup among early Indo-Europen setlers?

----------


## Trojet

> 1. How did we arrive at the conclusion that anciant Illyrians were mainly R1a and I2a1b? (what was the sample and the variables, not only for Illyrians for these haplogroup results)?
> 
> 2. Is it possible that Ilylrians too had some E1b1b/E-V13, and to what extent?
> 
> 3.Do the haplotype results suggest that Albanians existed in the Balkans at the same time as Illyrians ( or even before the Illrians were formed), what ancient people were they, and could they have mixed to some extent with Illyrians?
> 
> 4. If we refute the pro-Illyrian tehory of the origin of Albanians, ad take the Thracian or Daco-Mysian one insted, we know that the Daco-Mysian territory corresponds to a large extend with modern Romania and the Vlach people in general. However, the controversy here is that while the Daco-Mysian proponents of Albanian oprigin see Vlachs as the ancestors of modern Albanians, the DNA shows that the Vlachs have dominantly the I2a1b haplotype, not the E-V13, like the majority of Albanians? What is the way to come around this little puzzle?
> 
> Best Regards
> ...


1. Nobody knows for sure what Y-DNA Illyrians carried. R1a and I2a1 would be the least likeliest, since they are not considered Balkan haplogroups and are associated with the Slavic nations. Although some subclades could've been in the Balkans at the time of Illyrians. Adding to that, I2a1 is the least diverse haplogroup in the Balkans, which would suggest a recent "founder effect". I would expect Maciamo has changed his views on this, since he proposed this theory 6 years ago based on present Y-DNA distribution.

2. I expect E-V13 would have been the dominant haplogroup among the Illyrians.

3. Yes. Haplogroup diversity among 3 main Albanian haplogroups (E-V13, R1b Balkan, J2b2) suggests that the ancestors of Albanians have been in the Balkans since even before the Illyrians appeared.

4. The likeliest Y-DNA for Illyrians would be the Balkan haplogroups, such as E-V13, R1b Balkan Cluster, J2b2, and probably some others in smaller percentages. *Of course this is all speculation too but indeed the likeliest. We need ancient DNA from the time of Illyrians or prior to them appearing in the Balkans to know for sure, which we lack.*

----------


## Tomenable

Wrong thread, sorry!

----------


## Sile

> 1. Nobody knows for sure what Y-DNA Illyrians carried. R1a and I2a1 would be the least likeliest, since they are not considered Balkan haplogroups and are associated with the Slavic nations. Although some subclades could've been in the Balkans at the time of Illyrians. Adding to that, I2a1 is the least diverse haplogroup in the Balkans, which would suggest a recent "founder effect". I would expect Maciamo has changed his views on this, since he proposed this theory 6 years ago based on present Y-DNA distribution.
> 
> 2. I expect E-V13 would have been the dominant haplogroup among the Illyrians.
> 
> 3. Yes. Haplogroup diversity among 3 main Albanian haplogroups (E-V13, R1b Balkan, J2b2) suggests that the ancestors of Albanians have been in the Balkans since even before the Illyrians appeared.
> 
> 4. The likeliest Y-DNA for Illyrians would be the Balkan haplogroups, such as E-V13, R1b Balkan Cluster, J2b2, and probably some others in smaller percentages. *Of course this is all speculation too but indeed the likeliest. We need ancient DNA from the time of Illyrians or prior to them appearing in the Balkans to know for sure, which we lack.*


Proto-illyrian is vudecol culture as stated by many papers 

the only Illyrian tribes in vudecol area which covers from ancient pannonia to central bosnia is from 3 main illyrian tribes
1 - Delmatae ...........initially in pannonia and finished on the modern dalmatian coast
2- the Japodes from border of modern croatia and bosnia
3- the Autariates from border of modern serbia, hungaria and croatia

rootsi claims the following percent if you combine the 3 main tribes in the area
using the same markers as 2004
I1b-P37 = 26%
R1b-M137 = 23%
R1a = 29%
E- M78 = 8%
J2 - M172 = 11%
G2 = 3%
clearly saying that the illyrians did not appear prior to the late bronze age

it was confirmed in a lecture in the americas by Sujoldzic in 2007

----------


## Ike

That's logical. If Illyrians did really came from the north into Balkans, there was sure less than J+G+E<20%.

----------


## mr_y82

> It's funny to see that you think you know what "Greek" mean when your definition is narrower than Bill Clinton's definition of "sex".


Haha, still reading, but that was good... and I am subscribing.

edit: finished it all... except some of the back and forth about Greece/Macedonia... If I want to read wikipedia (or what have you) I will visit the site, haha.

EDIT




> James Carville


Found! "Old Man of La Chapelle"

Attachment 7662

----------


## Piro Ilir

> By definition, the Pelasgians are the autochthonous (native) inhabitants of Mesolithic Greece. They did not speak Greek, but their language _may_ have contributed to a few loan words in ancient Greek.
> 
> 
> 
> You are talking about the modern definition of "Greek" as related to the Greek nation. I don't see how this relates to genetic studies on ancient populations. For example, the modern country of Iran is not composed entirely of people descended from Iranian-speaking tribes - far from it. The same is true for Greece. Modern Greece is a melting pot. The Pelasgians were first there (probably haplogroup I2), then came early farmers from the Near East (E1b1b and J2), herders from the Caucasus and Anatolia (G2), then the Mycenaeans (I would think R1a), the Dorians (possibly R1b) and others. 
> 
> Ancient Greek language and religion is surely an admixture of all this, although the Indo-European component is stronger than the rest. I suppose that this is because the Mycenaeans and Dorians were the last invaders, whose language and culture eventually stuck, after some adaptation to local idiosyncrasies.
> 
> 
> ...


As I see sir, you are well informed about DNA studies and have a lot of information. Anyway, you should not introduce yourself into linguistics. Saying that Albanian language it's a Creole, it's completely inaccurate. Where did you had read such a thing. Who is this scholar/ linguist/ historian, who is supporting your claim!!!! Could you post anything? 

I think you should stay focused into genetics, as long as you are trained in that well better than in other fields. 

According to every serious scholar, the Creole theory about Albanian, it's rejected, since a long time from now. 

I have a few questions: 
Why the Croats and the bosniaks have more~ I2 than the rest of the Slavic nations, such as Ukrainians and Polish?

----------


## Piro Ilir

> But I do not understand how it is possible that the Indo-Europeans who moved to West-
> Europe, had mongoloid traits. So northwest Europeans also have mongoloid ancestors?


The earlier IE people had probably strong mongoloid traits. Much more than they have now. This is my humble opinion.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> But you do not see any mongoloid traits with the Netherlands and
> Danes. I suppose that they are the purest nordic and falish people.
> Really germanic.


If that's true, the Danes and the Dutch are less IE, or are inheriting less old IE genes.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I still have difficulties to accept mongoloid traits in real nordic and Germanic
> people. I suppose that you find these traits only in the Russians.
> I should like to see such mongoloid slits in Swedes or Dutch.


The IE tribes were much more superior than the indigenous people of europe. They wiped out the grand part of them. Seems they took their women and killed and enslaved the males. Thanks to this mixing we don't have today a large mongoloid trait on the IE people.

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

> As I see sir, you are well informed about DNA studies and have a lot of information. Anyway, you should not introduce yourself into linguistics. Saying that Albanian language it's a Creole, it's completely inaccurate. Where did you had read such a thing. Who is this scholar/ linguist/ historian, who is supporting your claim!!!! Could you post anything? 
> 
> I think you should stay focused into genetics, as long as you are trained in that well better than in other fields. 
> 
> According to every serious scholar, the Creole theory about Albanian, it's rejected, since a long time from now. 
> 
> I have a few questions: 
> Why the Croats and the bosniaks have more~ I2 than the rest of the Slavic nations, such as Ukrainians and Polish?


You quoted a post from 2009. That being said, you are right. English is more likely a creole and although it isn't generally accepted there are scientists who have supported that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle...ole_hypothesis

Also, Celtic languages are very atypical. VSO word order (like Afro-Asiatic), two genders (in insular Celtic only supposedly), inflected prepositions (like Semetic) etc., they lack a simple verb for the imperfect' have' process ('There is a cat to me' instead of 'I have a cat', like Hungarian "nekem van" = to me there is)

He also has said that "Latin and Greek are probably hybrid languages".

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Do you really believe that you are being serious right now?!
> Your country's propaganda doesn't fit in a forum where people have common sense.
> 
> As for the black Greeks etc and Greeks not being the same as in the past, DNA studies in skeletons found from Ancient Greece reveal that Greeks have the same DNA since 5000 years now, with 99.5% of it being European. Now if you want to ***** with false data go some place else and continue your propaganda.
> 
> I don't know why you slavs are trying so hard to convince other people that you come from ancient Greeks but it would be better to embrace your true identity. After all with the way you act you are being racists against your true nature.
> 
> PS Us Greeks are so black I don't really know how we got accepted to the EU... :
> 
> ...


99.5% !!!!!!!!! Where did you get that! !! It's a bit hazardous claiming that. It looks like nationalist Greek propaganda

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Marianne, 99.5% ??? I remember one time you posted that populations in villages are more ancient and considered original, than Greeks in cities, where many are darker skin and brown eye and immigrated from other places.
> So what if today's Greeks were different than ancient inhabitants. You wouldn't deserve a place to live?
> 
> You Slavs? Sorry Marian but this sounds very chauvinistic. 
> Being on sides of discussions of Greeks, Macedonians, Turks and Balkans in general, I can acknowledge that all of the parties use propaganda in their claims to territories or from what great cultures and warriors they are coming from. I'm sure it's cultural and these are the effects of years of listening to your governments propaganda in schools. I know what I'm talking about I experienced this in my country. Short exercise: make a survey who's countries soldiers were the bravest of all in WW2. You'll get as many answers as nationalities, and all will have stories and arguments to support it. Except French maybe, lol.
> Are they all right? Can't be! 
> That's an eye opener how wrong we all could be, even though we swear we are right!
> 
> Unbelievable is that people from same regions, almost brothers and sisters, hate each others so much, can't find a common ground, can't except one another and their point of view.


https://youtu.be/c0mMTwLn3mA


The number 99.5% that it's mentioned in the post above shows the true face of Balkanic nationalism. How may it be 99.5% , in a time when during nineteenth century, the grand part of modern Greece territory was inhabited by ethnic Slavs, Vlachs and Albanians, not mentioning here whether the Turks and the gypsies. A grand part of modern Greece population are descendants of the migrants from West Anatolia, that came due to the exchange population between Turkey and Greece.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Yeah I said of course that people in the villages are not mixed but I didn’t mean the others were mixed recently or much. I meant since ancient years the mixing in these areas has been more than in the isolated parts of Greece. They are darker than the rest but that doesn't mean they are dark. They are clearly Europeans and above all Greeks.
> 
> Yes according to surveys, Greeks have one of the smallest % of Sub-Saharan DNA. 
> For example
> 
> 
> I didn't say that. The problem is a different one and you can't understand it fully because you have never come to the situation us Greeks are in.
> 
> Our civilization, whether this is good or bad, has a huge history, since ancient times. Our ancestors, Plato, Archimedes, Socrates, etc are known worldwide, and our contribution to the Western World has been huge for example the Battle in Marathon, Thermopylae, Democracy etc. For reasons that serve certain political plans, certain groups of people are trying, with their propaganda, to separate us from our ancestors, our history and our civilization. This is insulting to Greeks and believe it or not, it hurts. We have been the same since ancient times. The way we look, the way we speak, certain expressions we use, the way we live, have all been the same since 3000BC. And some people who have no idea about our nation are trying to prove to us that we are not who we are. 
> ...


Are you saying that the Greeks are a superior race/ ethnicity! !!!!!

There are now historical rights. The term~ historical right~ means nationalism. Nationalism it's the doctrine of the evil, and as such, it should be wiped out. Modern Greeks has nothing to do with the ancient people of Balkans. Claiming historical rights over them, it's just disgusting nationalism.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Marianne, I understand your points, and your feelings. I'm from Poland, which has complicated history with neighbors too. Did you know what we fought Ottoman Empire too? And Tatars, and Germans, and Russians and Ukrainians, and Swedes, and Lithuanians, and Austrians, and Czechs, I'm sure I missed quite few, and there had domestic wars too. We lost independence for hundreds of years too. We have grivances with neighbours, family stories, and our borders were moved big time back and forth. If I want to dwell on stories and horrors of previous years, I can sit round and indulge the pain, the pain, and more pain. At the end I would hate my all neighbours. 
> Well I moved forward instead. I have German friends, Russians, Belorussians, Ukrainians, you name them.
> The problem is the historic heavy balance of wars and crimes. The solution should be finding a common ground, make few compromises, and move forward with your new friends building a great Europe.
> I'm sorry Marianne, but you don't bring solutions to the table. You are just acting like your neighbours want to kill you and take Greece away. Not sure what you are waiting for? Next war? I guess, making friends takes much more effort and compromises than sitting around hating neighbors.


Great post LeBrok.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I don't hate my neighbors. 
> 
> I posted where Greece is 5 posts above and then some ethnic FYROMian started posting his propaganda, saying that Greeks are Blacks, Asians etc (I'm surprised he didn't call us Amerindians). What should I do? Not reply? I think my reaction was very civilized. He continued posting his propaganda and I just ignored him. 
> 
> I have nothing against my neighbors. I had classmates who were immigrants from Albania, last year I had 1 Turkish student and 2 Bulgarians. The problem is that certain people filled with their country's propaganda attack my country and therefore myself. You must have noticed that I have never started such a conversation in this forum without being provoked first. 
> If I hated my neighbors and wanted to provoke them I would have asked Maciamo for example to edit all posts with the word Macedonia and rename it to FYROM since that is the official name for the moment, or to remove Turkey from the European maps etc. I'm not irrational though and I don't bring up such matters, unless I am provoked.
> 
> Your old neighbors for sure aren't as propagandistic as mine. They are civilized people who are more or less rational and believe in cooperation between countries. In this forum I was able to have a decent debate with only one Turk and zero people from FYROM...
> 
> I believe in friendship between countries too, I watch Turkish series on tv, I vote for the Albanian song in Eurovision () and I am very open to conversations with people who are willing to have a decent chat with me. But friendship includes both sides willing to cooperate. In the Macedonia issue Greece has proposed several names that could please both countries, like Nova Macedonia or North Macedonia etc which don't cancel the right of the rest of Macedonians to be called like that. But they just don't want to cooperate unless the name is Macedonia, or Republic of Macedonia. We are way more rational than them. You should refer to them about being rational and cooperating with your neighbors.


