# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Dedicated haplogroup pages

## Maciamo

I have started creating separate description pages for Y-DNA haplogroups. So far I have pages for Haplogroup G2a and Haplogroup I1. Let me know what you think. I am not 100% satisfied with my I1 banner yet.

----------


## Knovas

It looks good Maciamo, I'm curious to see what else you add. Also, I'd like to see more information about MtDNA. Specially haplogroup K has a very short mention, I think it's possible to improve it.

----------


## sparkey

I like the page style! It will be interesting to see all the banners once they're up.

This bit on the I1 page doesn't make sense to me, though:




> However the overwhelming proportion of I1 against R1a and R1b rather suggest that most of the Suomi I1 was in Finland came during the Mesolithic when humans reclaimed the region after the melting of the ice cap.


The grammar is weird, but if I understand correctly, you're saying that I1d3-Bothnian split with the rest of I1 in the _Mesolithic_? I1 as a whole doesn't have a TMRCA that goes to the Mesolithic, much less I1d3. Nordtvedt places I1d3 at ~2000 years old... or if you want an older estimate, Robb has it at ~3000 years old. See "The elusive non-Germanic I1."

----------


## Maciamo

> I like the page style! It will be interesting to see all the banners once they're up.
> 
> This bit on the I1 page doesn't make sense to me, though:
> 
> 
> 
> The grammar is weird, but if I understand correctly, you're saying that I1d3-Bothnian split with the rest of I1 in the _Mesolithic_? I1 as a whole doesn't have a TMRCA that goes to the Mesolithic, much less I1d3. Nordtvedt places I1d3 at ~2000 years old... or if you want an older estimate, Robb has it at ~3000 years old. See "The elusive non-Germanic I1."


Sorry for the grammar. I edited the sentenced late last night and forgot to re-read the whole sentence. Thanks for pointing out the conflicting age estimate of Nordtvedt. This made me re-think the whole thing. I shouldn't have written early Mesolithic (which in Finland starts only from 8500 BCE), but rather late Mesolithic (until a bit after 3000 BCE, since there was no Neolithic in northern Fennoscandia). I maintain what I say, and I have now explained in detail why. I think that Nordtvedt is just badly mistaken about his age estimate, which wouldn't be surprising considering how unreliable this method is.

----------


## sparkey

> Sorry for the grammar. I edited the sentenced late last night and forgot to re-read the whole sentence. Thanks for pointing out the conflicting age estimate of Nordtvedt. This made me re-think the whole thing. I shouldn't have written early Mesolithic (which in Finland starts only from 8500 BCE), but rather late Mesolithic (until a bit after 3000 BCE, since there was no Neolithic in northern Fennoscandia). I maintain what I say, and I have now explained in detail why. I think that Nordtvedt is just badly mistaken about his age estimate, which wouldn't be surprising considering how unreliable this method is.


Fair enough. I think Nordtvedt is reliable more often than not, but he has gotten some things wrong (like predicting that I2a2 is more closely related to I2c than to I2a1 and being proven wrong with SNPs). I actually strongly doubt his estimate for my own cluster, I2c-A, which seems much too young. The I1d3 estimate actually looks accurate to me, but the error bars are always large on STR dating, so there's nothing ruling out a mistake there as well.

----------


## Sile

if this site fully excludes Robb, then this site has an issue

----------


## sparkey

> if this site fully excludes Robb, then this site has an issue


Actually I just realized that I misread/misremembered Robb. He indeed does place I1d3 in a timeframe that works with Maciamo's theory (~3,500 BCE, not YBP). So I was wrong about that. But there's a good chance he's being thrown off there by including non-I1d3 in his age estimate for his approximation of I1d3. He actually uses specific STR values in a decision tree rather than STR clusters as what he dates, so he could be thrown off badly by convergence, which we've observed I1 having lots of. I don't know whether his latest dates take into account all the SNPs. So I still prefer Nordtvedt, but Robb is worth citing, yes.

Incidentally, Jean Manco cites Robb's I1 tree but defers to Nordtvedt on the date estimate.

----------


## Mzungu mchagga

The idea of these dedications is brilliant!

----------


## Maciamo

> Fair enough. I think Nordtvedt is reliable more often than not, but he has gotten some things wrong (like predicting that I2a2 is more closely related to I2c than to I2a1 and being proven wrong with SNPs). I actually strongly doubt his estimate for my own cluster, I2c-A, which seems much too young. The I1d3 estimate actually looks accurate to me, but the error bars are always large on STR dating, so there's nothing ruling out a mistake there as well.


I believe that Nordtvedt failed to take into account that Fennoscandia was a hunter-gatherer society until 2800 BCE (even later in the north, and until recently for the Saami), and hunter-gatherers had much smaller populations than agricultural societies. I read that the population of Britain passed from a few thousands people to about 100,000 people just after Neolithic farmers arrived from the continent. This never really happened in Nordic countries. Mutation rates (STR or SNP) are proportional to the population size. With such a tiny I1 population, I wouldn't be surprised if I1 was much older (many thousands years) than STR estimates suggest. If I1d3 is 5000 years old, then I1* could be 8,000 to 12,000 years old.

----------


## Maciamo

Here comes Haplogroup R1a !

----------


## spongetaro

> Here comes Haplogroup R1a !


Good work. In this R1a dedicated page, you wrote:




> A lot of Western and Northern European R1a that is negative for the marker Z284 falls under the root R1a1a1* (M417), or even in the older R1a1a (M17) and R1a1 (SRY10831.2). The former are descended from the oldest known expansion of R1a out of the Forest-Steppe, the Corded Ware Culture (see below), which predates all the above subclades. At present no subclade has been identified by a common SNP. However, Klyosov et al. (2009) found that a substantial percentage of R1a in Northwest Europe, particularly in Norway, England, Ireland and Iceland, had a repeat value of 10 (instead of 12) at the STR marker *DYS388*. Among them, some individuals were identified as carrying the mutation L664. The origin of the older subclades (M17 and SRY10831.2) is still unclear (perhaps the migration of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers around Europe).


Is it the case of most of the Northern Iberian and Inner French R1a?
In those two areas, there seems to have a curious blend of R1a and E1b1 like in northern Lybia. 
What if these R1a were mesolithic remanants?

----------


## Maciamo

I have now added Haplogroup J2. I have modified a lot the description. Note the new section about bull worship.

----------


## sparkey

No famous people for R1a or J2 yet? For R1a, I know of Sir Francis Drake (descendants of his nephew Francis Drake tested R1a, see the Drake DNA Project) and Anderson Cooper (see ISOGG).

----------


## zanipolo

Can we assume then that the heavy concentration of J2 in central anatolia was hittite, can we assume the heavy concentration of J2 near the hellespont was trojan. Can we assume thay became the sea people and sailed around looking to settle in lands, maybe ( apart from islands ) in modern albania first , then to italian lands. 

Did etruscans have J2 , as I know they where majority G2. there is a void of J2 in anatolia roughly where etruscans are said to have come from.

I really think the bronze age migrations of around 1200BC has a lot to do with J2, G2 and E

----------


## Goga

Thank you for all your pages. You have got a very time-consuming hobby, lol!

----------


## Semitic Duwa

Nice banners, I wonder how the J1, E1b1b1 and R1b banners will look like :Rolleyes:

----------


## Asturrulumbo

> I have now added Haplogroup J2. I have modified a lot the description. Note the new section about bull worship.


Interesting, however, bull-worship has arose independently among many civilizations, as the bull is often a symbol for fecundation and fertility:



> Indra is frequently compared with a *bull*. His Iranian counterpart, Verethragna, appears to Zarathustra in the form of a *bull*, a stallion, a ram, a goat and a wild boar, and "some other symbols of the male and combative spirit of elemental powers of the blood". Sometimes Indra is also called a ram. These same animal epiphanies are again found in Rudra, a pre-Aryan divinity assimilated by Indra. Rudra is the father of the Marutas and in an hymn, it is remembered how "the *bull* Rudra created them in the clear udder of Prishni". Under its *taurine* form, the reproductive divinity has united itself to a cow-goddess that breeds all. Prishni is one of its names. Sabardughâ is another; but it is always about a cow that breeds all. _Rig Veda_, III, 38, 8, speaks about a "_vishvarûpa_ cow that vivifies all"; in the _Atharva Veda_, X, 10, the cow unites itself successively to all the gods and breeds in all the cosmic planes; "the gods live off the cow and the men too, the cow has become in this universe as vast as the empire of the Sun". Aditi, mother of the supreme deities Adityas, is also represented as a cow.
> 
> This reproductive-taurine "specialization" of the atmospheric and fertility divinity is not only noticed in the Indian domain, we once more find it in a very extended Afro-Eurasian form, but let us observe from now that such a "specialization" equally reveals external influences, be they influences of an ethnic order (the "southern elements" of which ethnologists speak of), be they of a religious order: Indra, for example, presents traces of extra-Aryan influences, but what interests us more for now is that their personality has been altered and augmented by elements that don't belong to him as god of the rain, the hurricane and cosmic fertility. His relations with the *bull* and Soma, for example, confer him lunar prestiges. The Moon governs the waters and the rains and distributes the universal fecundity; the bull horns have been assimilated very early into the waxing Moon. We will soon occupy ourselves again of all these cultural complexes. Let us retain however that _the reproductive specialization constrains the celestial divinities to reabsorb in their personalities all the hierophanies that have a direct relation with the universal fecundity._ Necessarily, by accentuating their meteorological (tempest, thunder, rain) and reproductive functions, a celestial god not only transforms himself in the partner of the great chtonic-lunar mother, but also assimilates her attributes; in the case of Indra, Soma, the bull and maybe even certain aspects of the Marutas (in the measure that the latter hypostatize the wandering souls of the dead)....