If you want to have normal relationship with your neighbors, just start with calling your northern neighbor, with its true name~ Macedonia~ and not otherwise.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> The problem with all newly created nations is their megalomania as a a response to a lack of self confidence. So, the Slavs in region of Macedonia usurping the name of antic Macedonia, Muslim Bosniacs usurping name of medieval Bosnian state, Albanians usurping the name of Illyrians and so on. But I find also quite intriguing way the modern Greeks find themselves as direct descendants of ancient Greeks, especially if we talk about Hellenic civilization. I really can not see that direct line which conects Platon with sirtaki and giros. But maybe it is just lack of imagination.


Could you please be correct: Albanians don't call themselves Illyrians and their own country Illyria. Instead they call themselves Shqipetar, and their homeland Shqiperi. The foreigners (including the Greeks) calls them with the name~ Albanian~ ,which is indeed one of the ancient Illyrian tribes of the Roman prefecture of Illyricum.

----------


## Angela

> The IE tribes were much more superior than the indigenous people of europe. They wiped out the grand part of them. Seems they took their women and killed and enslaved the males. Thanks to this mixing we don't have today a large mongoloid trait on the IE people.


Where do you find empirical support for that? The steppe people were stone age fisher/hunter foragers until they adopted the advancements of the settled communities that surrounded them. They imported domestic animals and how to raise them from the Balkan "Old Europe" cultures and perhaps from south of the Caucasus and/or from Central Asia agriculturalists with an 
"Iranian Neolithic" form of the Neolithic. Their knowledge of agriculture and crops was scanty, but what they had in isolated places came from the same "Old Europe". The wheel and carts are first attested in TRB in Europe or in Anatolia. Even war carts came from the latter. We have very early war carts, pulled by oxen, in Anatolia. Copper metallurgy came from the Balkans, bronze from Maykop from what we know from the most recent papers.

We've discussed all of this, with citations to the appropriate papers, in many threads here. You can check it out for yourself.

I used to think that, in addition to a more war like mentality, their contribution to the final "Indo-European" package was the domestication of the horse, the use of the horse to pull wagons, and the development of the spoked wheel and war chariots. 

Well, that's true during a much later period, around 2000 BC, the time of Sintashta. It's not quite true of the migrations into Europe a thousand and more years earlier. There's very few horses found among Corded Ware remains, and not all that many carts either, so most of them must have come by foot. The carts they did use must, in large measure, have been pulled by oxen. There's extremely little bronze in early Corded Ware sites as well. That came much later. 
They did have copper, but not in huge amounts, from what I remember. 

The other side of the coin is that cultures like Baden and Remedello already had many of the hall marks of what we think of as "Indo-European" culture (not bronze, though), and no steppe admixture. The fact is that this period of West Eurasian history was a time of great flux, with new discoveries traveling very quickly along trade routes. Not all the advancements came to every single area with a large influx of people, nor did the advancements all necessarily come from the same direction. The models pushed over the years were much too simplistic, as I was saying five years ago on dna forums. 

That isn't to say that there wasn't a large influx of broadly "steppe" and "forest steppe" peoples into central Europe, because there was such an influx. However, it wasn't by horse riding, bronze sword wielding versions of Arnold Schwartzenegger. Not in those early periods, anyway. Central Europe had experienced repeated population crashes brought on by climate change and the unsuitability of their crops and agricultural technology to those changes. The incoming population also harbored the plague, to which these MN people would have been less immune. It was a perfect storm. The influx was particularly strong in the north east because those areas were sparsely populated, and many of them were still no doubt living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle, so for them the steppe people definitely introduced a very different lifestyle. It remains to be seen if they had such a large impact in southern Europe. 

It's true that even if the central European MN populations were much reduced, the fact that their mtDna survived more than their yDna indicates that more of the females were incorporated than the males, who must have either been killed or at least suffered a disadvantage in the breeding pool. This is hardly unusual, however, or specific to them, much as I may deplore it. This is the pattern in all of human history.

----------


## Angela

@Piro Ilir

This is not the thread for a discussion of inter-Balkan conflicts. LeBrok created a thread for that nonsense. 

If you have to pursue this hyper-nationalistic craziness, do it there.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> You quoted a post from 2009. That being said, you are right. English is more likely a creole and although it isn't generally accepted there are scientists who have supported that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle...ole_hypothesis
> 
> Also, Celtic languages are very atypical. VSO word order (like Afro-Asiatic), two genders (in insular Celtic only supposedly), inflected prepositions (like Semetic) etc., they lack a simple verb for the imperfect' have' process ('There is a cat to me' instead of 'I have a cat', like Hungarian "nekem van" = to me there is)
> 
> He also has said that "Latin and Greek are probably hybrid languages".


What you write about Celtic, seems interesting. Thank you. However, it doesn't mean that Celtic ain't an IE language. Every IE language have some other language features within. 

Although, why you saying that Greek and Latin are hybrid languages?

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Where do you find empirical support for that? The steppe people were stone age fisher/hunter foragers until they adopted the advancements of the settled communities that surrounded them. They imported domestic animals and how to raise them from the Balkan "Old Europe" cultures and perhaps from south of the Caucasus and/or from Central Asia agriculturalists with an 
> "Iranian Neolithic" form of the Neolithic. Their knowledge of agriculture and crops was scanty, but what they had in isolated places came from the same "Old Europe". The wheel and carts are first attested in TRB in Europe or in Anatolia. Even war carts came from the latter. We have very early war carts, pulled by oxen, in Anatolia. Copper metallurgy came from the Balkans, bronze from Maykop from what we know from the most recent papers.
> 
> We've discussed all of this, with citations to the appropriate papers, in many threads here. You can check it out for yourself.
> 
> I used to think that, in addition to a more war like mentality, their contribution to the final "Indo-European" package was the domestication of the horse, the use of the horse to pull wagons, and the development of the spoked wheel and war chariots. 
> 
> Well, that's true during a much later period, around 2000 BC, the time of Sintashta. It's not quite true of the migrations into Europe a thousand and more years earlier. There's very few horses found among Corded Ware remains, and not all that many carts either, so most of them must have come by foot. The carts they did use must, in large measure, have been pulled by oxen. There's extremely little bronze in early Corded Ware sites as well. That came much later. 
> They did have copper, but not in huge amounts, from what I remember. 
> ...


1- thank you for your explanation on this matter. 

2- anyway, I want to make clear what was my point of view. Considering the large number of R1a and the R1b throughout the Europe, especially in Germanics descendants and Slavic descendants, we should assume that the horse riders (IE people) were superior and they submitted the local people of Europe. One of the archeological proves for this it's recorded in south Greece in archeological sites. Around 2200-2000 bce the native people were conquered by a superior force. The destruction of settlements show this IE invasion. These superior people were carriers of R1. They step by step invaded the whole Europe and almost wiped out the local natives. But they took their women and mingled with them. That's why we have not too much mongoloid traits at the IE people. Please don't underestimate the importance of the horse in wars. 

3- As far as I know, the metallurgy it's linked to the IE people. If we combine both, metallurgy and horse, what you need more! 

4 - I heard for an afro/ Asiatic influence until the modern Germany prior the IE expansion.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> @Piro Ilir
> 
> This is not the thread for a discussion of inter-Balkan conflicts. LeBrok created a thread for that nonsense. 
> 
> If you have to pursue this hyper-nationalistic craziness, do it there.


Yes, I know. Could you please quote any of my posts where I did such a thing, pursuing the hiper nationalistic agendas? I would apologize to the forum. Instead I just replied to a post, which in my opinion was completely nonsense. Claiming that modern Greeks are 99.5 % descendants of ancient Hellenes, is the most nationalistic stuff I have ever heard in a forum, I mean in a serious one. That's all. 

Anyway, I made a question in one of my posts about the haplogroup I2. I2 it's too present in modern population of Croats and Bosniaks. Why I2 it's higher in those above mentioned nations, and much more less in other descendants of Slavs in central and east europe? 

Nice day"

----------


## MaxCRO

> Anyway, I made a question in one of my posts about the haplogroup I2. I2 it's too present in modern population of Croats and Bosniaks. Why I2 it's higher in those above mentioned nations, and much more less in other descendants of Slavs in central and east europe? 
> 
> Nice day"


I2 could be higher among Croats and Bosniaks due to founder effect. It's STR diversitiy is astoundingly low. Highest diversity is concentrated around Carpathian mountain range.

Depends what you consider much more less. In Ukraine and Belarus I2 is second dominant HG. Epicentre seem to be around Moldova and Zakarpatje regions.

R1b absolutely dominates Iberian and Britanic population yet it's origin is from steppes of Central Asia, where modern frequencies are minimal.

It's quite easy to understand the pattern.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I2 could be higher among Croats and Bosniaks due to founder effect. It's STR diversitiy is astoundingly low. Highest diversity is concentrated around Carpathian mountain range.
> 
> Depends what you consider much more less. In Ukraine and Belarus I2 is second dominant HG. Epicentre seem to be around Moldova and Zakarpatje regions.
> 
> R1b absolutely dominates Iberian and Britanic population yet it's origin is from steppes of Central Asia, where modern frequencies are minimal.
> 
> It's quite easy to understand the pattern.


Thanks for your response. 

1- I2 it's the largest HG in modern Croats and Bosniaks, as far as I know. The second it's R1a. They are I2/R1a. The Ukrainians have more R1a than the Croats/ Bosniaks, and they have the largest concentration of R1a. 

2- what's your explanation about the higher presence in Croats/ Bosniaks of I2 ? 

3- I have read that the ancient Scythii were R1a, and the later Sarmatians were G2/R1a. Although, the HG G2 was more present. The sarmatians were divided into two groups, one being the ruler class and the other (Limigantes) being the servers or the low class. It would be interesting knowing from what ancient bones the y- dna it's extracted. Another thing: until now in ancient skythian/ Sarmatian remains it's not found yet the HG I2, only one J1 and one J2a. 
.................................................. ..........

I am trying to understand something about genetics, because I am ignorant on this matter.

----------


## Angela

> 1- thank you for your explanation on this matter. 
> 
> 2- anyway, I want to make clear what was my point of view. Considering the large number of R1a and the R1b throughout the Europe, especially in Germanics descendants and Slavic descendants, we should assume that the horse riders (IE people) were superior and they submitted the local people of Europe. One of the archeological proves for this it's recorded in south Greece in archeological sites. Around 2200-2000 bce the native people were conquered by a superior force. The destruction of settlements show this IE invasion. These superior people were carriers of R1. They step by step invaded the whole Europe and almost wiped out the local natives. But they took their women and mingled with them. That's why we have not too much mongoloid traits at the IE people. Please don't underestimate the importance of the horse in wars. 
> 
> 3- As far as I know, the metallurgy it's linked to the IE people. If we combine both, metallurgy and horse, what you need more! 
> 
> 4 - I heard for an afro/ Asiatic influence until the modern Germany prior the IE expansion.


No one is underestimating the importance of the horse in wars. The problem for your theory is that more recent research shows that the "Indo-Europeans" who *first* moved into Europe didn't have "war horses". Corded Ware had barely any horses at all. It may have been slightly different further south. The "war chariot" is first discovered in 2000 BC in Sintashta and very far in the east. Even then, it wasn't horse mounted warfare. Mounted warfare in Europe is an Iron Age phenomenon. Of course, the mobility provided by the domestication of the horse is indeed an asset, as I stated upthread.

I'm afraid you heard wrong as far as metallurgy is concerned, at least if you think the "Indo-Europeans" are the ones who first invented it. It was invented in the "Old Europe" of the Balkans and in the Near East. They *learned* how to use metal and make metal tools and weapons *from* those people, but it took a long time. Once learned, it was indeed an advantage, but as Corded Ware moved into Europe, they didn't have Bronze, and indeed had very little copper.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...Gateway+Europe

We have very different definitions of what makes an individual or culture "superior". Having a more war like nature, benefiting from the fact that you carry the plague with you to which you have developed a certain immunity, and being willing to kill and enslave a lot of the men in the areas where you arrive doesn't make you "superior". Far from it, in my book. That isn't to say that they were the first or the last culture to do this. 

I have no idea what you mean by point number four. You might want to take your time and read carefully Lazaridis et al, and Haak et al to get a general picture of the major population movements into this area and all of Europe. They're also discussed extensively here. I've provided two of the main links:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...ight=Lazaridis

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...alkan+genetics

This thread is specifically about western Baltic genetics, but Bulgarians and Romanians and other people from that area are included. There are some nice admixture results. 
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0105090

It is discussed here:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...light=Bosnians

If you want to delve into yDna I2, there's a dedicated thread for it. It's very long, so maybe start on page 22, so that the comments, due to the new ancient dna discoveries, are more fact based.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26903-How-did-I2a-Din-get-to-the-Balkans/page22

----------


## Piro Ilir

> No one is underestimating the importance of the horse in wars. The problem for your theory is that more recent research shows that the "Indo-Europeans" who *first* moved into Europe didn't have "war horses". Corded Ware had barely any horses at all. It may have been slightly different further south. The "war chariot" is first discovered in 2000 BC in Sintashta and very far in the east. Even then, it wasn't horse mounted warfare. Mounted warfare in Europe is an Iron Age phenomenon. Of course, the mobility provided by the domestication of the horse is indeed an asset, as I stated upthread.
> 
> I'm afraid you heard wrong as far as metallurgy is concerned, at least if you think the "Indo-Europeans" are the ones who first invented it. It was invented in the "Old Europe" of the Balkans and in the Near East. They *learned* how to use metal and make metal tools and weapons *from* those people, but it took a long time. Once learned, it was indeed an advantage, but as Corded Ware moved into Europe, they didn't have Bronze, and indeed had very little copper.
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...Gateway+Europe
> 
> We have very different definitions of what makes an individual or culture "superior". Having a more war like nature, benefiting from the fact that you carry the plague with you to which you have developed a certain immunity, and being willing to kill and enslave a lot of the men in the areas where you arrive doesn't make you "superior". Far from it, in my book. That isn't to say that they were the first or the last culture to do this. 
> 
> I have no idea what you mean by point number four. You might want to take your time and read carefully Lazaridis et al, and Haak et al to get a general picture of the major population movements into this area and all of Europe. They're also discussed extensively here. I've provided two of the main links:
> ...