M. Eliade_, Patterns in Comparative Religion_
So, in conclusion, while some bull-worship may be an ethnic marker, it is not always the case.

----------


## Alan

Maciamo I have noticed a mistake you seem to have forgotten to fix.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origin...s_europe.shtml

On the description Table just under the Haplogroup "Tree" it still says 

G => 17,000 years ago (between India and the Caucasus) 
I2 => 17,000 years ago (in the Balkans) 
J2 => 15,000 years ago (in northern Mesopotamia) 
I2b => 13,000 years ago (in Central Europe) 
N1c1 => 12,000 years ago (in Siberia) 
I2a => 11,000 years ago (in the Balkans) 
R1b1b2 => 10,000 years ago (north or south of the Caucasus) 
*J1 => 10,000 years ago (in the Arabian peninsula)*

----------


## Knovas

It says I2a1 in Sardinia, also very dubious...It has been stated several times that this clade is surely relatively recent there. The Pyrenees are a more likely option for its ancestral place.

So not the only thing to fix.

----------


## Maciamo

> Maciamo I have noticed a mistake you seem to have forgotten to fix.
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origin...s_europe.shtml
> 
> On the description Table just under the Haplogroup "Tree" it still says 
> 
> G => 17,000 years ago (between India and the Caucasus) 
> I2 => 17,000 years ago (in the Balkans) 
> J2 => 15,000 years ago (in northern Mesopotamia) 
> ...


Yes, you are right. Thanks for pointing that out. I am sure that a lot of dates and places of origin will have to be revised.

----------


## razor

I would have given THIS item a + but apparently there is a restriction on approval or criticism per diem so I'll do it this way (:=)))

----------


## Maciamo

Here is a first draft of Haplogroup R1b. I haven't modified the history for over a year, so I should re-read everything once and see if everything is consistent with my current knowledge. I should also make a new subclade tree.

----------


## Kardu

> Here is a first draft of Haplogroup R1b. I haven't modified the history for over a year, so I should re-read everything once and see if everything is consistent with my current knowledge. I should also make a new subclade tree.


Loved the draft, one thing though, on the scheme U152 is noted as R1b1a2a1a1b4 and in the table as R1b1a2a1a1b3

----------


## Knovas

I already noticed that in the global distribution there's 5% of R1b in Northwest Africa without especification (mostly in Morocco and some in Tunisia) and then, there's between 1-5% of R-S28 (mostly in Algeria and a bit in Tunisia).

I assume the figure for Tunisia is the same type of R1b in both maps, but ¿which subclade is the Moroccan one? and ¿What happened with Algeria in the global map (absent)?

----------


## Maciamo

> Loved the draft, one thing though, on the scheme U152 is noted as R1b1a2a1a1b4 and in the table as R1b1a2a1a1b3


That's because I have already updated the table but not yet the scheme. I will fix it soon.

----------


## razyn

I'm pleased to see Z196 mentioned at last, but would respectfully differ from the description of its most prevalent ancient ethnic group(s). That, and the "highest frequency" data, are based on the fact that those relatively young branches of Z196 were found in the labs (and thus in the literature) long before Z196 itself was identified. However, the very populous "North/South cluster," the L165/S68 subclade of L176.2, and some Z196* remnant populations show little or no Iberian or Gascon concentration. As a very early clade of S116/P312, Z196 has been found in old populations at least as far east as Russia, Poland and Hungary, with a small but apparently early presence in coastal areas of Scandinavia.

----------


## Mikewww

> Here is a first draft of Haplogroup R1b. I haven't modified the history for over a year, so I should re-read everything once and see if everything is consistent with my current knowledge. I should also make a new subclade tree.


There are substantial changes in granularity in the R1b-L21/S145 haplogroup. ISOGG is fairly up to date.
http://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html

An leading edge L21 subclade tree box chart is here http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/RL21Project/

I will try to summarize the more significant subclades of R1b-L21/S145:

L513/DF1/S214 which has further suclades (in order of size) of L193, L705.2 and P66.
L513 is scattered across British Isles but reaches into Sweden, Benelux and France and is associated with the 
11-13 Combo cluster. L193 is the largest subclade of L513 and has a preponderance of Scottish Border lineages
and surnames.

Z253 which has the subclades of L226/S168 and L554. 
By the far the largest subclade is L226. It is noted as marking Irish III haplotypes and maybe associated with 
the Dalcassian clans. Two Z253* people have been found of Iberian descent.

DF21/S192 which as the subclades of Z246, P314.2 and L720 and S190.
DF21 is scattered across the Isles and Benelux and Norway. The largest DF21* cluster appears to be null425 Clan Colla. (EDIT: added Clan Colla comment.) Z246 appears to be the largest SNP marked subclade and includes DF25/S253 underneath it.
S190 is new so there are some unknowns but it is downstream of DF21 and has been found in Little Scots cluster people and it is downstream of DF21.

Z255 which has the large subclade of L159.2/S169.2.
L159.2 is associated with the Irish Sea/Leinster cluster.

L371 which is associated with the Wales I 17-14-10 cluster.

L144

----------


## Mikewww

Almost forgot. The other new news on R1b-L21/S145 is that M222, associated with NW Irish haplotypes, has been found to be downstream of DF23. There is a new major subclade of L21, and it is DF23. M222 is also very common in the lowlands of Scotland besides the north of Ireland. M222 has been found in Germany as well.

----------


## Maciamo

I have created a new phylogenetic tree of R1b. I couldn't place all the deep subclades and also excluded the private mutations.

----------


## Knovas

Looks good Maciamo. I see that in the Italo-Celtic Branch, you prefered not to name the subgroup in the Middle (Basque, Gascon-Catalan). You could use the word "Pyrenees" as reference, just a suggestion.

----------


## razyn

> I see that in the Italo-Celtic Branch, you preferred not to name the subgroup in the Middle (Basque, Gascon-Catalan).


Might that have something to do with its not being *exclusively* Italo-Celtic? There is a rationale for leaving a subgroup off the chart (such as the North/South cluster of Z196) if its SNP has yet to be identified -- although that NS cluster is clearly not of Iberian origin, and is ancestral to M153. More problematic is omission of the parallel Nordic clade L238/S182, and several others, that don't appear to be Italo-Celtic, either. These little lacunae may make P312 still look _sort of_ "Italo-Celtic," much as makeup can make a mature woman's face look _sort of_ young. But the exercise doesn't prove any underlying truth about the theoretical construct. There may also be a little tendency to perceive these terms (including btw my use, for contrast, of "Nordic") as referring to modern ethnic or language groups that didn't yet exist in the early Bronze Age -- when P312/S116 was differentiating, and beginning to migrate (from the east).

[Added in edit: I withdraw the underlined passage above, as L238 has appeared since I posted this earlier today. Thank you, Maciamo. I don't mean to be a pest about this, and will be glad to supply the SNP name for the North/South cluster as soon as that is discovered. I have also added the word exclusively, in bold italic. Certainly, P312 has some Italo-Celtic components. And some that aren't.]

----------


## zanipolo

> Might that have something to do with its not being Italo-Celtic? There is a rationale for leaving a subgroup off the chart (such as the North/South cluster of Z196) if its SNP has yet to be identified -- although that NS cluster is clearly not of Iberian origin, and is ancestral to M153. More problematic is omission of the parallel Nordic clade L238/S182, and several others, that don't appear to be Italo-Celtic, either. These little lacunae may make P312 still look _sort of_ "Italo-Celtic," much as makeup can make a mature woman's face look _sort of_ young. But the exercise doesn't prove any underlying truth about the theoretical construct. There may also be a little tendency to perceive these terms (including btw my use, for contrast, of "Nordic") as referring to modern ethnic or language groups that didn't yet exist in the early Bronze Age -- when P312/S116 was differentiating, and beginning to migrate (from the east).


Where does then, M126, M160 and M222 come into effect in the italo-celtic world. From forumdiversity site, these markers seems to be always prevelant in old north italian, swiss families

----------


## Maciamo

I have continued re-working the R1b page and created the page for haplogroup E1b1b.

----------


## Maciamo

> Where does then, M126, M160 and M222 come into effect in the italo-celtic world. From forumdiversity site, these markers seems to be always prevelant in old north italian, swiss families


Aren't M160 and M126 supposed to be private mutations ?

----------


## elghund

:Good Job: 

Thanks for all your work, Maciamo. I didn't realize how much the Y-tree has been advancing until I saw that R1b tree. Those main articles for the various haplogroups are an excellent read. Presentation is good too.

I noticed my quadrant of the R1b tree is being filled in with Z and then a number. For whom is the Z named?

----------


## Goga

> For whom is the Z named?


Maybe after Zorro?  :Laughing:

----------


## Mikewww

> I have created a new phylogenetic tree of R1b. I couldn't place all the deep subclades and also excluded the private mutations.


Thanks, for the update.

I noticed you are missing L165 (S68.) It has its own haplogroup designation from FTDNA and is on the ISOGG public SNP tree as well.

It fits under L176.2 as a peer to M167 (SRY2627).

EthnoAncestry considers it a "Norse Viking" marker.
http://www.ethnoancestry.com/S68.html

Here is the L165 project.
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...ction=yresults

----------


## Maciamo

> Thanks, for the update.
> 
> I noticed you are missing L165 (S68.) It has its own haplogroup designation from FTDNA and is on the ISOGG public SNP tree as well.
> 
> It fits under L176.2 as a peer to M167 (SRY2627).
> 
> EthnoAncestry considers it a "Norse Viking" marker.
> http://www.ethnoancestry.com/S68.html
> 
> ...


It was an oversight on my part. It's now corrected. However I doubt that L165/S68 is a Norse marker. Almost all the project members are Scottish. Even if some were to be found in Scandinavia (like L21), it would surely be Scots who moved there in Viking times.

----------


## Taranis

> It was an oversight on my part. It's now corrected. However I doubt that L165/S68 is a Norse marker. Almost all the project members are Scottish. Even if some were to be found in Scandinavia (like L21), it would surely be Scots who moved there in Viking times.


We need iron age samples of YDNA from Scandinavia, especially Norway. One sort of gets the impression that it's currently seems to be _en vogue_ to assume that there was a Celtic presence in Scandinavia during the Bronze Age or Iron Age... (which I find _very_ questionable, to say the least).

One addition I'd like to suggest is that in the R1b subclade table, that you add "Chadic" with R1b-V88.

----------


## razyn

> One sort of gets the impression that it's currently seems to be _en vogue_ to assume that there was a Celtic presence in Scandinavia during the Bronze Age or Iron Age... (which I find _very_ questionable, to say the least).


Others find the more questionable thing to be the assumption that the clades to which you refer (found farther north than one might expect) are, in fact, Celtic. Or Italo-Celtic. Anyway, that sort of thing is what we hope to resolve better by testing -- both ancient and modern samples. And Y-DNA isn't the only moving target; some of the archaeological, linguistic and other cultural assumptions may turn out not to be dated very correctly, and thus not to match the Y-DNA with which they are (still somewhat speculatively) associated.

I don't see much problem with painting first with a broad brush, and later filling in details (or even major revisions of the picture) as that becomes feasible. And whether or not one has philosophical objections to that process, it's what seems to be happening.

----------


## Semitic Duwa

Shall there be an article about J1 and N or isn't there enough to expand on?

----------


## Maciamo

> Shall there be an article about J1 and N or isn't there enough to expand on?


I have made the page for haplogroup J1 this morning.

I am not sure there is enough to write about haplogroup N now, especially if I limit it to N1c1.

----------


## Knovas

I see there's a lot of information still unknown about J1. The non Arabic types have very low representation today, and possibly companies like 23andme and others only list "J1" in most of this cases. For example, I observed that paternal haplogroup T is only listed as plain T, and there are several subclades. 

I'm afraid we need deep clade tests for this J1 linages.

----------


## sparkey

Just I2, T, and Q left then?

----------


## Knovas

Seems you are right sparkey. But I'm afraid if there wasn't much to say about N, Q & T could possibly have the same problem. We'll see.

Willing to see I2 :)

----------


## Kardu

> Seems you are right sparkey. But I'm afraid if there wasn't much to say about N, Q & T could possibly have the same problem. We'll see.
> 
> Willing to see I2 :)


 It's not gonna be an easy task :)

----------


## Semitic Duwa

I think the J1 banner is kind of simple in the sense that it doesn't represents only one J1's associations (J1* people wouldn't recognise themselves in such a banner for example).
Also, there is no true mention of J1, J1c2, J1c3c and J1c3d's roles in the spread of afroasiatic and Northeast Caucasian languages (Maciamo, if you have enough time, PM me and I'll provide interesting information about all this).

But apart from all this, I think the passage about J1b's association with G2a (probably correlated with Indo-european too in a sense) is the most positive point: Indeed, there are too few people willing to discuss about this matter, you innovated and pushed speculation at a further stage.

----------


## Maciamo

> I think the J1 banner is kind of simple in the sense that it doesn't represents only one J1's associations (J1* people wouldn't recognise themselves in such a banner for example).
> Also, there is no true mention of J1, J1c2, J1c3c and J1c3d's roles in the spread of afroasiatic and Northeast Caucasian languages (Maciamo, if you have enough time, PM me and I'll provide interesting information about all this)


You can send me more information. As for the banner it was a real dilemma. I represented mostly J1c3 because it is the most common variety of J1. I thought of using a photo of the Dome of the Rock with the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem to illustrate that J1 played a decisive role for both Islam and Judaism, but I found it too political, and I think it is better to avoid overt religious associations with haplogroups. 

I chose the man with the camel because J1 originated with herders, J1 is overwhelmingly present in desert regions, and Bedouins belong mostly to J1. 

I chose the Alhambra in Granada to have a trace of J1 men in Europe (and because I really like it architecturally).

Finally, I chose Petra because 1) the southern Levant is probably the region where Semitic languages first developed, 2) it is also the region from where J1c3 expanded in Bronze Age, 3) the Nabataeans almost certainly carried a lot of J1 lineages and were Aramaic speakers (so that the photos are not all about Arabic speakers), and 4) it is a fine example of classical architecture made by J1 people (reminding that the ancient Greeks, Etruscans and Romans were also carriers of some J1 lineages). 

I really don't know what image I could use to represent Caucasian, Anatolian or European J1. Suggestions are welcome (with links to photos if possible). The photos should also be aesthetically pleasing.

----------


## Kardu

Perhaps these photos might be useful, they are from Vani archaeological site, Western Georgia. All Georgian J1 come from that area so far. http://georgia.travel/travel2/?site-...&site-lang=en#

----------


## Alan

some examples to represent the caucasian J1.
lezginka_2.jpg
lezginka.jpg

----------


## Maciamo

> some examples to represent the caucasian J1.
> Attachment 5342
> Attachment 5343


I am not going to use pictures like that. A few guidelines to choose the pictures :

1) should represent population with a *high frequency* of the haplogroup, if possible *prehistoric* rather than modern as most modern populations are heavily mixed, and modern Y-haplogroups may hide former lineages (as I explained for R1b in Western Europe, but it is also surely the case for J1, since polygamy was and is still very widespread among J1 societies).

2) give preference *objects or buildings* made by the ancient people of the haplogroup, ideally authentic ancient objects *showing what ancient people looked like* (as I did for E1b1b and J2).

3) pictures must be reasonably beautiful and not copyrighted (or available for purchase).


Caucasian J1 is pretty much limited to the Kubachis, Kaitaks, Dargins and Avars. However, as these people still practice polygamy (or at least gave it up recently), their high percentage of J1 might be fairly recent. As these are very small and isolated populations, it is possible that a few dominant male lineages replaced most of the other lineages within the last 1000 years only. In that case, Caucasian J1 may have little to do with the original autosomal J1 ancestor from which they descend. Until ancient DNA proves that J1 was indeed a common lineage in these populations since ancient times (Neolithic, Bronze Age or Iron Age), I would rather refrain from even thinking of them as quintessentially J1 populations.

----------


## Maciamo

> Perhaps these photos might be useful, they are from Vani archaeological site, Western Georgia. All Georgian J1 come from that area so far. http://georgia.travel/travel2/?site-...&site-lang=en#


But Georgians are predominantly G2a (even if small pockets of J1 exist like in most of Europe). Why would I use that photo for J1 ?

----------


## Knovas

But, ¿isn't the Caucasian J1 different from the Arabian one (subclades)? I mean, ¿why this Caucasian ethnic groups showing very high J1 cannot be autosomally more of an especific subclade which fits in the West Asian admixture?

There's no evidence suggesting the contrary. Some J1 could perfectly be native to the Caucasus or a close region (IMHO), being the dominant genetic impact in various groups.

Again, more deep clade tests would probably help on this.