1- At my point four, I meant that the Europe was inhabited by various non-IE people, including the extreme North. Today we have almost only IE people. 

2- The reason for the superiority of I-E people certainly it's not the plague and their immunity, as you mentioned above. If it would ne true, seems nonsense killing only the males and the females being saved. The reason why the IE- people wiped out all the natives it's their superiority. In my opinion one of the evidences for this it's the documented proto-Mycenae invasion of south Greece. It's clear they were superior. 

3- The start of bronze age, corresponds to the raising of Hittite/ Mycenae civilizations. In my opinion it's not a coincidence. 

4- How you explain the modern majority of R1 all over Europe, except some areas like Balkans? 

5- Could you pinpoint why the Indo- Europeans were so successful? Obviously, they had something that the others didn't.

----------


## Piro Ilir

https://www.google.al/url?q=https://...MvmaEl4BofvIAw

According to Wikipedia, the Vinca people were wiped out probably by the proto IE horse riders. 



Sent from my LG-E460 using Tapatalk

----------


## Angela

I always strive to be clear so that everyone can follow the debate, and to strip down the arguments to their essentials so people don't forget to see the forest for the individual trees, so I don't think I can express my take on this more clearly than I already have...

However, I also strive to be polite, so I'll have one more go at it.

They were successful because they were in the right place(s), at the right time, with the right tools, and the right social organization, as is true for any group that becomes dominant. 

The tools, except for the domestication of the horse, and perhaps their more than average liking for warfare and development of a warrior cult, and their extremely patriarchal society, they initially adopted from others in a rather wholesale fashion. There's nothing in the archaeology or anthropology to indicate that the parts of their "package" that relate to farming, animal husbandry or herding, mining, metallurgy etc. were developed on the steppe . The steppe peoples had none of those things, and adopted them from cultures which had been developing them for hundreds if not thousands of years. There's absolutely no question about that. If you think there is, it's because you haven't done enough reading on the subject. Even carts, even war carts, are earlier in either Old Europe or the Near East. 

There's nothing wrong with building a new civilization based on the technology of others, and then improving on it to some extent, by the way, as they did when they perhaps invented the spoked wheel and attached it to a cart and a horse in 2000 BC in Sintashta, or in those later periods became metal smiths of some repute. It shows realism and practicality and flexibility. That's what the Japanese have been doing since the 1800s. To some degree, it's what the Romans did by building on the accomplishments of the Greeks, and the Greeks by building on the accomplishments of the Near East, and so on. More power to them.

The right tools also refers to the fact that in many of the places they arrived, the "package" they had put together was new to the area and offered a better way to utilize the ecosystem. That wasn't true everywhere, however, which may have been a factor as to whether their alleles are a small or a larger proportion of the modern total, although there were other factors, like population density, no doubt.

The right time refers to the fact that Central Europe, for example, had experienced repeated population crashes because of climate change, deforestation and other environmental degradation because of slash and burn farming methods, and the unsuitability of this early form of farming to the climate and terrain of central and northern Europe. These areas were only able to support larger populations thousands of years later in the Middle Ages when different types of plows were invented which could turn the heavy earth, and they learned about crop rotation and other things. They also needed slightly different cereal crop strains. This is all well known. Please use the search engine to find the citations. It will be worth it; it's all very interesting. I just can't spend any more time on this by also hunting down the citations; there's this little thing called my life that I sometimes remember. :)

We also know that they did indeed carry the plague. (Again, use the search engine.) It's perhaps somewhat analogous, although not totally, to the situation in the Americas when the Europeans brought the measles, chicken pox, small pox, etc. to the New World. It made the Europeans sick, killed a good number, but it decimated the native Americans. In some places 90% of them died.

As to why certain areas of Europe, predominantly central, eastern and northern Europe, are so heavy in the "Indo-European" clades of R1b and R1a, the preceding should make the answer self-explanatory. If you come in to a sparsely settled area or one that has seen a population crash, and you happen to also harbor plague, and of the surviving population, you either kill a lot of the men, or otherwise make them disadvantaged for procreation (enslaving them or making them serfs?), and so the vector for the genes of the earlier inhabitants is far more often the women, then would you expect anything else? I wouldn't.

In the Americas it was even more extreme in certain areas, even in relatively advanced areas like those of the Aztecs and Mayas, because the disparity in technology was still greater. In addition to disease, and horses, and steel swords, they had guns and cannon, for goodness sakes. Hardly an "equal" fight. The native civilizations had agriculture, and some metallurgy, but they didn't have domestic animals for riding, or iron and steel yet, and certainly not guns. That's why so many of the men in Latin America carry European yDna bub native mtDna.

Have you read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond? I think you'd find it very interesting. (I don't agree with all of his proposals, but it's important to read him, I think.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel

I do think we badly need some research into the effects of various mtDna on health, fitness, and procreative ability as well. We know how important mtDna is for all of these things. There's already a bit of research that mtDna "H" is better for protection against sepsis and women who have it bear more children, likewise some indication that carriers of some R1 clades may be slightly more likely to sire sons, and even a slight propensity could have a maximum impact over time.

So, based on the papers and books we have so far, that's my take on it. I'm always more than ready to change my position as new evidence comes in. 

I don't think there's any purpose served by debating this with you any more. You can accept it or not, as you choose. I would advise that you look for the papers, however.

----------


## VMRO1893

> I don't hate my neighbors. 
> 
> I posted where Greece is 5 posts above and then some ethnic FYROMian started posting his propaganda, saying that Greeks are Blacks, Asians etc (I'm surprised he didn't call us Amerindians). What should I do? Not reply? I think my reaction was very civilized. He continued posting his propaganda and I just ignored him. 
> 
> I have nothing against my neighbors. I had classmates who were immigrants from Albania, last year I had 1 Turkish student and 2 Bulgarians. The problem is that certain people filled with their country's propaganda attack my country and therefore myself. You must have noticed that I have never started such a conversation in this forum without being provoked first. 
> If I hated my neighbors and wanted to provoke them I would have asked Maciamo for example to edit all posts with the word Macedonia and rename it to FYROM since that is the official name for the moment, or to remove Turkey from the European maps etc. I'm not irrational though and I don't bring up such matters, unless I am provoked.
> 
> Your old neighbors for sure aren't as propagandistic as mine. They are civilized people who are more or less rational and believe in cooperation between countries. In this forum I was able to have a decent debate with only one Turk and zero people from FYROM...
> 
> I believe in friendship between countries too, I watch Turkish series on tv, I vote for the Albanian song in Eurovision () and I am very open to conversations with people who are willing to have a decent chat with me. But friendship includes both sides willing to cooperate. In the Macedonia issue Greece has proposed several names that could please both countries, like Nova Macedonia or North Macedonia etc which don't cancel the right of the rest of Macedonians to be called like that. But they just don't want to cooperate unless the name is Macedonia, or Republic of Macedonia. We are way more rational than them. You should refer to them about being rational and cooperating with your neighbors.


Remember it was Greece that made the issue about our name. The Republic of Macedonia had it's name for decades before independence and Greece had no objection. We don't need others to determine our name, that is up to the citizens of the state to determine, not our neighbours or any one else. In any case, there is no confusion really, our state is called Republic of Macedonia, and the majority of it's inhabitants are ethnic Macedonians, whereas over the border, there is a region of Greece called Macedonia, and it's inhabitants are mostly ethnic Greeks.

----------


## Dinarid

> Remember it was Greece that made the issue about our name. The Republic of Macedonia had it's name for decades before independence and Greece had no objection. We don't need others to determine our name, that is up to the citizens of the state to determine, not our neighbours or any one else. In any case, there is no confusion really, our state is called Republic of Macedonia, and the majority of it's inhabitants are ethnic Macedonians, whereas over the border, there is a region of Greece called Macedonia, and it's inhabitants are mostly ethnic Greeks.


You can call yourselves whatever you like. However, no one has to accept this. If your people are Slavs it's hard for me to see you as the inheritors of the ancient Macedonian civilization. The Greeks of Greek Macedonia see themselves as Macedonians too, with their idea of "Macedonian" being a Greek subgroup.

----------


## VMRO1893

> You can call yourselves whatever you like. However, no one has to accept this. If your people are Slavs it's hard for me to see you as the inheritors of the ancient Macedonian civilization. The Greeks of Greek Macedonia see themselves as Macedonians too, with their idea of "Macedonian" being a Greek subgroup.


This is true, thankfully the majority of the world accepts it. As for being Slavs, well yes we are a Slavic nation, but genetically we are mostly pre-Slavic and this site has tons of data demonstrating this. Remember a large part of the Greeks of Macedonia were imported into the area from the 1920s from Turkey, after the population exchange with Greece. These refugees are mostly of Armenian and Georgian stock, who had to be taught Greek in schools. Surely the Slavicized aboriginal inhabitants of the region of Macedonia have a greater right to the name, than these pretenders.

----------


## LeBrok

> This is true, thankfully the majority of the world accepts it. As for being Slavs, well yes we are a Slavic nation, but genetically we are mostly pre-Slavic and this site has tons of data demonstrating this. Remember a large part of the Greeks of Macedonia were imported into the area from the 1920s from Turkey, after the population exchange with Greece. These refugees are mostly of Armenian and Georgian stock, who had to be taught Greek in schools. Surely the Slavicized aboriginal inhabitants of the region of Macedonia have a greater right to the name, than these pretenders.


Well said VMRO. Welcome to Eupedia.

----------


## Dinarid

> This is true, thankfully the majority of the world accepts it. As for being Slavs, well yes we are a Slavic nation, but genetically we are mostly pre-Slavic and this site has tons of data demonstrating this. Remember a large part of the Greeks of Macedonia were imported into the area from the 1920s from Turkey, after the population exchange with Greece. These refugees are mostly of Armenian and Georgian stock, who had to be taught Greek in schools. Surely the Slavicized aboriginal inhabitants of the region of Macedonia have a greater right to the name, than these pretenders.


I'm fine with all of this, it's just the alliance with Turkey that I find somewhat unnerving. I see many Macedonians praising Turkey, and I wish for Macedonians to remember that Turks see you as nothing more than Ottoman citizens, like everyone else in the Balkans.

----------


## VMRO1893

> I'm fine with all of this, it's just the alliance with Turkey that I find somewhat unnerving. I see many Macedonians praising Turkey, and I wish for Macedonians to remember that Turks see you as nothing more than Ottoman citizens, like everyone else in the Balkans.


Agree with you. Turkey and Macedonia are drawn together because of Greece. Macedonians don't realise that Turks couldn't care less about Macedonians, they are just used by Turkey in their game against Greece. In saying this though, all Macedonians are aware of the horrors of the Ottoman Empire and what they did to Balkan Christians. No Macedonian would ever like to see Turks enter Macedonian soil again. It is currently more a case of ''my enemy's enemy is my friend'', which is often the case in Balkan politics, as I'm sure you're aware. I think the way to thwart this is a resolution with Greece over the name.

----------


## Milan

> You can call yourselves whatever you like. However, no one has to accept this. If your people are Slavs it's hard for me to see you as the inheritors of the ancient Macedonian civilization. The Greeks of Greek Macedonia see themselves as Macedonians too, with their idea of "Macedonian" being a Greek subgroup.


Everyone call himself whatever he like,just like you are Dinarid now in this case i accept your choice.
The name issue have little to do with ancient history,it is mostly modern politics and starting from the 19th century.The ancient history being just pretext for this.There is no continuity in "ancient" Macedonian history since tons of things have been changed in that region since their "legends" that made the region famous that is Phillip and Alexander.Everyone claiming continuity including Greeks are delusional nationalist,pick Thesaloniki if you like it was mostly Jewish city when Greeks conquered it.About other ethnic make up pick yourself maps prior 1913(division of Macedonia) and do your research on the region.

Here is quote from national awakers of Macedonian people Georgi Pulevski (1817-1895);
What do we call a nation? – People who are of the same origin and who speak the same words and who live and make friends of each other, who have the same customs and songs and entertainment are what we call a nation, and the place where that people lives is called the people's country. Thus the Macedonians also are a nation and the place which is theirs is called Macedonia. 
By definition that is nation then and now,only in Balkans people think that this is inherited since pra-history.
However no one from great powers at the time supported independent Macedonia,the Macedonian rebelion in 1903 was crashed by Ottomans without the needed support,later on Macedonia divided between Greeks,Serbs and Bulgarians,Greeks sieging 51%,the problems of that are still visible today,countries created with support by great powers(Greece and Bulgaria had kings of German origin) just a case to see how modern countries were created,firstly Bulgaria for example with Russian idea to gain entrance in the warm waters.The current R.Macedonia was formed by the anti-nazi communist party of Macedonia,with similar ideas like the former,they succeded creating a republic within Yugoslavia and gained independence in 1991,only the Serbian part of Macedonia is current R.Macedonia,since the communist plan of "unified Macedonia" within Balkan federation or greater Yugoslavia (including Bulgaria) failed.

----------


## Milan

> You can call yourselves whatever you like. However, no one has to accept this. If your people are Slavs it's hard for me to see you as the inheritors of the ancient Macedonian civilization. The Greeks of Greek Macedonia see themselves as Macedonians too, with their idea of "Macedonian" being a Greek subgroup.