----------


## Semitic Duwa

> I am not going to use pictures like that. A few guidelines to choose the pictures :
> 
> 1) should represent population with a *high frequency* of the haplogroup, if possible *prehistoric* rather than modern as most modern populations are heavily mixed, and modern Y-haplogroups may hide former lineages (as I explained for R1b in Western Europe, but it is also surely the case for J1, since polygamy was and is still very widespread among J1 societies).
> 
> 2) give preference *objects or buildings* made by the ancient people of the haplogroup, ideally authentic ancient objects *showing what ancient people looked like* (as I did for E1b1b and J2).
> 
> 3) pictures must be reasonably beautiful and not copyrighted (or available for purchase).
> 
> 
> Caucasian J1 is pretty much limited to the Kubachis, Kaitaks, Dargins and Avars. However, as these people still practice polygamy (or at least gave it up recently), their high percentage of J1 might be fairly recent. As these are very small and isolated populations, it is possible that a few dominant male lineages replaced most of the other lineages within the last 1000 years only. In that case, Caucasian J1 may have little to do with the original autosomal J1 ancestor from which they descend. Until ancient DNA proves that J1 was indeed a common lineage in these populations since ancient times (Neolithic, Bronze Age or Iron Age), I would rather refrain from even thinking of them as quintessentially J1 populations.



I attached depictions of Semites in ancient times and, as far as J1* is concerned, I put these pictures:37c0da8d5ad8.jpg
33314088.040Anthropomorphicvase.jpg
They are both derived from Hurro-Urartian culture, a culture which Roy King links to J1* with DYS388=13 (and, in a more global perspective, to Northeast Caucasian languages).

----------


## Kardu

> But Georgians are predominantly G2a (even if small pockets of J1 exist like in most of Europe). Why would I use that photo for J1 ?


According to our DNA project so far Georgian G2a tends to be concentrated in the east and north-east of the country. West and south-west Georgia is predominantly J2a and J1 with some R1b1.
Our J1* members come from the area where the Vani finds were discovered, that's why I thought they might be useful.

----------


## Goga

According to this report in the Middle East was the domestication of horses *9,000* years ago, at least 4,000 earlier than in Central Asia!

"_The al-Maqar civilisation is a very advanced civilisation of the Neolithic period. This site shows us clearly, the roots of the domestication of horses 9,000 years ago_"

They found old remnants of the horses in the Arabian Peninsula. I think it has something to do with J1.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14658678

----------


## Maciamo

> I attached depictions of Semites in ancient times and, as far as J1* is concerned, I put these pictures:37c0da8d5ad8.jpg
> 33314088.040Anthropomorphicvase.jpg
> They are both derived from Hurro-Urartian culture, a culture which Roy King links to J1* with DYS388=13 (and, in a more global perspective, to Northeast Caucasian languages).


Hurro-Urartian culture was probably more J2, G and R1b than J1.

----------


## Maciamo

> According to this report in the Middle East was the domestication of horses *9,000* years ago, at least 4,000 earlier than in Central Asia!
> 
> "_The al-Maqar civilisation is a very advanced civilisation of the Neolithic period. This site shows us clearly, the roots of the domestication of horses 9,000 years ago_"
> 
> They found old remnants of the gorses in the Arabian Peninsula. I think it has something to do with J1.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14658678


They could have domesticated horses for their skin, meat and milk, just like cows or goats/sheep. But the steppe people were the first to tame horses _to ride_ them.

In any case, it is very unlikely that J1 was already in the Arabian peninsula 9000 years ago as recent evidence point at a Neolithic dispersal from the Taurus-Zagros mountains. I would rather foresee haplogroups E1b1b and T.

----------


## Goga

> They could have domesticated horses for their skin, meat and milk, just like cows or goats/sheep. But the steppe people were the first to tame horses _to ride_ them.


Ok, thanks. But maybe this has something to do with J1* folks?

Or maybe J2*, but there's not so much of J2* in the Arabian Peninsula, so I'm not sure about that.


EDIT

I do agree with you! Before J1 arrived in Arabia the folks that lived there were more likely E1b1b, T, (maybe some L from hg. LT) and F*.

----------


## Goga

_"According to Saudi Arabian antiquities officials, a Neolithic site in the southwestern Asir province has revealed the earliest evidence of horse domestication."

_
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/d...domestication/

----------


## Semitic Duwa

> Hurro-Urartian culture was probably more J2, G and R1b than J1.


That depends, if you consider the Alarodian link, J1* surely was a major marker.




> In any case, it is very unlikely that J1 was already in the Arabian peninsula 9000 years ago as recent evidence point at a *Neolithic dispersal from the Taurus-Zagros* mountains.


Which is precisely why Hurro-Urartian provides a stunning link with Northeast Caucasian, the link between those two is primarly J1* with J2a4b* for the Nakh speakers... But, as Dienekes hypothesized, proto-Northeast Caucasian speakers most likely were J1* positive men.

----------


## Maciamo

> That depends, if you consider the Alarodian link, J1* surely was a major marker.
> 
> Which is precisely why Hurro-Urartian provides a stunning link with Northeast Caucasian, the link between those two is primarly J1* with J2a4b* for the Nakh speakers... But, as Dienekes hypothesized, proto-Northeast Caucasian speakers most likely were J1* positive men.


That is because you still think that the Northeast Caucasus was peopled by J1 men in ancient times. I am convinced that it isn't the case. The polygamy thing is enough to spread one Y-haplogroup like a bushfire (in genealogical terms, within a few centuries, or a millennia at most). The Caucasus region has ethnic groups that are predominantly J1, others that are J2, others G2a, and others still that are quite mixed. Yet, autosomal comparisons show very little differences between them. 

The K=12 admixtures from the Dodecad don't show any significant difference of 'West Asian' among the Dagestani (Lezgins, Urkarah, Stalskoe), Armenians, Abhkazians, Georgians, Ossetians, Adygei, Chechens or even Iranians, despite having completely different Y-DNA. What differentiate them are the percentages of West European (highest in the Dagestani, lowest in the Chechens), East European (higher in the North Caucasus) and Mediterranean (higher in the South Caucasus). There is a clearer Y-DNA correlation there, as populations with higher West European have more R1b, those with higher East European have more R1a. No correlation with the Mediterranean admixture though (probably because it doesn't match any single haplogroup).

The Eurasia7 calculator shows even stronger similarities between all Caucasian populations.

Here is what we have :

- Caucasians are very close autosomally, yet so divergent in Y-DNA frequencies
- many populations have extremely high frequencies of a single haplogroup (54% of G2a for the Adygei, 84% of J1 for the Dargins, 88% of J2 for the Ingush)
- there is little haplogroup diversity, especially among ethnic groups where one haplogroup exceeds 50% of the lineages.

What can this all mean ? In my opinion, it almost certainly means that local chieftains/kings have spread their own Y-DNA among their ethnic group for a few centuries. There might have been a lot of different haplogroup before that happened, as attested by larger populations (Georgians, Armenians, Azeri).

----------


## Knovas

I must admit the last explanation makes sense, so you are probably right. However, I still think the non Arabic types have a different repercussion autosomally speaking (not Southwest Asian), which could perfectly be the West Asian admixture. But in the Caucasus, seems the vast majority comes from G2a and J2 peoples, so it's not possible to get any aproximation.

----------


## Semitic Duwa

Maciamo, do you think Semitic is a Bronze age language?
Can you tell us more about its genetic implications?

----------


## Taranis

> Maciamo, do you think Semitic is a Bronze age language?
> Can you tell us more about its genetic implications?


I would say I am reasonably sure that the Semitic languages date from the Neolithic. If you look at the oldest attested Semitic language (Akkadian), it's already quite diverged from Proto-Semitic, and this is over 4500 years ago. Where I'm less certain is how old the Afroasiatic languages as a whole are.

----------


## spongetaro

> I would say I am reasonably sure that the Semitic languages date from the Neolithic. If you look at the oldest attested Semitic language (Akkadian), it's already quite diverged from Proto-Semitic, and this is over 4500 years ago. Where I'm less certain is how old the Afroasiatic languages as a whole are.


Taranis, where would you place the Semitic language Homeland?
Also,With which linguistic family group do you associate first J1 people: North East Caucasian or Semitic?

----------


## Alan

> Taranis, where would you place the Semitic language Homeland?
> Also,With which linguistic family group do you associate first J1 people: North East Caucasian or Semitic?


J1 probably some isolated and caucasian groups in east anatolia an north mesopotamia.

afro-asiatic (proto semitic) came with E1b

proto semitic + J1c3 from mesopotamia = Semites.

----------


## spongetaro

> J1 probably some isolated and caucasian groups in east anatolia an north mesopotamia.
> 
> afro-asiatic (proto semitic) came with E1b
> 
> proto semitic + J1c3 from mesopotamia = Semites


Thanks. Do you think that E1b was the most carried haplogroup in the Arabian Peninsula before J1c?
I would say that it was a mix Of E1b and T.
That big J1 founder effect in the Arabian Peninsula is really difficult to understand. Is it Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze age? Why were J1 people so successfull there?

----------


## Semitic Duwa

> J1 probably some isolated and caucasian groups in east anatolia an north mesopotamia.
> 
> afro-asiatic (proto semitic) came with E1b
> 
> proto semitic + J1c3 from mesopotamia = Semites.


It's not all that simple, J1 also got involved in the diversification of Cushitic and the spread of Berber and Egyptian...
At least two markers can be connected to Semitic ethnogenesis for now: E1b1b1c and J1c3d.
I would add J1c2, J1c3c, R1b1c and T to these two (J2a4h too... perhaps).

Mainly, we could associate Caucasian words within African branches of Afroasiatic with J1 and R1b1c.

Basicallly, E1b1b1c positive people probably spoke pre-proto-Semitic.

----------


## Alan

> Thanks. Do you think that E1b was the most carried haplogroup in the Arabian Peninsula before J1c?
> I would say that it was a mix Of E1b and T.
> That big J1 founder effect in the Arabian Peninsula is really difficult to understand. Is it Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze age? Why were J1 people so successfull there?


 actually calling even j1c3 "semitic" would be wrong cause the mutation for j1c3 took place somewhere in ancient mesopotamia and zagros. from there it mixed throughout the levant and mesopotamia with ancient semitic speakers like babylonians.

it moved from levant into the arabian peninsula and somewhere around saudi arabia and yemen it mutated into j1c3d, which is the real bedoin haplogroup because this subtype evolved among the semites and can only be connected to semitic influence.

I think before J1 moved into the peninsula there was more archaic F*. E* is also possible but not a must.

----------


## Ricardo

J1 is a complex and diverse haplogroup.
Ideologies, religions and identities are always related to the history of J1, so the sub-haplogroups are fundamental for the history and expansion of this decisive antique civilization-maker and religion-maker haplogroup

As November of 2011 we have:

J1* - Small pockets of STRs waiting for a SNP and for a history in Eurasia and Africa.

J1a - M62. Old SNP . A singleton found in a Crimean Tatar of Uzbekistan

J1b - M365. Originally found in Eastern Anatolia and in Georgia. Now we have two small hotspots in Northern Iran and in Western Iberia and thinly scattered cases in Devon, England, the French Pyrenees and in Belgium. The Caspian Iranian cases and the Portuguese-Brazilian cases are matching in more or less 2000 years, a historical TMRCA dating to the Fall the Roman Empire. Pretty distinctive modal haplotype associated to J1b and a basal branch of the J1 haplogroup. The distinctive J1b modal haplotype is usually associated with the Ancient Iranian languages and peoples in Eastern Anatolia and Northern Iran. 

J1c - L136 and the big P58 group. The J1c3d (L147) is the traditional Arid Pastoralism J1-Deep South usually associated with the Semitic imaginary. Monotheism, Deserts, Camels, Jews, Arabs et Caterva. Desinformed people will take this important J1 sub-haplogroup as the totality of the J1 experience, what is a mistake committed for begginers in genetic genealogy. 

J1d- Z1834 (plus more Z SNPs discovered in November of 2011) or the bulk of the DYS388=13 cases

We can observe in Jim's map of J1 388=13 almost a precise straight diagonal line to the West of the Caucasus, Dagestan, Azerbaijan, Eastern Anatolia, Pontus, Armenia, Northen Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. To the East of this line J1 388=13 is rare in Northern Iran and in the Southern Caspian shores, where the rare J1b types can be found and 388=13 is also rare to the Southern semi-arid areas where the "Semitic" P58+ L147+ types are dominant. 388=13 is also present and thinly spreaded in Greece, Eastern Europe and parts of Western Europe. It looks like the three mentioned types of J1 (Z1834, L147 and M365) had a completely different history and a completely different pattern of migrations and expansions. They were not living together and they were not moving together because they are found in different places with different frequencies. The smallest and rarest SNP, J1b M365 is completely absent in several populations where 388=13 is found and L147 is dominant. In the detailed SMGF database there are only two J1b types hotspots: in Northern Iran and in Portugal, so J1b could be perhaps one of the elements in the individuality of the Portuguese language and Portuguese Empire in Brazil where J1b is regularly found in most of the regions. No J1b was found in the Mediterranean Sea. Probably Z1834 participated in all the ethnic and political movements across the Z1834 divide line to the West, since the Neolithic, the Bronze Age, the Persian Empire, the Eastern Roman Empire, Byzantium, the Ottoman Empire.

----------


## Taranis

> Taranis, where would you place the Semitic language Homeland?
> Also,With which linguistic family group do you associate first J1 people: North East Caucasian or Semitic?


I must admit that I can't tell you at this point (read: I'll get back to this later). I must say this, however: a part of the answer to this problems goes hand in hand with the question where the Proto-Afroasiatic homeland was.

----------


## Semitic Duwa

> actually calling even j1c3 "semitic" would be wrong cause the mutation for j1c3 took place somewhere in ancient mesopotamia and zagros. from there it mixed throughout the levant and mesopotamia with ancient semitic speakers like babylonians.
> 
> it moved from levant into the arabian peninsula and somewhere around saudi arabia and yemen it mutated into j1c3d, which is the real bedoin haplogroup because this subtype evolved among the semites and can only be connected to semitic influence.
> 
> I think before J1 moved into the peninsula there was more archaic F*. E* is also possible but not a must.


Calling J1c3 "semitic" is indeed, gross, it is too basal to be deemed Semitic as two of its subclades (J1c3a and J1c3b) have nothing to do with the spread of Semitic.
It is a mistake however, to believe that J1c3d first appeared in Southwest Arabia since most of the J1c3 positive men in the northern levant are in turn positive for L147.1... And as we both know, it is a region of YSTR diveristy.
So it must have a more northerly node, probably around Syria.

----------


## Maciamo

> I would say I am reasonably sure that the Semitic languages date from the Neolithic. If you look at the oldest attested Semitic language (Akkadian), it's already quite diverged from Proto-Semitic, and this is over 4500 years ago. Where I'm less certain is how old the Afroasiatic languages as a whole are.


I agree with that.

----------


## Semitic Duwa

> I agree with that.


Do you agree with Andrew Kitchen's Bayesian analysis or Nicholls and Ryder's excerpt regarding the dates and breakup?

----------


## Maciamo

> It's not all that simple, J1 also got involved in the diversification of Cushitic and the spread of Berber and Egyptian...
> At least two markers can be connected to Semitic ethnogenesis for now: E1b1b1c and J1c3d.
> I would add J1c2, J1c3c, R1b1c and T to these two (J2a4h too... perhaps).
> 
> Mainly, we could associate Caucasian words within African branches of Afroasiatic with J1 and R1b1c.
> 
> Basicallly, E1b1b1c positive people probably spoke pre-proto-Semitic.


That sounds about right.

----------


## Maciamo

> Do you agree with Andrew Kitchen's Bayesian analysis or Nicholls and Ryder's excerpt regarding the dates and breakup?


That's very difficult to say considering that the two papers give relatively close dates (3750 BCE vs 3100-2400 BCE). Besides, I don't like discontinuous thinking. Languages (like genes and most other things) evolve _progressively_. When are we to say that one language stops being Proto-Semitic and becomes Semitic instead ? It didn't just happen like that in one day, nor in a few years or a few generations. Even if the change was pretty fast it still took centuries. So what does it matter if the progressive transition took place between 3800 and 3100 BCE or between 3100 and 2400 BCE, or during both periods ?

----------


## Semitic Duwa

> That's very difficult to say considering that the two papers give relatively close dates (3750 BCE vs 3100-2400 BCE). Besides, I don't like discontinuous thinking. Languages (like genes and most other things) evolve _progressively_. When are we to say that one language stops being Proto-Semitic and becomes Semitic instead ? It didn't just happen like that in one day, nor in a few years or a few generations. Even if the change was pretty fast it still took centuries. So what does it matter if the progressive transition took place between 3800 and 3100 BCE or between 3100 and 2400 BCE, or during both periods ?


Good point, it in fact mainly proves that the language is thriving... But the main dissention is directed upon the mundane judgement of conservatism between East Semitic and Central Semitic: In other words, which branch is to be deemed most conservative?
Then, the second mundane problem is the classification of arabic... But these are other matters.

----------


## sparkey

Maciamo, did you decide not to do I2? Or do you have too little time?

Or too controversial?  :Laughing:

----------


## Maciamo

> Maciamo, did you decide not to do I2? Or do you have too little time?
> 
> Or too controversial?


I would like to create separate pages for each subclade of I2, but I am wondering I have enough to write about for each. I2 clades have not moved very much since the Mesolithic, except perhaps I2a2 in Southeast Europe, but this issue remains indeed controversial. Then what pictures am I going to use to represent each subclade ? There isn't really any country or culture that is I2-dominant except the Bosnians and Croatians. I would be especially hard to make a page about your rare haplogroup I2c. Your suggestions are welcome though.

----------


## sparkey

> I2 clades have not moved very much since the Mesolithic, except perhaps I2a2 in Southeast Europe, but this issue remains indeed controversial.


I'm not sure that's quite true. We have:

-I2a2b moving out of Central Europe, probably with the Iron Age Celts
-I2a1a expanding on Sardinia
-I2a2a being an important part of certain expansions, especially Germanic (unfortunately probably as a minority clade just about every time)
-I2c-B expanding on the Eastern Mediterranean, especially Crete, and into Asia

...along with a few others. Although some I2 appears quite stationary (like Basque I2a1a, some of the small British minority I2's, "unexpanded" clades like I2b-ADR...), most have had some sort of apparent significant movement.




> Then what pictures am I going to use to represent each subclade ?