If we are to go in ancient "fairy tales" my ancestors inhabited a region that was home to Agrianes "Thraco-Peonian tribe" ,entire region is in ruins from them,best allies of Phillip and Alexander,their land administrated by Pella(Macedonian capital) later on they governed themselves because were one of the most trust worth allies.It is northern most region of Macedonian region,with parts of south Serbia,west Bulgaria.
While they fought against Persians with Macedonians,because Athenians for example view that as occupation by barbarian Macedonians see Demosthenes.Many,many Greeks fought on Persian side,likewise later on against Romans,when Romans operating on the banner(freedom for Greeks from Macedonia).
The make up of alliances and political activities in that period and today was completely different,likewise one political organization as a whole(to our current understandings)therefore talking about countinuity again is non sense.

No one make issue about Dalmatians and Dalmatia whether they descent from Delmatae or not,we all call them as such due to the region they inhabit,if they saw themselves as distinct to Croats or Serbs,they would have simply today be Dalmatians in ethnic sense,if they had political movement to be independent they could have formed a country,and that is that.

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

> This is true, thankfully the majority of the world accepts it. As for being Slavs, well yes we are a Slavic nation, but genetically we are mostly pre-Slavic and this site has tons of data demonstrating this. Remember a large part of the Greeks of Macedonia were imported into the area from the 1920s from Turkey, after the population exchange with Greece. These refugees are mostly of Armenian and Georgian stock, who had to be taught Greek in schools. Surely the Slavicized aboriginal inhabitants of the region of Macedonia have a greater right to the name, than these pretenders.


While it's true that a large part of the Greeks of Macedonia were imported into the area from modern-day Turkey, these refugees were not of Armenian and Georgian stock. It's quite possible that Pontic Greeks were admixed with some Caucasian populations but that doesn't make them Armenian or Georgian. Furthermore they didn't speak Georgian or Armenian but an Hellenic dialect with many archaisms. There was one non-Greek speaking Christian Orthodox group in south-central Anatolia, the Karamanlides but not many refugees were Karamanlides.

And not all refugees were Pontic Greek. Those from Asia Minor coasts descend from Greek colonizers (ancient, medieval and early modern) and Thracians, 'Luwians', even Galatians which were hellenized since late antiquity. My maternal grandfather was from Smyrna/Izmir but his ancestry was Cretan and Cycladic probably (based on their surnames).

About Ancient Macedonia the majority of the population was Thracian, not Hellenic. The Argead dynasty was Hellenic though and they adopted Attic Greek. Modern Greek and Koine Greek, the language of Hellenistic Macedonian kingdoms are quite close. We speak their language practically.

----------


## Yetos

> While it's true that a large part of the Greeks of Macedonia were imported into the area from modern-day Turkey, these refugees were not of Armenian and Georgian stock. It's quite possible that Pontic Greeks were admixed with some Caucasian populations but that doesn't make them Armenian or Georgian. Furthermore they didn't speak Georgian or Armenian but an Hellenic dialect with many archaisms. There was one non-Greek speaking Christian Orthodox group in south-central Anatolia, the Karamanlides but not many refugees were Karamanlides.
> 
> And not all refugees were Pontic Greek. Those from Asia Minor coasts descend from Greek colonizers (ancient, medieval and early modern) and Thracians, 'Luwians', even Galatians which were hellenized since late antiquity. My maternal grandfather was from Smyrna/Izmir but his ancestry was Cretan and Cycladic probably (based on their surnames).
> 
> About Ancient Macedonia the majority of the population was Thracian, not Hellenic. The Argead dynasty was Hellenic though and they adopted Attic Greek. Modern Greek and Koine Greek, the language of Hellenistic Macedonian kingdoms are quite close. We speak their language practically.


you do not know what you talking about,

at least 150 000 Greeks came from what today is called Fyrom, Monasterion Perlepe Stromnitsa Evgeleia etc with their own will
and 350 000 are the Pontic Greeks, which from them only 150-180 000 settled in N Greece imncluding the Sevas and Kappadokia and about 10-15 % left to USA and elsewhere until 1932 before ended the exchange of kitap (κτηματολογικοι χαρτες Τουρκικου κρατους) exchanged.
80 000 came from Bulgaria (ανατολικη Ρωμυλια) with their own will 
the minor Asian were mostly from Magnesia (Philadelgeia) and not Smyrna (turkophonoi and zeibeks - Kula teppe) and are few in numbers comparing the other
about 60 000 direct came direct and 80 000 from around Con/polis after 1860 till the pogrom 1954 from them 1/3 were Jews the diefference is some are exchanged, some are with their own will

search the census of Greek state
the difference among own will and exchange, is the some came free will and others came either by force, or by treaties,

and that is why both Greece and Fyrom do not dare to ask the land, according the kitap (turkish land registry official pappers)
cause enough land and properties of Slavic speakers that is in Greece and much more that is in Fyrom will change hands and pass an anomaly,
for example the 60% of Monasterion (bitola) town belongs to Greeks according Turkish kitap maps, although Communistic policy destroy it and build huge blocks,
means that if one dares to ask most citizens of Monasterion will found their shelves without home,
something same is also in some areas in Greece,
that is why no side in going to international courts, but only for the name,

it is more complicated than some politician want, and is more easy than other want,

it is a problem that created by politicians, and mainly Turks,
who when retreat establish a state with a ghost treaty.
in fact the parallel casualties at WW2 and civil war for this subject are much more than Balkan wars and WW1 excluding clear army battles

about ancient Makedonians except Argeiads, at least you know them, were also the Locroi Λοκροι, the bottiaeans Βοττιαιοι etc etc,
whom you probably never heard, although you call the frog βατραχος and the water battery βρυση and your bed κραββατος etc etc, 
Ι wonder have you ever heard of Argos Orestikon, if not search for it,

----------


## Milan

> you do not know what you talking about,
> 
> at least 150 000 Greeks came from what today is called Fyrom, Monasterion Perlepe Stromnitsa Evgeleia etc
> and 350 000 are the Pontic Greeks, which from them only 150-180 000 settled in N Greece imncluding the Sevas and Kappadokia and about 10-15 % left to USA and elsewhere until 1932 before ended the exchange of kitap (κτηματολογικοι χαρτες Τουρκικου κρατους)
> 80 000 came from Bulgaria (ανατολικη Ρωμυλια)
> the minor Asian were mostly from Magnesia (Philadelgeia) and not Smyrna (turkophonoi and zeibeks - Kula teppe) and are few in numbers comparing the other
> 
> search the census of Greek state


Not very biased for a "original" Makedonian.
This can be send in Balkan disagreements.
How many then Slavs,Bulgarians,Fyromians,the non existent ones or whatever you call them left "Greek Macedonia"?
What was the ethnic make up of "Greek Macedonia" prior Greece "liberated" that part of "Greek Macedonia"?
Do they had right of self determination then and now?
Do they had then or now right to speak their mother tongue the "Slavic" non existent one? or still the police is watching at their windows what language they speak?
Since when Greek become the national language in Greek Macedonia?
Does in Greece exist a minority status as in every other neighboring country or all are "Hellenes" descendant of Pericles and Sophocles?
How many villages and towns were renamed in Greek Macedonia,shortly here;
*Greek region of Macedonia*

Till 1912, the area had a very heterogeneous population consisting of Slavic, Turkish, Greek, Jews and Wallachian people. Most of the geographical names were of non Greek origin, the Greek government planned to change this. Between 1913 and 1928 the Slavic names of hundreds of villages and towns were Hellenized by a Committee for the Changing of Names, which was charged by the Greek government with _"the elimination of all the names which pollute and disfigure the beautiful appearance of our fatherland"_.Between 1912 (Balkan Wars) and 1928 (after the Population exchange between Greece and Turkey), the non Greek inhabitants were largely gone and instead of them Greek refugees from the Ottoman Empire settled in the area thereby changing its demography.

This people today call themselves original Makedonians?

----------


## Angela

I'm not going to say it again. This thread is for the discussion of the yDna haplogroups of ancient civilizations. You guys are not going to destroy another genetics thread. The next person that posts an off-topic comment will get an infraction. Take your historical/ethnic disputes to other threads. 

I'll tell you now though that even on those threads I'm not going to tolerate this constant ******** of Greeks.

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

> I'm not going to say it again. This thread is for the discussion of the yDna haplogroups of ancient civilizations. You guys are not going to destroy another genetics thread. The next person that posts an off-topic comment will get an infraction. Take your historical/ethnic disputes to other threads. 
> 
> I'll tell you now though that even on those threads I'm not going to tolerate this constant ******** of Greeks.


LeBrok was ok with the first offtopic comment. 




> Well said VMRO. Welcome to Eupedia.


This isn't a genetics thread but a thread created by a charlatan. And it's pure speculative pseudoscience. You are smart enough to understand it.

I don't want an infraction. A ban would have been preferable.

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

> about ancient Makedonians except Argeiads, at least you know them, were also the Locroi Λοκροι, the bottiaeans Βοττιαιοι etc etc,
> whom you probably never heard, although you call the frog βατραχος and the water battery βρυση and your bed κραββατος etc etc, 
> Ι wonder have you ever heard of Argos Orestikon, if not search for it,


Stabo says that the majority were Thracians. There were also Epirote Greeks, Illyrians (non-Greek) and others probably. The Argeads were Greek too and Macedonian Greek was quite close to NW Greek most likely.

----------


## Angela

> LeBrok was ok with the first offtopic comment. 
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't a genetics thread but a thread created by a charlatan. And it's pure speculative pseudoscience. You are smart enough to understand it.
> 
> I don't want an infraction. A ban would have been preferable.


@Papadimitriou,
Yes, some of the posts are pure speculation, and pseudoscience, and sometimes a whole lot of ethnic ********, although there are some good bits too. 

A little wandering off topic is fine, and often interesting; I have no problem with it. However, when the "usual suspects" start getting into the usual Balkan ethnic disputes bandwagon, it ruins the thread for everybody else. 

You don't seem to get it. I haven't read the whole thread, or all of the many "Balkan" threads, but from what I've read, I quite often agree with your points, certainly in your last post about the "ethnic" identity of the Greeks who were repatriated to Greece. As I said, I was addressing the "usual suspects".

I don't want you to get banned. You provide another, and needed perspective. I know it's difficult, believe me, but just don't let this stuff get to you.

----------


## Milan

> LeBrok was ok with the first offtopic comment. 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't want an infraction. A ban would have been preferable.


You do not deserve that at all,you haven't started anything of that.
Often i agree with your points of view,you have your own opinion on certain things so do I.
Just to be clear myself that i do not care less about ancient Macedonians to make them more close to me or to others here.I stated my opinion on the ancient "fairy tales".With whom i will identify today is only my own political conviction,as i even have a Yugoslav flag on my profile.
I was writing about the name issue.
Have been many times in Greece and talk to many Greeks in person and will go again,have nothing against them.

----------


## Azzurro

Hi all,

This is my first post, this is one of the more interesting threads, being that I am J2 and am more knowledgable in the various the clades and distribution there are 2 very interesting clades J-Z467 and J-M319. There is general observation that J2 is associated with the Mediterranean.

J-Z467 is associated with Southern Anatolia and the Levant, various civilizations had a good portion of their people with J-Z467 and its branches, the civilizations goes as the following: the Cilicians, the Hurrians, the Ancient Cypriots, Ugarites, Mari, Urartu, Assyrians likely took in some of these lines when they conquered this area and the Canaanites would eventual lead to the Phoenicians, Aramaics and Israelites carrying some of these lines. It came into Europe through Phoenician settlers, Greek Seleucid Empire through migrations, Jewish diaspora and migrations through various periods, Roman and Byzantine Empires (through immigrations more during Roman times).

J-M319 on the other hand has a definite role in Crete, Minoan Crete and the Minoans definitely had J-M319, it is also found in Middle Easterners and Jewish People as well. J-M319 most likely originated around the same area as J-Z467 and a portion went to Western Anatolia, Aegean Islands and Crete. The other followed J-Z467 and other J2a lineages into the Middle East and the Levant. Its dispersion into Europe was brought the same way as J-Z467 with the additional Magna Graecia migrations taking place in setting up Greek Colonies after Minoan Crete was absorbed.

This is going to be a delicate issue on my next opinion but I believe Alexander the Great was J2b M241 and that the original Macedonians carried this line along with the Ancient Albanians.

----------


## Yetos

> Not very biased for a "original" Makedonian.
> This can be send in Balkan disagreements.
> How many then Slavs,Bulgarians,Fyromians,the non existent ones or whatever you call them left "Greek Macedonia"?
> What was the ethnic make up of "Greek Macedonia" prior Greece "liberated" that part of "Greek Macedonia"?
> Do they had right of self determination then and now?
> Do they had then or now right to speak their mother tongue the "Slavic" non existent one? or still the police is watching at their windows what language they speak?
> Since when Greek become the national language in Greek Macedonia?
> Does in Greece exist a minority status as in every other neighboring country or all are "Hellenes" descendant of Pericles and Sophocles?
> How many villages and towns were renamed in Greek Macedonia,shortly here;
> ...


Makedonian strugle, search for it,

you will have better view of case,

in fact why Slavs change even ancient Brygian names,
and how many names change the Slavs after 1912,

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Hi all,
> 
> This is my first post, this is one of the more interesting threads, being that I am J2 and am more knowledgable in the various the clades and distribution there are 2 very interesting clades J-Z467 and J-M319. There is general observation that J2 is associated with the Mediterranean.
> 
> J-Z467 is associated with Southern Anatolia and the Levant, various civilizations had a good portion of their people with J-Z467 and its branches, the civilizations goes as the following: the Cilicians, the Hurrians, the Ancient Cypriots, Ugarites, Mari, Urartu, Assyrians likely took in some of these lines when they conquered this area and the Canaanites would eventual lead to the Phoenicians, Aramaics and Israelites carrying some of these lines. It came into Europe through Phoenician settlers, Greek Seleucid Empire through migrations, Jewish diaspora and migrations through various periods, Roman and Byzantine Empires (through immigrations more during Roman times).
> 
> J-M319 on the other hand has a definite role in Crete, Minoan Crete and the Minoans definitely had J-M319, it is also found in Middle Easterners and Jewish People as well. J-M319 most likely originated around the same area as J-Z467 and a portion went to Western Anatolia, Aegean Islands and Crete. The other followed J-Z467 and other J2a lineages into the Middle East and the Levant. Its dispersion into Europe was brought the same way as J-Z467 with the additional Magna Graecia migrations taking place in setting up Greek Colonies after Minoan Crete was absorbed.
> 
> This is going to be a delicate issue on my next opinion but I believe Alexander the Great was J2b M241 and that the original Macedonians carried this line along with the Ancient Albanians.


From them map of the J2 it looks like that's it's connected closely with Albanians. Both E v13 and J2 looks as Albanian subclades. Why you think that Alexander the great was J2 ? However, even if he was J2 it doesn't prove anything.

----------


## Aaron1981

> From them map of the J2 it looks like that's it's connected closely with Albanians. Both E v13 and J2 looks as Albanian subclades. Why you think that Alexander the great was J2 ? However, even if he was J2 it doesn't prove anything.


A non-indigenous Middle Eastern farming element in territory we call "Albania" may have carried E-V13 and J2b. From a language point of view, if Indo-European really did come from the steppe, which there is plentiful evidence supporting this, the elite were of a European hunter-gatherer type, and carried R1b. Same likely goes for the Mycenaean Greeks, and intrusive warrior elite. There is ample support the earlier farmers were of the Middle Eastern type.

----------


## Azzurro

I think J2b and E-V13 have been in the Balkans for awhile, I think J2b may have been the ancestors of the Doric Greeks, Albanians, Epirus and part of the Macedonians, as for Alexander the Great being J2 there is no evidence since we cant dna test him, but its rather an educated guess, he could have been E-V13 as well.

----------


## Azzurro

I always felt like Mycenaean Greeks and Spartans were R1b, as they are warrior based societies.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> A non-indigenous Middle Eastern farming element in territory we call "Albania" may have carried E-V13 and J2b. From a language point of view, if Indo-European really did come from the steppe, which there is plentiful evidence supporting this, the elite were of a European hunter-gatherer type, and carried R1b. Same likely goes for the Mycenaean Greeks, and intrusive warrior elite. There is ample support the earlier farmers were of the Middle Eastern type.


So, what would be the ancient Illyrians or better saying proto Illyrians. Were them more R2b or R1a? 
If what you said it's true, that means Albanians are more connected to the ancient balkanians, as long as the largest subclades which they carry on are Ev 13 and J2, along with the R1b.

----------


## Twilight

> So, what would be the ancient Illyrians or better saying proto Illyrians. Were them more R2b or R1a? 
> If what you said it's true, that means Albanians are more connected to the ancient balkanians, as long as the largest subclades which they carry on are Ev 13 and J2, along with the R1b.


I'd say the Illyrians had R1a and R1b-U152 migrants that migrated into their area during the Bronze Age as people related to the Greek Macedonians and Dorians invaders. R2 is most strong in the Indian subcontinent and rare in Europe. http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolit...dle_bronze_age

----------


## Twilight

> A little update based on new information.
> 
> *Romans, Celts and Germans*
> 
> Celtic, Italic and Germanic people are all descended from the same R1b-L11 stock. They split north of the Alps, in modern Germany. They also incorporated a sizeable minority of G2a3b1 and J2b2 lineages, especially the Celts and the Italics.
> 
> The *Italic* branch went south and mixed with the Terramare people who were I2a1a, G2a and E1b1b. Northern Italians have more Indo-European Celto-Italic blood, while southern Italian have more indigenous blood (the highest being Sardinia, then Basilicata).
> 
> The *Germanic* branch moved north and mixed with the indigenous I1 and I2a2 people, who had already mixed with R1a migrants from the Corded Ware (Battle Axe) culture. The new hybrid Germanic people retained the highest percentage of autochthonous haplogroup I.
> ...


Now that the Neolithic-Bronze age map has been updated. It seems that the Megalithic cultures are no longer E1b but the builders of Stonehedge are now only Ydna I2 and G. Do you know how else ydna E1b could have gotten into Ancient Britain?

----------


## Maleth

> I always felt like Mycenaean Greeks and Spartans were R1b, as they are warrior based societies.


So would Ghenkis Kan, Hanibal Barca, Miyamoto Misashi, Xiahou Dun fall under R1b too?  :Thinking:

----------


## Azzurro

> So would Ghenkis Kan, Hanibal Barca, Miyamoto Misashi, Xiahou Dun fall under R1b too?


Good point Maleth, I believe there is a correlation between warrior culture and R1b, it doesn't necessarily mean that other warrior cultures can't be other haplogroups.

----------


## Hauteville

I guess Gengis Khan Q or N and Hannibal a Phoenician J1 lol

----------


## Maleth

> Good point Maleth, I believe there is a correlation between warrior culture and R1b, it doesn't necessarily mean that other warrior cultures can't be other haplogroups.


Sparta was located south of the Peloponnese (South Greece). These are a very approx Main haplogroups presently.

*Southern Greeks (Sterea Hellas & Peloponnese) (264 samples)

I : 12.9
R1a :10.2
R1b : 20.5
E1B :25.8
G: 3.4
J2: 19.7
J1:2.3
LT:3.8
*1.5

*http://gnosticwarrior.com/greek-dna.html (I dont know how reliable these percentages are but similar to others I have seen)
There might be population replacements and so on during the course of history but I very much doubt if R1b was the dominant culture of the time ;).......

----------


## Maleth

> I guess Gengis Khan Q or N and Hannibal a Phoenician J1 lol


J2 is very high in the land of origins of the Phoenicians (Lebanon), apart from Cyprus and Crete, so another possibility for Mr. Barka :)

----------


## Azzurro

> Sparta was located south of the Peloponnese (South Greece). These are a very approx Main haplogroups presently.
> 
> *Southern Greeks (Sterea Hellas & Peloponnese) (264 samples)
> 
> I : 12.9
> R1a :10.2
> R1b : 20.5
> E1B :25.8
> G: 3.4
> ...


You could definately right! But than again who is to say that Sparta couldn't have been R1b majority while the rest of the Southern Pelopponese city states were high in other haplogroups.

----------


## Aaron1981

> Sparta was located south of the Peloponnese (South Greece). These are a very approx Main haplogroups presently.
> 
> *Southern Greeks (Sterea Hellas & Peloponnese) (264 samples)
> 
> I : 12.9
> R1a :10.2
> R1b : 20.5
> E1B :25.8
> G: 3.4
> ...


The interesting thing is that E-V13 hasn't really turned up often among the Neolithic finds, although I suspect it must have been part of a secondary wave of farmers. For some reason it reaches high frequency just north west of the Balkans in Austria...I suspect the Celtic people picked it up and brought it to Wales. The farmers of Greece were G2a and look how low these rates are in this sample - 3.4%..... The point is that we have no clue who these ancient people were, and it appears the Balkans is extremely volatile and doesn't resembe the Neolithic YDNA distribution from what we have seen so far. R1b still seems to be the strongest IE speaking candidate in the Albanian and Greek populations...unless you were thinking Levantines were the origin of PIE language? ...

----------


## Maleth

> You could definately right! But than again who is to say that Sparta couldn't have been R1b majority while the rest of the Southern Pelopponese city states were high in other haplogroups.


I don't think we have much evidence for either theories. What is for sure is that we more and more now that ancient Greece had similar markers to those found at present from all the evidence we have say in other areas were they expanded, that is coast of Turkey and Italy and beyond. So present day Haplos can give some kind of indication.

----------


## Maleth

> The interesting thing is that E-V13 hasn't really turned up often among the Neolithic finds, although I suspect it must have been part of a secondary wave of farmers. For some reason it reaches high frequency just north west of the Balkans in Austria...I suspect the Celtic people picked it up and brought it to Wales. The farmers of Greece were G2a and look how low these rates are in this sample - 3.4%..... The point is that we have no clue who these ancient people were, and it appears the Balkans is extremely volatile and doesn't resembe the Neolithic YDNA distribution from what we have seen so far. R1b still seems to be the strongest IE speaking candidate in the Albanian and Greek populations...unless you were thinking Levantines were the origin of PIE language? ...


E-V13 might be the most dominant however they as a society it compromises any other groups including R1b and J2 for example. Maybe one has to go deeper into were the different groups came from before the classical era. Regards to Neolithic finds we have E-V13 as old as 7000 BP.

These are extracts from more recent papers. 2014 study

*On the other hand, Y-chromosome lineage E-V13 is thought to have originated in southern Balkans* _[53]–[54] and then to have spread in Sicily at high frequencies with the Greek colonization of the island [8].

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0096074

_quote - *In Europe, certain sub-haplogroups of G and specifically E-V13 were detected in ancient DNA, including Linear Band Keramik (LBK) remains from Central Europe (*_ca. 8000 y BP), Epicardial skeletons from Iberia (7000 y BP), South of France Late Neolithic (5000 y BP), and a Tyrol specimen (5300 y BP) [77, 78, 79, 80].- end quote

https://investigativegenetics.biomed...323-016-0032-8_

----------


## Azzurro

> I don't think we have much evidence for either theories. What is for sure is that we more and more now that ancient Greece had similar markers to those found at present from all the evidence we have say in other areas were they expanded, that is coast of Turkey and Italy and beyond. So present day Haplos can give some kind of indication.


I'm assuming it would be difficult to actually determine, probably going with current populations is a good indicator, but at the same time looking at neolithic is proving to be different than what many previously thought, there is the founding myth that Taranto was founded by Spartan men, so maybe looking at the Y of Taranto and the surronding areas will be a good indication? Was there any current reseach done with the Y frequencies of Taranto, I wonder that would be interesting.

----------


## Angela

If the claim is that the highest concentration of E-V13 is in Austria (I presume the poster meant the Tyrol), that's incorrect. The highest concentration is just northwest of Greece. 

I don't know why, now that ancient dna has shown us the trail of E-V13 from the Levant, then in Anatolia, then in southern Europe, we would think it parsimonious to posit some speculative spread by people originating in the steppe to explain the Tyrol and Wales. Also, I don't give all that much credence to physical anthropology to explain these local population hotspots, but there's the famous "Dinaric" Tyrolese physical type to explain as well: not at all "Celtic" to my eyes. Indeed, some of them look very "Greek" to my eyes. Of course, I'm braced to have someone tell me she looks completely "something" northern given the kind of "classifications" I see on here. 



She looks like a Kouros to me:


Years ago Dienekes speculated E-V13 underwent a Bronze Age expansion from the Aegean if I recall correctly. That was certainly what I speculated at the time, particularly because there are attested archaeological movements from Anatolia, through the Aegean into mainland Greece and on into the Balkans all the way from the mid-to-late Neolithic into the Bronze Age.

Then we have Sarno et al dating the E-V13 in Italy to the first millennium BC, which correlates very nicely indeed with the Greek colonization of southern Italy and Greece, and trading in the north, and particularly with the Adriatic side of Italy. 

Now, until we get more ancient dna supporting this argument we obviously can't be certain, but it's certainly a more parsimonious explanation than some speculative spread by means of the _Celts_. As for the Welsh pockets of E-V13, Wales was for thousands of years a famous mining area. I would think the more parsimonious explanation is that it's some founder effect in an isolated area from the Atlantic Bronze Age. Not to worry, people, I'm sure autosomally they're totally "British". Y dna is a small amount of one's entire genetic code.

----------


## Sile

> E-V13 might be the most dominant however they as a society it compromises any other groups including R1b and J2 for example. Maybe one has to go deeper into were the different groups came from before the classical era. Regards to Neolithic finds we have E-V13 as old as 7000 BP.
> 
> These are extracts from more recent papers. 2014 study
> 
> *On the other hand, Y-chromosome lineage E-V13 is thought to have originated in southern Balkans* _[53]–[54] and then to have spread in Sicily at high frequencies with the Greek colonization of the island [8].
> 
> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0096074
> 
> _quote - *In Europe, certain sub-haplogroups of G and specifically E-V13 were detected in ancient DNA, including Linear Band Keramik (LBK) remains from Central Europe (*_ca. 8000 y BP), Epicardial skeletons from Iberia (7000 y BP), South of France Late Neolithic (5000 y BP), and a Tyrol specimen (5300 y BP) [77, 78, 79, 80].- end quote
> ...


IIRC, did not a recent paper this claender year about Cyprus state E-V13 originated in cyprus of southern Turkey ?

----------


## Maleth

> IIRC, did not a recent paper this claender year about Cyprus state E-V13 originated in cyprus of southern Turkey ?


This is what the paper stated:- 

*Conclusions*

Analyses of Cypriot haplogroup data are consistent with two stages of *prehistoric settlement. E-V13 and E-M34 are widespread, and PCA suggests sourcing them to the Balkans and Levant/Anatolia, respectively.

*_https://investigativegenetics.biomed...323-016-0032-8_

----------


## Maleth

> I'm assuming it would be difficult to actually determine, probably going with current populations is a good indicator, but at the same time looking at neolithic is proving to be different than what many previously thought, there is the founding myth that Taranto was founded by Spartan men, so maybe looking at the Y of Taranto and the surronding areas will be a good indication? Was there any current reseach done with the Y frequencies of Taranto, I wonder that would be interesting.


Its difficult to use Taranto as a Measure since the original Spartan settlement has been diluted with known new Roman settlements which probably had diluted the original source. it is also believed to have been totally ransacked by the Saracens in the 900's and its population taken into slavery.

----------


## Azzurro

> Its difficult to use Taranto as a Measure since the original Spartan settlement has been diluted with known new Roman settlements which probably had diluted the original source. it is also believed to have been totally ransacked by the Saracens in the 900's and its population taken into slavery.