This is the hard part. If I have some time later I can scout some out for you. I assume that you're thinking of doing pages for I2a1 (old I2a) and I2a2 (old I2b) in particular, and skipping I2b-ADR and I2c.

For I2a1, I'd definitely include something having to do with the Medieval Balkans, which we can all agree had significant I2a1b. Something representing the Kingdom of Bosnia would probably be appropriate. I2a1a is trickier because I'm not 100% sure when it expanded on Sardinia, so I wouldn't feel comfortable using their earliest tombs or anything. Nuraghes might be OK, though. We similarly can't be certain that Azilian culture was I2a1, but it seems likely to me, so it might be good to use Azilian artifacts.

For I2a2, I really think you should include Urnfield artifacts to represent I2a2b, as ancient samples of Urnfield culture have so far been more I2a2b than anything (6 out of 9). If there is a good picture of an artifact from the Lichtenstein Cave in particular, that would be even better. I2a2a is tough, though, because it always seems to be a minority everywhere, despite its ancientness and diversity throughout Europe. There's a good chance that British Grooved Ware culture had relatively high amounts of the now-rare I2a2a1 and I2a2a4 subclades, so maybe some Grooved Ware artifacts would be warranted.




> I would be especially hard to make a page about your rare haplogroup I2c.


Yeah, though I think I2c could eventually get added to the main page. In case you missed it, here is the best-guess history I made based on input from fellow I2c Eupedians Kardu and haithabu. There are still some loose ends, like whether the Phrygians or the Galatians or someone else are most likely to have brought I2c-B to Asia, but it's a clean enough summary to start from before doing your own fact checking.

----------


## Ivan

> Here is what we have :
> 
> - Caucasians are very close autosomally, yet so divergent in Y-DNA frequencies
> - many populations have extremely high frequencies of a single haplogroup (54% of G2a for the Adygei, 84% of J1 for the Dargins, 88% of J2 for the Ingush)
> - there is little haplogroup diversity, especially among ethnic groups where one haplogroup exceeds 50% of the lineages.
> 
> What can this all mean ? In my opinion, it almost certainly means that local chieftains/kings have spread their own Y-DNA among their ethnic group for a few centuries. There might have been a lot of different haplogroup before that happened, as attested by larger populations (Georgians, Armenians, Azeri).


You are saying that all this g2a are just offspring of one man in few hundred years, what effectively makes them extraordinary close. People from diaspora and of those in Adigeya are then unprecedentedly close relatives somehow unknowable to them. You are effectively saying that these people have no memory of their paternal lineages at all. This means their fathers, or should I say one recent relative, forced one y dna in a *bushfire* like sexual marathon with women who craved to be impregnated by just one of many of petty chieftains.

The problem is that these people do have memory of their lineages for ages. And have old clans and family names just like Scottish people. Male lineage is considered to be the most valued thing there. Also there are many chieftains, but also council of elders, and the free people. There are even chieftains of higher and lower ranks.

Here I used word petty here for a reason.
1. Among free adighe people chieftain was considered to be just one of many.
2. Also these chieftains were mainly among gray or white bearded people. 
3. Their appearance was known to be understated, to arouse no suspicion for trying to differentiate himself among others, while having to prove his valor in battlefield and survive to an old age when he is considered to be ready for place of a chieftain.
4. Chieftains in Caucasus unlike all other people had nothing to do with hereditary rights. Every chieftain had to deserve such a place, being bravery or wisdom, and especially generosity. 
5.Forcing one lineage in such a free society would be very much noticeable and considered as an insult to other free male lines. Chieftains were always aware of a possibility of being scrutinized by society they belonged to, so they were eager to prove *no such intentions* like forcing their offspring, ever existed in their minds. *They were actually always trying to prove the opposite.* This paternal behavioral model was very strong then and even Stalin, refused to acknowledge his son, when being captured by Germans who tried to exchange him for their generals. 
6. Kings were not important in mountains, only clans and tribes, and a principle of equality. The kings you are referring to, did not exist in this areas. There were just princes in Kabarda (just one of 12 tribes) and their influence was not even close as those of original clans and tribes. Even clans in Kabarda in many cases did not listen to princes advices. *Yes they were considered to be just advices.* Russians did try to prepare the terrain for take over, and they tried to make influence through princes. This approach made some influence on people being divided into strict castes.* But this was prior to Russian invasion, and it was contrary to original democratic ideas of this people.* Even in such circumstances strict castes would exclude almost any possibility of mixing. 
7. There are 12 tribes with lots of clans among adighe and everybody was aware of who is who and which line one belongs to. *The Chieftain of one clan is of no such importance in other.* So there are many chieftains (among equal people). Their word is considered to be a law only in cases when they assumed their position. Their customs and traditions are considered sacred, and *any violation by a chieftain of them is sufficient to remove him from his post and cause him to be punished too.* Circassians are a democratic people. The chieftain cannot make a decision in any public issue without consulting the public, thus implying a respect for the value of the individual. Whenever a public meeting is held *the eldest of the group presides over the meeting, even if he is socially inferior.*

----------


## Ivan

So is there a possibility that even in your scenario* one chieftain influenced all other y dna in all other clans and tribes.* I think not. Even more so in a few hundred years and in frenzy like sexual dominance over free people. The factor of being divided in tribes and clans makes it almost imposible. And all mountain people be it in Caucasus or Montenegro who still live in such communities will acknowledge this. Clans are known to belong to one or two families. But clans are just forms of extended families that extends far back in time keeping their male line sacred. No clan would allow dominance of other one which is the best predisposition for keeping the status quo. Being that all the clans had g2a mostly there must have been a founding father cell with most of G2a before this clans were created. 

The Caucasus is a place with many nations known to settle there in various times in its valleys. Adighe, Ingush were much higher in mountains and considered to be mountain people by the Caucasus people from valleys. These people from Caucasian plains were never displaced by Adighe nor Ingush … And they stayed there until some new invader made its own influence. 

*Polygamy as a model was known in Persian Shahs and Turkish sultans. It did happen only in rare cases in mountains, and that happened in recent times with the introduction of Islam.* 
But abduction for marriage was common in some places. Also this is what I believe a case of founding father effect. I must say something about G1 high numbers among Kazakhstan Magyars, it is certainly interesting case. It derives from a few male G lineages. They were known for not taking women from their clan but from all around them while keeping close ties with their male lines. I think this is the same case.

Male lineages were known to be better concentrated in one area in general *among all Y dna*. Autosomally they are similar probably because of introduction of beautiful women from all around Caucasus in a founding father base cell, a tradition continued for a long time until some of tribes became noticeably pretty, set their anthropological standards, and decided to keep their lines pure.

Here you are also talking about Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, lands mostly south of the main Caucasus range ravaged and attacked by multitude of armies. Land with noticeable amount of valleys through which many invaders crossed, and land in such geo-strategic locations that they were in contact with most of old civilizations, also established countries themselves, and compare them to isolated mountaineers like Adighe, Ingush ...



> There might have been a lot of different haplogroup before that happened


We are not talking about garden of Eden here, but inhospitable mountains, harsh winters, lack of food for unprepared people, frequent avalanches... Sure for some who did learn to survive there it was a nice home. Even Adige in their history tried living in steppes on a few occasions. Better pastures were tempting and they did control neighboring steppes which they used for grazing their herds. They knew of primitive farming, shepherding, bee keeping.

----------


## Knovas

The problem with I2 is that it's nowhere dominant in both haplogroup frequencies and autosomally speaking. Autosomal data makes me think Iberians have a very large composition of I2a1a* not reflected in the haplogroup frequencies, but in the rest of the populations it's not clear. Well, Sardinians for sure carry substantial, but they are still very eclectic to be representative of it. That's why I prefer to focus in Iberians in regards for this.

The rest of I2 it's really confusing in terms of autosomes, the only obvious thing is the present haplogroup distribution.

----------


## Maciamo

I have finally found the time to create the page for Haplogroup I2. There is still work to do (as always), but that's a start. For the photos I chose the paintings of Lascaux to show the Paleolithic link. They date from 17,000 years ago, which is approximately the age of I2 (but of course we don't know and Lascaux might have been painted by I*, IJ or F people). In the middle is a female statuette from the Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture, which I believe was one of the most representative I2 Neolithic cultures. This kind of statuettes (also called Venus figurines) have a continuity in Europe dating back to the Paleolithic, especially in Central Europe and Southern France, which once again may well be I2 people or their I* ancestors. The picture on the right represents Bogatyrs, which were medieval Slavo-Germanic warriors descended in part from Swedish Vikings, who may have brought I2a2a (former I2b1) to Eastern Europe. If not they may still be I2a1b (former I2a2), so it works too.

----------


## sparkey

Great job again, Maciamo, the I2 page looks good. I think the pictures are appropriate... and I wouldn't be too worried about using Lascaux. In my opinion, they are even more likely to have been I2 dominant than Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture, who also seem likely but are east of most I2 subclade centers of diversity. (Most likely explanation IMHO: most I2 subclades had been pushed westward prior to modern expansions).

Some minor proofreading suggestions, I won't dispute the content:




> I2a1 is estimated to be 8,000 years old.