There still must be some descendants of the Spartan colonists in surrounding villages and general area, it probably wouldn't have disappeared entirely, but I get what your saying that events in history may change demographics, but at the same time some original must be there as well.

----------


## Maleth

> There still must be some descendants of the Spartan colonists in surrounding villages and general area, it probably wouldn't have disappeared entirely, but I get what your saying that events in history may change demographics, but at the same time some original must be there as well.


Taranto would fall under the county of Apulia which comprises of many more towns and villages. According to Eupidia these are the main HG's. 
















Apulia
(10)
(4)
(1)
(15)
13
117
52
94
13
82
6
1
0
426


I1 2.5%
I 2b1 1%
0%
I2a 3.5%
R1a 3%
R1b 27.5%
G 12%
J2 22%
J*+J1 3%
E1b1b 19%
 T 1.5%
0%
0%

----------


## Azzurro

> Taranto would fall under the county of Apulia which comprises of many more towns and villages. According to Eupidia these are the main HG's. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes I am aware of that, it is also not far from my dads paternal village, I have been to Taranto, nice city, you could even argue that Matera would be similar to Taranto as they share the same Ionian coast.

----------


## Maleth

> Yes I am aware of that, it is also not far from my dads paternal village, I have been to Taranto, nice city, you could even argue that Matera would be similar to Taranto as they share the same Ionian coast.


I have not been to Taranto, but maybe one day. I was lucky to visit the region last April, Ostuni, Lecce and a couple of villages. Missed visiting Matera as we had no time. A very nice experience.

----------


## Azzurro

> I have not been to Taranto, but maybe one day. I was lucky to visit the region last April, Ostuni, Lecce and a couple of villages. Missed visiting Matera as we had no time. A very nice experience.


Matera is a gem, its really nice and historical, they filmed the Passion of the Christ there, how was Lecce? Heard nice things about it along with Otranto,I have never been pasted Taranto on that coast.

----------


## Maleth

> Matera is a gem, its really nice and historical, they filmed the Passion of the Christ there, how was Lecce? Heard nice things about it along with Otranto,I have never been pasted Taranto on that coast.


Lecce has some awesome buildings and felt particularly familiar as the stone used is very similar to the local stone (soft light limestone) and very similar architecture too in the historical centres. Well worth a visit. I hope I will be able to visit Matera some day.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I'd say the Illyrians had R1a and R1b-U152 migrants that migrated into their area during the Bronze Age as people related to the Greek Macedonians and Dorians invaders. R2 is most strong in the Indian subcontinent and rare in Europe. http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolit...dle_bronze_age


Sorry. In previous post I meant R1b instead of R2b. My mistake. 
So you think that Illyrians firstly only R1a? What about the E v13 and the J2?

----------


## Aaron1981

E-V13 is quite a bit higher in Austria than I would have expected. However, I believe both the levels of R1a and I1 are comparable to it. R1b still encompassed just over 50% of the male sample, and there was an even split between U106, U152 and P312(XU152). This is going on the latest data from a recent study which is from a paper under a paywall in 2016. I would expect some of these E-V13 are recent immigrants from the Balkans, but it's really difficult to determine since there is no ancient culture which seems linked with this group.

----------


## firetown

> Ancient mtDNA indeed indicate that prehistoric Basques were closer to modern Near Easterners


 Much excellent evidence regarding mtDNA findings amongst ancient Basques. Is there any report on y-DNA frequencies from ancient Basque burial grounds anywhere?

----------


## dorian

This article says that :- "The Illyrians have more mysterious origins, but judging from the modern haplogroup frequencies in the Dinaric Alps, they surely were predominantly a blend of R1a and I2a1b."

Now the questions its why you judge from haplogroup in the ex Yougoslavia and you not judge the halpogroup of the Albanians which are the only who speak the language of ancient Illyrians ... !! This its ridiculous ... Yougoslavians come from slavs and spoke a slavic language and you cant see their halpogroup to understand the halpogroup of the Illyrians ...!! But first you have to see the Albanians ... !!!

----------


## redeyednewt

I read the first page, just wondering how accurate are those findings? I am asking since other haplogroups have been found since 2008.

----------


## ihype02

Those are merely hypotheses. Mycenaeans turned out to be J2.

----------


## Athanasios

> A little update based on new information.
> 
> All haplogroups I are the indigenous people of Europe, the direct descendants of Cro-Magnon (it isn't R1b as previously thought). This is why I is found everywhere in Europe at low frequencies, except I1 which remained strong in Germanic countries. A pocket of I2a1a (M26) survived in Sardinia because of it's relative isolation. I2a1b (M423) seems to have adopted agriculture early on around the Carpathians and is thought to have migrated to the Dinaric Alps around 1000 BCE with the Illyrians, where it survives in over 50% of male lineages in most of Bosnia and Croatia.
> 
> *Ancient Greeks*
> 
> The *Pelasgians* (pre-Minoan Greeks, or Helladic Greeks) belonged to an admixture of I2, E1b1b, T and G2a. E-V13 and T probably arrived in Greece from the Levant (and ultimately from Egypt, hence the small percentage of T) in the early Neolithic, 8,500 years ago. G2a came from the Levant was picked up in Anatolia along the way by Levantine farmers and herders.
> 
> *Minoan* Greeks migrated from Mesopotamia via Anatolia. They were mostly J2 people, but probably had some E1b1b too.
> ...


Thank u so much it took me 5 days to find these info

----------


## Johane Derite

> Thank u so much it took me 5 days to find these info


A friendly comment: a lot has changed in our understanding of these subjects since that post in 2009

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Those are merely hypotheses. Mycenaeans turned out to be J2.


What type of J2 were Mycenaeans?

----------


## Piro Ilir

I read in eupedia that Ev13 was part of bronze age elite warriors. Then how is it today strongly ethnic alban!? And to the other hand, the Neolithic farming haplogroup G is almost absent in Albanian ethnic population. In alban Ghegs of Kosova the EV13 go more then 45% , while the 'G' is nearly zero

----------


## Angela

> I read in eupedia that Ev13 was part of bronze age elite warriors. Then how is it today strongly ethnic alban!? And to the other hand, the Neolithic farming haplogroup G is almost absent in Albanian ethnic population. In alban Ghegs of Kosova the EV13 go more then 45% , while the 'G' is nearly zero


The G2a disappeared all over Europe: y dna haplogroups come and go with big migrations. In big migrations, particularly, but not only if male mediated, the newcomers ensure one way or another that they have more reproductive "success". That's the way of it whether we like it or not.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> The G2a disappeared all over Europe: y dna haplogroups come and go with big migrations. In big migrations, particularly, but not only if male mediated, the newcomers ensure one way or another that they have more reproductive "success". That's the way of it whether we like it or not.


From here in Eupedia it says that Neolithic farmers were mostly G2 from what comes out from Neolithic sites. Ev13 it's almost not shown up from these Neolithic sites. Why Albanians have almost nothing G2? They must have some few. Actually we have G2 in Europe in isolated areas where the Neolithics got hidden from the IE warriors. There is a big gap between Ev13 and G2 in ethnic Albans. It doesn't fit to the logic

----------


## Piro Ilir

Eupedia also says that Ev13 was an important part of IE warriors , whom spread in many parts of Eurasia in a short time, whether R1b or R1a.

----------


## firetown

y-DNA in Europe was getting replaced frequently. Groups were invaded, the men all killed and the boys enslaved and treated so badly that most didn't make it to adulthood. 




> From here in Eupedia it says that Neolithic farmers were mostly G2 from what comes out from Neolithic sites. Ev13 it's almost not shown up from these Neolithic sites. Why Albanians have almost nothing G2? They must have some few. Actually we have G2 in Europe in isolated areas where the Neolithics got hidden from the IE warriors. There is a big gap between Ev13 and G2 in ethnic Albans. It doesn't fit to the logic

----------


## ihype02

> What type of J2 were Mycenaeans?


https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2017...nd-mycenaeans/

----------


## Alcuin

> As for the Welsh pockets of E-V13, Wales was for thousands of years a famous mining area. I would think the more parsimonious explanation is that it's some founder effect in an isolated area from the Atlantic Bronze Age


You could be right, at least partly, but I notice that on the '*Genetic History of the British & Irish*' page here on Eupedia the highest rates of E1b generally are found in Cumbria and the East Midlands. I recall reading that there was a small-but-influential Greek population in Roman Luguvalium, modern-day Carlisle, whilst the East Midlands had a number of Roman towns and settlements (including those that became Lincoln and Leicester) which are roughly equidistant between York and London on 'Ermine Street', whilst also being proximate to the Fosse Way. I'd say that a good percentage of the E1b in Britain arrived in the Roman era.

----------


## Mark

> You could be right, at least partly, but I notice that on the '*Genetic History of the British & Irish*' page here on Eupedia the highest rates of E1b generally are found in Cumbria and the East Midlands. I recall reading that there was a small-but-influential Greek population in Roman Luguvalium, modern-day Carlisle, whilst the East Midlands had a number of Roman towns and settlements (including those that became Lincoln and Leicester) which are roughly equidistant between York and London on 'Ermine Street', whilst also being proximate to the Fosse Way. I'd say that a good percentage of the E1b in Britain arrived in the Roman era.


That would be interesting. Are they Roman and Greek subclades?

----------


## Alcuin

> That would be interesting. Are they Roman and Greek subclades?


I'd also like to know!

----------


## Mark

> I'd also like to know!


Guaranteed most E1b in the British Isles are V13 but there is a small pocket of E81 in Northern Wales:

IMG_2329.JPG

----------


## gidai

> The G2a disappeared all over Europe: y dna haplogroups come and go with big migrations. In big migrations, particularly, but not only if male mediated, the newcomers ensure one way or another that they have more reproductive "success". That's the way of it whether we like it or not.


This is not true. Look at the core of Europe, like Switzerland, Austria, or in Romania where barbarian hordes have passed again and again.

----------


## Angela

> This is not true. Look at the core of Europe, like Switzerland, Austria, or in Romania where barbarian hordes have passed again and again.


I have no idea to what you're objecting. 

You don't think G2a levels drastically decreased? That is a fact.

In Europe first we had C, then I, then G2a, then resurgence of some I2a, then huge increases of R1b and R1a. At some point E appeared, which got lucky and expanded quite late.

Now, either they killed the "native men" whom they encountered or they just made them less likely to reproduce by elite dominance.

This is all the consensus. If you're going to downvote statements about it and post that you disagree then produce your evidence by citing ancient dna and the population genetics academic papers.

----------


## gidai

Sorry. But is not true that "The G2a disappeared all over Europe" But are spread now all over, even in... Italy :) or in China. Is it right ?

----------


## Angela

> Sorry. But is not true that "The G2a disappeared all over Europe" But are spread now all over, even in... Italy :) or in China. Is it right ?



"Disappeared" may have been hyperbole, but G2a went from being the majority haplogroup to being a few percent in some countries. Where "farmer" ancestry wasn't as decimated, as in Italy, the percentages are higher, but nowhere near where they were. 

You also have to look at sub-clades.

A G2a line was picked up by the Indo-Europeans and absorbed by them, so that complicates matters. In northern Italu for example, as in Germany, a lot of the G2a is of this variety, so it doesn't invalidate the claim of replacement. It was spread by Indo-European groups.

Also, in southern Italy, in particular, much of the G2a may have come from Anatolia in the Bronze Age, so again it's replacement 5-6,000 years ago. 

Of the G2a sub-lineage carried by the ancient farmer Otzi, for example, there's almost none left. The I2a that had been absorbed by the farmers is also at very low percentages. The places where you can find the highest frequency of some of these farmer yDna lineages is in isolated Sardinia. The I2a which shows up in the Balkans and Eastern Europe is once again a lineage picked up by the Indo-Europeans.

You have to know the history of the sub-clades involved. You can't just look at I2a or G2a. 

There's just no denying that there was massive yDna line replacement in Europe over and over again. The causes we can argue about.

See:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ighlight=Sarno
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...light=Boattini

----------


## Parafarne

It is accepted fact the G, I2 ydna was replaced by R1b yet could it be possible the pre R1b europe had very little population and the incoming IEs had simply higher population from the begining so there weren't need to dissimate the local male line? or is it combination of the two.

----------


## Angela

> It is accepted fact the G, I2 ydna was replaced by R1b yet could it be possible the pre R1b europe had very little population and the incoming IEs had simply higher population from the begining so there weren't need to dissimate the local male line? or is it combination of the two.


There are lots of other possible factors: population crashes in central Europe due to climate change, and the plague which the Indo-Europeans brought with them, for example, However, the mtDna lineages of the women survived. So, there had to be some selective advantage of elite lineages in terms of breeding opportunities etc. unless it was also a case that the children of "native" women inherited some useful immunity to the new diseases? If you use our search engine you can find lots of threads where we discuss all these things at length.

However, I think it's informative to look at the fact that even within the downstream R1b and R1a clades, so within these tribes, there's a lot of pruning. If they didn't kill the men with whom they were competing, they put them at a severe disadvantage. I don't think we can get away from the fact that some of that must have gone on. Anyway, that's what it looks like to me at the moment.

Ed. Neolithic Europe is a bit different. There may have been some "warfare", but Europe was so unpopulated at the time that I think there was a lot of mutual co-existence of the two groups, especially because their economies were so massively different. It's just that farmers always massively out produce hunter-gatherers in terms of population growth. That's not to say the farmers couldn't be violent. There are a lot of examples of violence in the late Neolithic when resources decreased because of climate change. 

The I2a farmer lineages may have come about through absorption of some hunter-gatherer men and then just drift. We need to learn more about that period.

----------


## gidai

I try to see what happens if at one point in time, two diferent populations, each with its own Y haplogruop, * 1* and _2_, mix together, let's say in proportion of 10 to 90. At the initial moment the haplogrup *1* population represent 10% of the mixture, and fertility is the same for both populations, but because of any biological reasons there is a difference between the number of boys and girls who are born in families of men of haplogrup *1* and *2*. I assumed that from 10 offsprings, males *1* have 6 boys and 4 girls, and males *2* have 4 boys and 6 girls.
Then I calculated what would happen with the frequency of this two haplogroups in the mixed population over a few next generations.

_ 1 .......... 2_ 
_(%)_ _(%)_
*10........90
14,29...85,71 --> generation I (after 25-30 years)
20........80
27,27...72,73
36........64
45,76...54,24
55,86...44,14 -->* * generation VI (150-180 years)*
*65,5.....34,5
74,01...25,99
81.03...18,97
86,5.....13,5
90,57...9,43 -->* * generation XI (275-330 years)*
*93,51...6,49
95,58...4,42
97,01...2.99
97,99...2,01
98,65...1,45
99,09...0,91 -->* * generation XVII (425-510 years)*

_Since the sixth generation (150-180years), the haplogroups proportion already has changed in favor of Y haplogroup_ *1*.
_In about 275-330 years (eleventh generation), the proportion of haplogrope 1 (90,57%) already exceeds initial proportion of haplogroup 2 (90%). 

Other important effects:
- Mitochondrial haplogroup of the population 2, which represented 90% at the beginning, will increase, reaching very close to 100% in a short time.
-Although haplogroup 1 has become overwhelming, in fact the initial autosomal genetic heritage proportion of the mixture is kept, 10 to 90. 
_
If it has a correspondent in reality, this can explain many "sudden population extinctions" if we take into account only the chromosome Y. But *these extinctions do not exist* autosomaly!
I think it be one explainations of the fast expansion at high proportion of R1b, R1a, or other Y haplogroups.
So, probably, mixing with other small groups, many populations like Neolithic Farmers switch Y chromosome, but their genetic heritage remain at high level until today. 

What do you think?

----------


## Wonomyro

> I try to see what happens if at one point in time, two diferent populations, each with its own Y haplogruop, * 1* and _2_, mix together, let's say in proportion of 10 to 90. (...) What do you think?


 A nice example how it is wrong to draw conclusions about a past solely based on on present day frequencies of Y-DNA haplogroups without any insight into autosomal and ancient data.

----------


## JajarBingan

> The G2a disappeared all over Europe


Ehm, it's still alive and kicking, especially in Austria and Italy.

----------


## Angela

> Ehm, it's still alive and kicking, especially in Austria and Italy.


Please read post number 414.

----------


## Plutarch

> A little update based on new information.
> 
> All haplogroups I are the indigenous people of Europe, the direct descendants of Cro-Magnon (it isn't R1b as previously thought). This is why I is found everywhere in Europe at low frequencies, except I1 which remained strong in Germanic countries. A pocket of I2a1a (M26) survived in Sardinia because of it's relative isolation. I2a1b (M423) seems to have adopted agriculture early on around the Carpathians and is thought to have migrated to the Dinaric Alps around 1000 BCE with the Illyrians, where it survives in over 50% of male lineages in most of Bosnia and Croatia.
> 
> *Ancient Greeks*
> 
> The *Pelasgians* (pre-Minoan Greeks, or Helladic Greeks) belonged to an admixture of I2, E1b1b, T and G2a. E-V13 and T probably arrived in Greece from the Levant (and ultimately from Egypt, hence the small percentage of T) in the early Neolithic, 8,500 years ago. G2a came from the Levant was picked up in Anatolia along the way by Levantine farmers and herders.
> 
> *Minoan* Greeks migrated from Mesopotamia via Anatolia. They were mostly J2 people, but probably had some E1b1b too.
> ...


This is absolutely false since all ancient Greeks perished just as Romans did. You need DNA from fosiles.

----------


## noman

So, Y DNA R2 was just in Ancient India?

----------


## Carlos

The tartessos of what haplogroups were?

----------


## jmedlin81

I'm impressed with the depth of your information, and most of it rings true with my 20 years of research, but you lost me here... and I strongly agree with Hag anus.
Theres a very obvious genetic type represented in Scandinavian, Denmark, Northwestern Germany and the Netherlands, and it shows virtually zero mongoloid admixture.. this is obvious to any remotely discerning eye, but also obvious in skull shape, hair/eye/skin color, height, lactose tolerance, and several other factors I could spend a great deal of time listing. 
This idea of significant mongoloid mixture simply don't make any sense relative to my own totality of context, and I'm struggling to think the mental gymnastics that must be used to justify its being true.
I agree with other posters, traits simply don't change THAT fast.. the big wide round eyes found in these regions can't have been re-shaped overnight, nor the hair color or texture, nor the eye color, nor the skin tone, nor the stature...

----------


## jmedlin81

> Lastly on this, trying to say that the people of ancient Greece that achieved so much were ethnically different from those who live there today does not even reach the level of pseudo-science. I would not even lend dignity to those assertions by arguing against them. Offering maps upon maps and citations that are mostly irrelevant adds no credibility. todays Greeks are descended from the Indo European Greek tribes and those who did not get killed or driven off by them.


This is complete nonsense, I'm afraid, at the risk of offending Greek friends...
we have not only numerous exactingly-formed statues and artistic depictions showing a different type, but countless mentions of blond hair and blue eyes, especially among the Spartan element.
Populations don't remain static over millennia.. capable human capital tends to migrate where the wealth and power and influence lies, slowly but surely, which leads to a brain-drain effect. Immigration _into_ a region has an even more profound effect (think of what Europe might look like in 20 years, relative to what it looked like 20 years ago).
Greece today is far more Turkic and misc than it was in the time of the Hellenes, just as northwest India looks completely different than it would have between 1500bc-500ad... the ruling caste is always subsumed and integrated over time, especially when the strict caste system is abandoned. They're definitely descendants, broadly speaking, but to assume they're the _same_ people in a genetic or cultural sense doesn't seem to square with the information available.

----------


## jmedlin81

> The earlier IE people had probably strong mongoloid traits. Much more than they have now. This is my humble opinion.


What in the world are you basing this speculation on, I wonder?
Genetic data clearly shows the Yamnaya, for example, relate more closely to modern Scandinavians and northwestern Europeans than any other people.

I think several people on this board make the mistake that because IE peoples once existed in Asia, India, Turkey, etc, that those that migrated into Europe must also be part modern Asian, modern East-Indian, modern Turk... I couldn't disagree with this more strongly, nor could the data. 
Everything about fair skin/hair/eyes is recessive.. it disappears over time, especially with any admixture.. it doesn't strengthen and become more pronounced.

----------


## jmedlin81

> So would Ghenkis Kan, Hanibal Barca, Miyamoto Misashi, Xiahou Dun fall under R1b too?


Interestingly, for what its worth, Genghis was mentioned as having reddish hair, and blue/gray eyes, in the two depictions of his appearance. He also belonged to the 'Bourchikoun' clan, which means 'gray eyed'.

----------


## markod

> I think several people on this board make the mistake that because IE peoples once existed in Asia, India, Turkey, etc, that those that migrated into Europe must also be part modern Asian, modern East-Indian, modern Turk... I couldn't disagree with this more strongly, nor could the data. 
> Everything about fair skin/hair/eyes is recessive.. it disappears over time, especially with any admixture.. it doesn't strengthen and become more pronounced.


You might want to retake highschool biology.

----------


## jmedlin81

> You might want to retake highschool biology.


Are you saying recessive genetic traits become more pronounced within a people or nation over time, under usual circumstances?

I'd be far more inclined to think the prevalence of fair hair and eyes we see in Europe are directly connected to those peoples who were referred to these traits throughout history throughout (Scythians, Dorians, Tocharians, those who swept into India, etc), as opposed to developing by some exceptional genetic mutation in the past couple millennia in the forests of Europe. 

If you can explain to me how nature achieves the recessive skin/hair/eye color traits of, say, a modern Swede, from a genetic background containing significant mongoloid (or darker) skin/hair/eye color influences, I'd love to hear your theory.

----------


## markod

> Are you saying recessive genetic traits become more pronounced within a people or nation over time, under usual circumstances?
> 
> I'd be far more inclined to think the prevalence of fair hair and eyes we see in Europe are directly connected to those peoples who were referred to these traits throughout history throughout (Scythians, Dorians, Tocharians, those who swept into India, etc), as opposed to developing by some exceptional genetic mutation in the past couple millennia in the forests of Europe. 
> 
> If you can explain to me how nature achieves the recessive skin/hair/eye color traits of, say, a modern Swede, from a genetic background containing significant mongoloid (or darker) skin/hair/eye color influences, I'd love to hear your theory.


Riddle me this: how did the blond populations you refer to become blond?

----------


## Angela

> Riddle me this: how did the blond populations you refer to become blond?


Didn't you know? Aliens made them and dropped them out of spaceships.

----------


## JrTAlexie

AETA of the Philippines
Ydna P*, P1, P2, K2
Mtdna B, B4, M, M7
Same as Melanesians, some Aetas are born with Blond Hair

----------


## gidai

Anything else discovered?

----------


## Carlos

Attachment 10668
*Source of wishes
*
_I would like to be blonde, beautiful and desired by all men_

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> Interestingly, for what its worth, Genghis was mentioned as having reddish hair, and blue/gray eyes, in the two depictions of his appearance. He also belonged to the 'Bourchikoun' clan, which means 'gray eyed'.


That's true, he probably did have natural red hair, but he still obviously would have looked Mongoloid.

----------


## davef

> This is complete nonsense, I'm afraid, at the risk of offending Greek friends...
> we have not only numerous exactingly-formed statues and artistic depictions showing a different type, but countless mentions of blond hair and blue eyes, especially among the Spartan element.
> Populations don't remain static over millennia.. capable human capital tends to migrate where the wealth and power and influence lies, slowly but surely, which leads to a brain-drain effect. Immigration _into_ a region has an even more profound effect (think of what Europe might look like in 20 years, relative to what it looked like 20 years ago).
> Greece today is far more Turkic and misc than it was in the time of the Hellenes, just as northwest India looks completely different than it would have between 1500bc-500ad... the ruling caste is always subsumed and integrated over time, especially when the strict caste system is abandoned. They're definitely descendants, broadly speaking, but to assume they're the _same_ people in a genetic or cultural sense doesn't seem to square with the information available.


 Wroooong!!!!! W-R-O-N-G WRONG WRONG WRONG!
stormfront is thataway buddy---->

----------


## Salento

> Wroooong!!!!! W-R-O-N-G WRONG WRONG WRONG!
> stormfront is thataway buddy---->


 :Good Job:  
☇
https://www.Eupedia.com/forum/thread...l=1#post565448

----------


## Eumania

This is not an opinion of the Bulgarians, but of 99% of the ethnologists in the world in the 20th century

----------


## Eumania

> This is your opinion, and not of the people that live out there. Bulgarians were constantly trying to repress the use of Serbian language and Serbian names in those areas. Bulgarians are also infamous to ethnic related crimes during WWII and WWII ...


This is not an opinion of the Bulgarians, but of 99% of the ethnologists in the world in the 20th century. And you Serbs are far more infamous to ethnic crimes in the latest story. It is hypocritical to raise the topic.

----------


## xri34

> This is complete nonsense, I'm afraid, at the risk of offending Greek friends...
> we have not only numerous exactingly-formed statues and artistic depictions showing a different type, but countless mentions of blond hair and blue eyes, especially among the Spartan element.
> Populations don't remain static over millennia.. capable human capital tends to migrate where the wealth and power and influence lies, slowly but surely, which leads to a brain-drain effect. Immigration _into_ a region has an even more profound effect (think of what Europe might look like in 20 years, relative to what it looked like 20 years ago).
> Greece today is far more Turkic and misc than it was in the time of the Hellenes, just as northwest India looks completely different than it would have between 1500bc-500ad... the ruling caste is always subsumed and integrated over time, especially when the strict caste system is abandoned. They're definitely descendants, broadly speaking, but to assume they're the _same_ people in a genetic or cultural sense doesn't seem to square with the information available.


Greece today is not more Turkic. It is more Balkanic due to the balkan migrations during the middle-ages. Most mainland Greeks have balkanic admixture while many Anatolian Greeks descend from ancient indigenous populations of Anatolia. But to a significant extent Greeks descend from ancient Greeks. I can show you my gedmatch results which are representative for southern mainland Greeks.
Proto-Greeks were a steppe tribe so I suppose they were blonde with blue eyes. When they arrived in Greece during Bronze Age they mixed with the local neolithic mediterranean populations and they created the ancient Greek people. Haplogroups of the majority of the modern Greeks are from those neolithic populations. There were not only blonde ancient Greeks many of them had brown hair and eyes like Greek people today.

----------


## xri34

Could you tell me in which subclades of R1a did the ancient Thracians belong?

----------


## Angela

> Greece today is not more Turkic. It is more Balkanic due to the balkan migrations during the middle-ages. Most mainland Greeks have balkanic admixture while many Anatolian Greeks descend from ancient indigenous populations of Anatolia. But to a significant extent Greeks descend from ancient Greeks. I can show you my gedmatch results which are representative for southern mainland Greeks.
> *Proto-Greeks were a steppe tribe so I suppose they were blonde with blue eyes.* When they arrived in Greece during Bronze Age they mixed with the local neolithic mediterranean populations and they created the ancient Greek people. Haplogroups of the majority of the modern Greeks are from those neolithic populations. There were not only blonde ancient Greeks many of them had brown hair and eyes like Greek people today.


Steppe tribes, if by that you mean the people like Yamnaya and Catacomb culture, they were not blonde and blue-eyed. The only steppe tribes who had some lighter people were groups like Andronovo which come from a period 1000 years later and way to the east. 

I'm surprised a Greek hasn't read the Lazaridis paper from the Reich lab: Myceneaens were dark haired and dark eyed.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5565772/

----------


## xri34

What I know is that the myceneaens descended from the steppes but until they arrive to Greece they mixed with other populations so they had steppe admixture but less than their ancestors in Yamnaya. Furthermore I think that the myceneaens in Greece mixed quickly with the local neolithic population and everyone is considered myceneaen so we are talking about a population with low steppe admixture. But yes their ancestors in Steppes were relatives to Indo-Iranians so they were blond. What I am looking for is about their haplogroups. They were R1b, J2a R1a-Z93?