Do you mean I2a1a? That's ballpark correct for it, but too young for I2a1.




> There are two major subclades : *I2b2a* (M223) and *I2b2b* (L38/S154), further subdivided in at least 4 subclades each, although little is known about them yet. The subclade I2b1a (M284+) occurs almost exclusively in Britain, where it seemingly developed about 3,000 years ago.


Should be I2a2a, I2a2b, and I2a2a1.




> Groups A and C seem to have expanded respectively during the Celtic Bronze and Iron ages, alongside R1b-S116/P312.


I think you got the "respectively" backwards, at least, if you're going by what I've had to say about it recently. I think C matches better the Bronze Age and A the Iron Age.

----------


## Knovas

It's a good beginning ;)

----------


## zanipolo

> Great job again, Maciamo, the I2 page looks good. I think the pictures are appropriate... and I wouldn't be too worried about using Lascaux. In my opinion, they are even more likely to have been I2 dominant than Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture, who also seem likely but are east of most I2 subclade centers of diversity. (Most likely explanation IMHO: most I2 subclades had been pushed westward prior to modern expansions).
> 
> Some minor proofreading suggestions, I won't dispute the content:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean I2a1a? That's ballpark correct for it, but too young for I2a1.
> 
> 
> ...


so do you think terry Robb, I for Italy around 5000BC is wrong
http://www.goggo.com/terry/Haplogrou...ca_5,000BC.jpg

----------


## Maciamo

> Great job again, Maciamo, the I2 page looks good. I think the pictures are appropriate... and I wouldn't be too worried about using Lascaux. In my opinion, they are even more likely to have been I2 dominant than Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture, who also seem likely but are east of most I2 subclade centers of diversity. (Most likely explanation IMHO: most I2 subclades had been pushed westward prior to modern expansions).
> 
> Some minor proofreading suggestions, I won't dispute the content:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean I2a1a? That's ballpark correct for it, but too young for I2a1.
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry about that. I have been working with 38°C fever today. I can't concentrate as well as usual.

----------


## sparkey

> so do you think terry Robb, I for Italy around 5000BC is wrong
> http://www.goggo.com/terry/Haplogrou...ca_5,000BC.jpg


I am pretty convinced that he is wrong. I2a1a is more diverse in Iberia than in Sardinia, suggesting an expansion the other direction. I2a1b1a has a North-to-South cline, not a West-to-East one like he suggests. And the I2a1c1 direction he suggests is odd... it probably has a link to the Rhine, not so much to Southern France. More likely, these subclades were spread more widely across Europe in 5000BC. See my Paleolithic Remnants map for my idea of what a picture of I subclades prior to their expansions (starting ~4000BC) would look like.

----------


## sparkey

> Sorry about that. I have been working with 38°C fever today. I can't concentrate as well as usual.


Good job in spite of that! Get well soon.

----------


## RayBanks

Maciamo, undoubtedly you have the best graphics of anyone writing on population genetics on the Internet and are deservedly the envy of everyone else for this.

But I have a number of differences regarding the unsourced narrative for haplogroup G. I will bring them up piecemeal in installments as time permits in coming days or weeks.

In the opening sentences, you remark:
"The highest genetic diversity within haplogroup G is found between the Levant and the Caucasus, another good indicator of its region of origin."

Diversity could certainly be one of the indicators of place of origin, as could frequency in the population.

But the current evidence of most diversity for haplogroup G, suggests the most diversity found among available samples would be in multiple European countries. This is based on the 2700 G samples in the haplogroup G project tested at Family Tree DNA.
THIS IS THE MOST RECENT OF SEVERAL ATTEMPTS TO POST THIS ITEM. THE LATEST INDICATES I CANNOT INCLUDE A LINK BECAUSE I DO NO POST OFTEN ENOUGH. READERS WHO WANT TO KNOW THE LINK WILL APPARENTLY HAVE TO WRITE ME AT MY E-MAIL ADDRESS AT THE BOTTOM. HOWEVER, THAT IS ALSO APPARENTLY FORBIDDEN SO YOU WILL HAVE TO GOOGLE KEYWORDS HAPLOGROUP G PROJECT and MY NAME TO GET MY E-MAIL ADDRESS.


There are eight major SNP subgroups of G based on counts within the numbers of samples: G1, G2a1/G2a1a, G2a2b, G2a3a, G2a3b1a1, G2a3b1a1a, G2a3b1a2, G2a3b1a3, G2c. I included G2a3b1a1 because it occurs in high numbers among the Adyghe/Circassian population of the western Caucasus, but is not so major a group in Europe. And G2c in Europe is so far found only in countries in which Ashkenazi Jews have lived. Several have surnames suggesting Italian origins though not living there. These categories correspond to the latest ISOGG listing of the G tree
LINK REMOVED BY MACIAMO'S SOFTWARE HERE

Only four of these eight groups have been tested in published studies using population samples, and we presently have to rely on samples of non-European persons tested at the commercial labs to determine whether some subgroups might occur in the non-European countries. Their STR markers from the labs can be used somewhat to match them with the STR marker values provided in some population studies.

We have so far found all eight of these subgroups in the more populous European countries but no place outside Europe.

This does not mean I am advocating for Europe as the place of origin of these G subgroups, but only pointing out that the evidence for places outside Europe is not well developed at this point. 

Referring again to your comment
"The highest genetic diversity within haplogroup G is found between the Levant and the Caucasus, another good indicator of its region of origin."

This location you describe seems to coincide with Armenia. We are been fortunate to have a very active, well-funded Armenia project. We have found six of these G subgroups among Armenians though in small numbers. The various studies of the Armenian population seem to find about an average of 11% G in that country, which is lower in frequency than some of its neighbors.
LINK REMOVED HERE BY MACIAMO'S SOFTWARE SYSTEM

But we have not been as fortunate in having such well tested men from the countries surrounding Armenia, and the extent of the G diversity in them is unclear at this point. We recently found the first two G2a3b1a3 men from North Ossetia, and one turned up in the 1000 Genomes Project in a man from Beijing, China, of all places. Some of the G subgroups can be deduced from the haplotypes of men in n.w. China, but others can't. The ethnic groups of n.w China are known to have G intermixture but almost no testing for subgroups. A G2a2b man turned up in the commercial lab among a Bakthiari man from Iran, but no hint of this in the published studies. Egypt has almost no subgroup testing, and the same situation applies to Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikstan. The more we test in India, the more diverse the G in that country seems and could have major subgroups of its own not yet identified.

Which brings me to two other points (a) the frequency of one of the subgroups could help to point to origin, and (b) knowing the distribution of just haplogroup G in general can be misleading. I will tackle the last point first. Virtually no one belongs to general G or general G2. Almost all can be assigned to a G subgroup, and the worldwide frequency distribution for a G subgroup is typically radically different from the general G map suggesting separate migrations. Constructing valid subgroup maps requires testing for these in non-European countries, and such studies are rare. 

And does the frequency distribution really help in isolating the origins of G subgroups? In the case of the Circassian G2a3b1a1 men and the Ossetian G2a1a men, their high frequency counts would suggest origins there. But the two Caucasus studies last year (Balanovsky and Yunubaev) both concluded that the Caucasian population is basically of Near Eastern origins though they did not single out haplogroup G for this conclusion.

In closing this first installment, I would like to point out that Oetzi, the Iceman, was referred to as having the G2a4 mutation last August by the curator of his remains in an interview, and that designation is used at Eupedia. G2a4 did not appear in the listing for the 2008 revision of G subgroups by the scientists of the Y-DNA consortium. The L91 mutation was subsequently identified. Off the record conversations with population geneticists suggests that L91 is seemingly the mutation under discussion, but I have no proof of it due to lack of publication of the Iceman's genome. But G2a4 was abolished in January 2012 both at ISOGG and also in Family Tree's draft of the new Y tree and at Wikipedia. This was due to confirmation that L223 is a mother group for L91. So now the known Y trees would place the Iceman's category as G2a2b pending a new publication by the consortium which will have the last say on this.

Ray Banks
Administrator, Haplogroup G Project
Content expert, ISOGG's Y Tree

----------


## Maciamo

> Maciamo, undoubtedly you have the best graphics of anyone writing on population genetics on the Internet and are deservedly the envy of everyone else for this.


Thank you.




> But I have a number of differences regarding the unsourced narrative for haplogroup G.


It is unsourced because it is my personal hypothesis based on the data available, my knowledge of prehistory/archaeology and logical deduction.





> In the opening sentences, you remark:
> "The highest genetic diversity within haplogroup G is found between the Levant and the Caucasus, another good indicator of its region of origin."
> 
> Diversity could certainly be one of the indicators of place of origin, as could frequency in the population.


West Asia is also the place of highest genetic diversity.





> But the current evidence of most diversity for haplogroup G, suggests the most diversity found among available samples would be in multiple European countries. This is based on the 2700 G samples in the haplogroup G project tested at Family Tree DNA.


In commercial tests, maybe, but that's only because the Middle East is cruelly under-represented. I prefer to take into account scientific studies rather than commercial tests with self-reported ancestry, especially when they test mainly North Americans like FTDNA.