----------


## Yetos

> Greece today is not more Turkic. It is more Balkanic due to the balkan migrations during the middle-ages. Most mainland Greeks have balkanic admixture while many Anatolian Greeks descend from ancient indigenous populations of Anatolia. But to a significant extent Greeks descend from ancient Greeks. I can show you my gedmatch results which are representative for southern mainland Greeks.
> Proto-Greeks were a steppe tribe so I suppose they were blonde with blue eyes. When they arrived in Greece during Bronze Age they mixed with the local neolithic mediterranean populations and they created the ancient Greek people. Haplogroups of the majority of the modern Greeks are from those neolithic populations. There were not only blonde ancient Greeks many of them had brown hair and eyes like Greek people today.



All scientistic pappers say the oposite,

wonder which papper is your source,

Blonde and blue eyes was never a characteristic of Hellenic nation,

----------


## Yetos

> What I know is that the myceneaens descended from the steppes but until they arrive to Greece they mixed with other populations so they had steppe admixture but less than their ancestors in Yamnaya. Furthermore I think that the myceneaens in Greece mixed quickly with the local neolithic population and everyone is considered myceneaen so we are talking about a population with low steppe admixture. But yes their ancestors in Steppes were relatives to Indo-Iranians so they were blond. What I am looking for is about their haplogroups. They were R1b, J2a R1a-Z93?



Myceneans have nothing to do with Steppes,
the last papper of Lazarides is clear,

and NO

it is diefferent think the Indo-Iranian,
and different the Greaco-Aryan,

R1b might not existed in Myceneans,
as for R1a found in the lands of proto-Greek area 
still is under discuss its origin,


in fact Myceneans might be origined from South Caucas area-Armenia, and never mixed with steppe,
since have the lowest steppe admixture of steppe admixture.

----------


## xri34

> Myceneans have nothing to do with Steppes,
> the last papper of Lazarides is clear,
> 
> and NO
> 
> it is diefferent think the Indo-Iranian,
> and different the Greaco-Aryan,
> 
> R1b might not existed in Myceneans,
> ...


Myceneaens had some steppe admixture. Probably before they arrive in Greece they mixed with other populations and this is why they had J2a lineages. This is what we can find in eupedia:
The Mycenaean culture commenced circa 1650 BCE and is clearly an imported steppe culture. The close relationship between Mycenaean and Proto-Indo-Iranian languages suggest that they split fairly late, some time between 2500 and 2000 BCE. Archeologically, Mycenaean chariots, spearheads, daggers and other bronze objects show striking similarities with the Seima-Turbino culture (c. 1900-1600 BCE) of the northern Russian forest-steppes, known for the great mobility of its nomadic warriors (Seima-Turbino sites were found as far away as Mongolia). It is therefore likely that the Mycenaean descended from Russia to Greece between 1900 and 1650 BCE, where they intermingled with the locals to create a new unique Greek culture.

And this is what the paper of Lazaridis mention: could model Mycenaeans as a mixture of the Anatolian Neolithic and Chalcolithic-to-Bronze Age populations from Armenia (Table 1).* Populations from Armenia possessed some ancestry related to eastern European* *hunter-gatherers*4, so they, or similar unsampled populations of western Asia, could have contributed it to populations of the Aegean. This model makes geographical sense, since a population movement from the vicinity of Armenia could have admixed with Anatolian Neolithic-related farmers on either side of the Aegean. *However, Mycenaeans can also be modelled as a mixture of Minoans and Bronze Age steppe populations (**Table 1; Supplementary Information**, section 2), suggesting that, alternatively, ‘eastern’ ancestry arrived in both Crete and mainland Greece, followed by ~13–18% admixture with a ‘northern’ steppe population in mainland Greece only. Such a scenario is also plausible

*So he pinpoints ancestry from north-east europe and he examines the possible alternatives but he does not reject the steppes scenario.


My haplogroup is R-F2935 which is a subclade of R1a-Z93. There is mostly in Europe. I have been told that this subclade is Scythian/Sarmatian or Proto-Greek or even Thracian because it is believed that Proto-Greeks and Thracians had some steppe lineages.

----------


## Yetos

@xri34

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...and-Mycenaeans

maybe you already have read it,
but it is a good point to philosophed the genettics of Myceneans

and until now no Rib found in early Greece.
as also the most ancient population of Greek space are the sarakatsanoi. (I1)
while Kleitos sample is G2

----------


## xri34

> @xri34
> 
> https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...and-Mycenaeans
> 
> maybe you already have read it,
> but it is a good point to philosophed the genettics of Myceneans
> 
> and until now no Rib found in early Greece.
> as also the most ancient population of Greek space are the sarakatsanoi. (I1)
> while Kleitos sample is G2


The link does not argue something different than what I am saying. I1 is palaiolithic and G2a neolithic in Greece so it makes sense. How did R1b arrive in Greece according to you?

----------


## Sonnenburg

True. Native Europeans should be studied with more vigor and determination...

----------


## Yetos

> The link does not argue something different than what I am saying. I1 is palaiolithic and G2a neolithic in Greece so it makes sense. How did R1b arrive in Greece according to you?


It depends on which R1b

The Anatolian one
or the West European ones?

----------


## khufu

need updates new studies vs old studies

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Steppe tribes, if by that you mean the people like Yamnaya and Catacomb culture, they were not blonde and blue-eyed. The only steppe tribes who had some lighter people were groups like Andronovo which come from a period 1000 years later and way to the east. 
> 
> I'm surprised a Greek hasn't read the Lazaridis paper from the Reich lab: Myceneaens were dark haired and dark eyed.
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5565772/


It makes sense that Mycenaean people were not blonde and fair eyes. As long as they mingled heavily with the Neolithic natives there , mostly with females, they should be brown or black haired. The skin would have been white.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> All scientistic pappers say the oposite,
> 
> wonder which papper is your source,
> 
> Blonde and blue eyes was never a characteristic of Hellenic nation,


Some of them probably were blonde, but anyway the overwhelming majority were in my opinion black and whether brown haired.

----------


## KarinaRof

Всем привет. Занялся утеплением фундамента и отмостки. укладываю ливневку и теперь задумался что она должна быть над пенопластом который лежит горизонтально. а я уложил ее под него и получается какбы мостик холода. Переделать еще есть возможность если это будет правильно.

----------


## Ralphie Boy

A lot of Greeks today have brown and black hair and brown eyes, a “Mediterranean” look. It makes sense what was found in the Mycenaean study and supported by other studies—the Neolithic presence in modern people was not completely replaced by later invasions and settlements.

----------


## Nik

> A lot of Greeks today have brown and black hair and brown eyes, a “Mediterranean” look. It makes sense what was found in the Mycenaean study and supported by other studies—the Neolithic presence in modern people was not completely replaced by later invasions and settlements.


The vast majority I'd say. A lot of Swedes have brown to dark brown hair and brown eyes makes more sense.

----------


## Carlos

Is true really

----------


## goblinjames

The study comparing the Y-chromosome of the Madjar tribe from Kazakhstan to the Magyars of Hungary was leaded by a Jobbik activist, hence not worth a penny.

----------


## TaktikatEMalet

Illyrians r1a and i2a? What are you smoking pal, these are the ones responsible for moving the illyrians southward

----------


## torzio

> The Avars were 
> not listed by you. 
> In and around the present-day Hungarian city of Debrecen, their khaganane was centered 
> and their presence in the Carpathian Basin lasted until 800 AD for several centuries. 
> The existence of the Huns was negligible in terms of the 
> time spent there even when compared with that of the Avars. 
> You also mention Hungary as a 
> name derived from the name Hun. 
> Since the Roman era and long after the fall 
> ...


As for , Pannonia was one of the main "illyrian" tribes along with Dalmatians ..................actually, in the 4 year long Illyrian revolt against Rome, 75% of the illyrian forces came from these 2 groups, ..... Dalmatians comprising of 50% of fighting men and Pannonia 25%

----------


## TaktikatEMalet

How northern Ilyrians lost their land/y dna - all these cities were in northern balkans (Croatia to Montenegro) - 

"Illyricum was heavily colonized by the Romans beginning in the third century BC. The Romans founded the cities of Acruvium, Cibalae, Mursa, Narona, Siscia, and established colonies at Salona, Sirmium, Epidaurum, Aequum, Iader, Rhizon, and in many other cities. These cities were colonized by Roman war veterans. The Illyro-Roman also absorbed other tribes such as the Early Slavs, particularly in the Roman provinces of Dalmatia and Pannonia during the 7th century."

Ilyrian Rhizon - 
"The invasions of the Avars and Slavs left the city deserted. The last reference of a bishop in Risan dates back to 595." 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhizon

This is why we have a lot more ilyrian y dna in southern regions of balkans instead of north, this is where they were settled in isolation to newcomers, some moved there from the north

----------


## ImBooste

Have we any updated, science based, Y-Haplogroup breakdowns of these ancient groups? Prior to the significant genetic mixing of all of the Balkan region and without ignorant "pure origin" nationalism displayed by so many folks/nations.

----------


## Denis87

> Have we any updated, science based, Y-Haplogroup breakdowns of these ancient groups? Prior to the significant genetic mixing of all of the Balkan region and without ignorant "pure origin" nationalism displayed by so many folks/nations.


I've researched recently and I've only found that Vinča culture had some R1b y chromosome markers, that Illyrian period findings in Dalmatia and somewhere in Serbia had G2 haplogroups samples. In Greece it seems G2 and J haplogroup have been found in Minoan and Mycenian period remains, and show them to be related to a high degree, and their genetic continuity with modern Greeks. I found nothing more, is it possible that no one cares about Greek and Roman cultures if no one cares about other peoples in south-east Europe ? 

edit : Oh and there has been found n 2020 a grave yard in Serbia from a Roman period and they found remains of a black person. Also take a look if you care at the page of facebook. archeoserbia its rather nice

----------


## Papajoe

Hi, Newbie here. I see a lot of discussion about R1a and R1b as being in all these ancient cultures.

But I'm R (R-M207) which is an ancestor branch of both R1a and R1b. 

Is that found in any of the ancient cultures?

----------


## TaktikatEMalet

> I've researched recently and I've only found that Vinča culture had some R1b y chromosome markers, that Illyrian period findings in Dalmatia and somewhere in Serbia had G2 haplogroups samples. In Greece it seems G2 and J haplogroup have been found in Minoan and Mycenian period remains, and show them to be related to a high degree, and their genetic continuity with modern Greeks. I found nothing more, is it possible that no one cares about Greek and Roman cultures if no one cares about other peoples in south-east Europe ? 
> edit : Oh and there has been found n 2020 a grave yard in Serbia from a Roman period and they found remains of a black person. Also take a look if you care at the page of facebook. archeoserbia its rather nice


G2 in ancient illyria? Do you have a link?
As far as I know j2b l283 and r1b z2103 have been found in illyrian period/area

----------


## Ozzie

I have never gotten the importance people place on haplogroups. I do not know the subclades of the haplogroups of Maltese men but I know the base haplogroup of some surnames. Attard: E-V13, Schembri: J2, Agius: G2, Portelli: R1a, Zammit & Azzopardi & Cassar are subclades of R1b, Vella & Micallef are subclades of I2 and Borg (a common surname) is J1, I don't know the subclade. Of course not every Maltese male of those surnames has those haplogroups (NPE, adoptions, foundlings) but most do, which is surprising.

----------


## Hawk

> G2 in ancient illyria? Do you have a link?
> As far as I know j2b l283 and r1b z2103 have been found in illyrian period/area


Middle Bronze Age is not Illyrian period at all. Illyrians started to form in Late Bronze Age, and by Early Iron Age they were already formed as an ethnic group.

So, we have no Y-DNA yet from classical period of Illyrians. We have some leaks from Thracians, and some from Anatolian Greeks (Empuries).

----------


## TaktikatEMalet

> Middle Bronze Age is not Illyrian period at all. Illyrians started to form in Late Bronze Age, and by Early Iron Age they were already formed as an ethnic group.
> So, we have no Y-DNA yet from classical period of Illyrians. We have some leaks from Thracians, and some from Anatolian Greeks (Empuries).


Its always good to give a few hundred years leeway for this kind of thing because 

1. Old written history is not always accurate 
2. It has been carried to the modern age innacurately 
3. Ancient dna isnt always perfectly predicted

What are the thracian and greek leaks if you dont mind sharing?

----------


## kingjohn

> I have never gotten the importance people place on haplogroups. I do not know the subclades of the haplogroups of Maltese men but I know the base haplogroup of some surnames. Attard: E-V13, Schembri: J2, Agius: G2, Portelli: R1a, Zammit & Azzopardi & Cassar are subclades of R1b, Vella & Micallef are subclades of I2 and Borg (a common surname) is J1, I don't know the subclade. Of course not every Maltese male of those surnames has those haplogroups (NPE, adoptions, foundlings) but most do, which is surprising.


Interesting  :Thinking: 
As you are maltese you probably memberin
The maltese dna project ( which is close to non-maltese)
Can you have a look about the e1b1b branches there are all of them e-v13 or there some 
e-m81?
Regards
Adam

P.s
I am asking because i know about a confirmed member of e-m81 in e3b project with maltese heritage ...
I Don't post his surname here ( from privacy matter)

----------


## Lzdpbs12

Interesting. Thanks for the work

----------


## Kari

The ancient Macedonians were I2a2.The I haplogroup people are tall.Macedonia in ancient Greek means country with tall men 

( I have not done research is a rough view)

----------


## enter_tain

> The ancient Macedonians were I2a2.The I haplogroup people are tall.Macedonia in ancient Greek means country with tall men 
> ( I have not done research is a rough view)


Yeah and they were led by their tall 5 foot tall leader Alexander  :Laughing: 

Doesn't the "Make" in Makedonian refer to the *high*lands (mountains), not the people?

----------