> THIS IS THE MOST RECENT OF SEVERAL ATTEMPTS TO POST THIS ITEM. THE LATEST INDICATES I CANNOT INCLUDE A LINK BECAUSE I DO NO POST OFTEN ENOUGH. READERS WHO WANT TO KNOW THE LINK WILL APPARENTLY HAVE TO WRITE ME AT MY E-MAIL ADDRESS AT THE BOTTOM. HOWEVER, THAT IS ALSO APPARENTLY FORBIDDEN SO YOU WILL HAVE TO GOOGLE KEYWORDS HAPLOGROUP G PROJECT and MY NAME TO GET MY E-MAIL ADDRESS.


Every forum member needs to have minimum 10 posts before posting links to discourage spammers. It is not very difficult to post a few short comments to reach that number, is it ? You could start by introducing yourself in the Member Lounge or comment on a few other threads, as they are plenty of interesting topics here. A single sentence is enough to count as a post - no need to write a novel each time.

Then why do you feel the need to complain about this in a thread about haplogroups and in block letters when you could have sent me a PM or posted a thread in the Support section ? I find this kind of behaviour rather inappropriate, if not childish.





> There are eight major SNP subgroups of G based on counts within the numbers of samples: G1, G2a1/G2a1a, G2a2b, G2a3a, G2a3b1a1, G2a3b1a1a, G2a3b1a2, G2a3b1a3, G2c. I included G2a3b1a1 because it occurs in high numbers among the Adyghe/Circassian population of the western Caucasus, but is not so major a group in Europe. And G2c in Europe is so far found only in countries in which Ashkenazi Jews have lived. Several have surnames suggesting Italian origins though not living there. These categories correspond to the latest ISOGG listing of the G tree


Sorry, but you are only basing your hypothesis based on the FTDNA database, which is completely insufficient. I see no need to further argue with you as we don't have the same standards to evaluate the origins of haplogroups, and that would just be a waste of time for the both of us. We will see who was right once we get more data, in particular Neolithic and pre-Neolithic DNA from the Middle East. 




> LINK REMOVED BY MACIAMO'S SOFTWARE HERE


You are giving me far too much credit. This forum runs on the vBulletin software, designed by Jelsoft Enterprises. It is not "my" software. Have you never posted on a vBulletin forum before ? They are all over the Internet.

If you really want to post a link, either get your 10 posts or remove the http://www. in front of the link. You are the only member so far who has not understood this and managed to publicly complain about it.

----------


## RayBanks

I was going to continue with a discussion of the parts of your haplogroup G narrative which are inconsistent with both the Family Tree data and the published studies, but much of what I got from the first posting were personal attacks because I am did not know in advance how your posting system would work when I tried to provide a link. I had to retype the text multiple times because it kept rejecting my posting. 

It is also nonsense to exclude the information from the Family Tree DNA database because it is "insufficient." In many cases these are the most tested samples available and provide far more information that the testing for general G available in most studies. 

The whole idea of footnoting data is to allow a second party to see the context of the data, and when one just says "Trust me" I have the correct information, there is no way to evaluate the information.

In any event, it is clear from the first installment that disagreement with anything in your narrative is an exercise in futility. And it is best to move on to more productive activities.

Ray Banks
Administrator, Haplogroup G Project

----------


## Maciamo

> I was going to continue with a discussion of the parts of your haplogroup G narrative which are inconsistent with both the Family Tree data and the published studies, but much of what I got from the first posting were personal attacks because I am did not know in advance how your posting system would work when I tried to provide a link.


You are the one who attacked me for no reason, when you could just have asked nicely and in the appropriate section or by PM why you couldn't post links (although I believe the forum does tell you that you need minimum 10 posts to put a link). I really don't like your aggressive attitude, which is partly why I have no desire to discuss further with you. I was well disposed enough towards you when you joined though, as I spontaneously offered to give you more visibility on the forum and granted you extra advantages (as explained by PM) by "promoting" you to the Y-DNA Project Admin usergroup. You can't blame me for not trying to be nice and friendly at first, but if you react as discourteously as you did, don't expect another tone from me.

----------


## razyn

I sympathize a little with Ray about the difficulty of posting links, it seems arbitrary and capricious. And I had the same problem, when I tried to start a thread here about Z196. But I agree with Maciamo that, once one is forced to study the rules, it is bone simple to post ten times -- and then get on with the more interesting (or argumentative) part of one's agenda.

Some of the craziest people on the planet post here regularly, and are made to feel welcome. I don't really see much of a problem, unless they behave offensively toward others. The excessively freewheeling discussion often brings out someone with actual expertise, to correct it. And those people are also welcomed.

----------


## I2b2a

It may not be doable to jump into an old conversation, but this I2b2a feels like nobody cares, or even knows he exists. Are there any other I2b2a's out there? Can anyone tell me who I am?

----------


## sparkey

> It may not be doable to jump into an old conversation, but this I2b2a feels like nobody cares, or even knows he exists. Are there any other I2b2a's out there? Can anyone tell me who I am?


I2b2a is the old nomenclature for what is current Nordtvedt I2a2b1, and I2a2b in ISOGG (which doesn't recognize your subclade for some reason). I suppose FTDNA and/or 23andMe may still call it "I2b2a."

I2a2b1 is a very rare clade, only represented by the surnames Fuchs, Brion, and Butler at the FTDNA Project. It is the earliest known branch off of I2a2b, but it branched after the initial expansion of I2 as a whole in the Neolithic, hence it shares a point of origin with the rest of I2a2b in my Paleolithic Remnants map. Although we have too few I2a2b1 samples right now to know exactly how it spread, the spread of the rest of I2a2b has been shown by Hans de Beule to correspond tightly with Alpine Celtic migrations (although it's older than them), and I2a2b has been found in the apparently proto-Celtic Urnfield Culture. I don't know of a reason right now to assume that the spread of I2a2b1 was significantly different than the spread of the rest of I2a2b.

----------


## Maciamo

I just wanted to let you know that I have revised and considerably expanded the pages on haplogroup I1 and haplogroup I2. I have also updated the phylogenetic trees. I hadn't done it for 3 years, so it really needed to be done.

I have also added many new famous members over the last few weeks, including Nicholas Cage (E-M34), Sting (I1), Elvis Presley (most probably I2c1), King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands (R1a-Z280), Benjamin Netanyahu (R1a-Z93), Che Guevara (R1b-L21), Kevin Bacon (R1b), and Robert Downey Jr. (R1b).

----------


## sparkey

> I have also added many new famous members over the last few weeks, including Nicholas Cage (E-M34), Sting (I1), Elvis Presley (most probably I2c1), King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands (R1a-Z280), Benjamin Netanyahu (R1a-Z93), Che Guevara (R1b-L21), Kevin Bacon (R1b), and Robert Downey Jr. (R1b).


Really cool! If I have time, I'll try to do some follow-up confirmation of the Chuck Norris and Elvis Presley haplogroups and add them to my Searching for Famous I2 Carriers thread once I'm done with that.

----------


## Regio X

If Nicolas Cage is E-M34, Francis Ford Coppola would be E-M34 too.

----------


## Angela

Anyone know if Netanyahu is a Levite?

----------


## Rethel

> I have also added many new famous members over the last few weeks, including Nicholas Cage (E-M34), Sting (I1), Elvis Presley (most probably I2c1), King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands (R1a-Z280), Benjamin Netanyahu (R1a-Z93), Che Guevara (R1b-L21), Kevin Bacon (R1b), and Robert Downey Jr. (R1b).


Unfortunatly you produced another new false facts.

Grimaldi - their hg is not known. Thousands of people
bear this surname which is actually a simple first name.
In the project GG people are simply grouped by hg (and
this is not the only hg) and there is nothing about their
ancestry. I am affraied that this is another false internet
fact, which now will live his own life.

Grimaldis started in XI century, and they bore surname Canelli.
It is impossible, that thousands of Grimaldis in the Italy (and 
NOT even Grimaldis from the world in that project) are related
to them. Especially this one clade which you chose from some
not clear reasons can't be prooved as theirs.... It is the same
missunderstanding of the subject as in the case of Habsburgs
or Gagarins, and probably couple of others... Please Maciamo,
do not make such kind of missinformation... It is enaugh that
you are bombarding people with fictional millenias.

----------


## Rethel

> Anyone know if Netanyahu is a Levite?


I don't remember, but probably it is not known.

And not netanyahu, but Mileikowski.

His oldest ancestor is this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilna_Gaon
But there is no known to me direct line to him anyway, so it can be a legend,
maybe even from some pregranny's family, not necessary his, so who knows...
The oldest known ancestor was Chaim born somewhere in 1830s.

----------


## Maciamo

I have now updated the history and phylogenetic tree of haplogroup G2a.

----------


## Arame

Maciamo

Thanks for the update. 40% of Hemshin Armenians have G1. I think it is worth to note.





> Haplogroup G1 is found predominantly in Iran, but is also found in the Levant, among Ashkenazi Jews, and in Central Asia (notably in Kazakhstan).

----------

