Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Proto-Indo-Europeans and Y-Haplogroup R

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Stevo
    I don't deny there were some Irish slaves taken to Iceland. I just don't think there could have been many of them or enough to amount to 33% or more of the population.
    It remains to be seen. The next page of the link discusses Icelandic genetics.
    The level of confidence seems to vary from 86% Scandinavian to 98% Celtic:

    http://www.mnh.si.edu/vikings/voyage.../genetics.html

    The newest technique for answering the question of who settled Iceland is genetic studies. Even before these advances took place, the dark eyes and red hair of some Icelanders suggested a non-Scandinavian origin. However, the studies have fluctuated wildly in their conclusions, some estimating 86% Scandinavian genetic markers, while others estimating 98% Celtic! The most recent study suggests up to 50% of the women in Iceland were likely of Celtic stock.

    Why does this study base its conclusion on women in Iceland? Mitochondrial DNA is inherited, unchanged except for random mutations, from one's mother. It is thought to be the key to unlocking long-term population movements. Based on comparisons of Icelandic mitochondrial DNA with other European populations, Icelandic women are most similar to the Welsh and British. While the sagas speak often of Irish slaves, perhaps the term really meant Celtic peoples from the Western Isles, and not Irish alone.

    Other DNA traces suggest Icelandic women share DNA not only with Scandinavians and people of the British Isles, but also with the Saami, Finns, Russians, Germans, Austrians, Turks, and others. This unique blend means Icelanders are not closely related to any single population.

    While enlightening, this study acknowledges a number of problems with their data. Their sample size for Icelanders is quite large, but the samples from other nationalities were much smaller. Therefore, any findings are subject to revision as more data become available. At present, genetic studies can only add an interesting dimension to the debate, but offer no conclusive answers.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Eki
      . . .the dark eyes and red hair of some Icelanders suggested a non-Scandinavian origin.
      While red hair is at its highest frequency among the Irish, dark eyes are not an Irish trait.

      Here is a recent post from the Rootsweb DNA List that quotes a Harvard anthropological study of the physical appearance of the Irish.

      Originally posted by Alan Reilly
      I have cut and paste from a website an official
      summary of a statistical survey of the Irish carried
      out by Harvard in the 1940s. These statistics (the
      ones quoted are for the Catholic Irish only) would
      probably still stand today although average height has
      significantly increased since then. I have cut out
      some of the more outmoded interpretations and just
      kept the statistics in:

      '..based upon ...some 10,000 adult Irish males,
      ...this huge and amply documented series was measured
      by Mr. C. Wesley Dupertuis under the auspices of the
      Division of Anthropology of Harvard University, and
      with the close coöperation of both governments in
      Ireland. The data have been tabulated and seriated in
      the Harvard Anthropometric Laboratory, under the
      direction of Professor Earnest A. Hooton....The
      composite Irishman, representing the mean of ten
      thousand of his countrymen, is 35 years old, 172 cm.
      tall, and weighs 157 pounds. He is well built,
      muscular, and large boned, with shoulders 39 cm.
      broad, and a trunk length which is 53.3 per cent of
      his total height. His arms are long, and his span is
      105.3 per cent of his stature. So far, his bodily
      dimensions and proportions might be matched among
      western Norwegians, Icelanders, many Swedes, Livs, and
      Finns of Finland. His head is large, for Ireland has
      consistently the largest head size of any equal land
      area in Europe. The three principal vault dimensions
      of his head, 196 mm. by 154 mm. by 125 mm., give him
      the mesocephalic cephalic index of nearly 79, and the
      moderately hypsicephalic length-height index of 64.
      His cranial vault, like his body, could again be
      matched among the larger-headed peoples of Scandinavia
      and the Baltic lands...He is comparable in these
      respects to the western Norwegians, to the Livs, and
      to some of the Finns... Let us now examine the pigment
      characters and morphological traits of the Irish, both
      as a total group and regionally. In the first place,
      the Irish are almost uniquely pale skinned when
      unexposed, untanned parts of the body, are observed.
      Out of 10,000 men, over 90 per cent had skins of the
      pale pink shade represented by von Luschan #3, while
      not a single individual was darker than von Luschan
      #11..The pale Irish skin, where exposed to the sun,
      shows a marked inclination to freckling. Forty per
      cent of the entire group are freckled to some extent;
      in Kerry the ratio rises as high as 60 per cent...The
      hair color of the Irish is predominantly brown; black
      hair accounts for less than 3 per cent of the total,
      while the ashen series (Fischer #20-26) amounts to but
      one-half of one per cent. Forty per cent have dark
      brown hair (Fischer #4-5); 35 per cent have medium
      brown (Fischer #7-9); reddish brown hues total over 5
      per cent (closest to Fischer #6, #10), while clear
      reds (Fischer #1-3) run higher than 4 per cent. The
      rest, some 15 per cent, fall into a light brown to
      golden blond category (Fischer #11-19). Thus the hair
      color of the Irish is darker than that of most regions
      of Scandinavia, but not much darker than Iceland; it
      is notably different from Nordic hair, as exemplified
      by eastern Norwegians and Swedes, in its almost total
      lack of ash-blondism. The rufous hair color pigment
      reaches a world maximum here
      ; not so much in reds as
      in the prevalance of golden hues in blond and brown
      shades. The lightest hair is found in the Aran
      Islands, where the commonest shade is, nevertheless,
      medium brown; in the southwestern counties there are
      more goldens and at the same time more dark-browns
      than in Ireland as a whole, while the Great Plain runs
      fairest of all. Red hair, with a regional maximum of 8
      per cent, is commonest in Ulster, rarest in Waterford
      and Wexford.In the proportion of pure light eyes,
      Ireland competes successfully with the blondest
      regions of Scandinavia.
      Over 46 per cent of the total
      group has pure light eyes, and of these all but 4 per
      cent are blue. Very light-mixed eyes (equivalent to
      Martin #13-14) account for another 30 per cent, while
      less than one-half of one per cent have pure brown.
      There is probably no population of equal size in the
      world which is lighter eyed, and blue eyed, than the
      Irish.
      The almost total absence of gray eyes
      corresponds to the equal paucity of ash-blond hair.
      Compared to eastern Norway, Sweden, and Finnic and
      Baltic groups, the eye color is disproportionately
      light in comparison to hair color.
      It takes a certain kind of economy to support large numbers of slaves. Neither the Icelandic economy nor the Scandinavian economies could have done so. One can only keep as many slaves as he can afford to feed, and one keeps only as many slaves as seem to be doing him some good.

      In the absence of large plantations and mines, where the labor of gangs of slaves produces profits sufficient to make keeping them worthwhile, slavery is either a very limited or non-existent institution. I suspect it was very limited in both Iceland and Scandinavia. Chances are good just as many if not most thralls were I1a as members of any other y-haplogroup. Probably many of the guys currently puffing themselves up as "vikings" had thralls for ancestors.

      BTW, why don't you start another Scandinavian-whatever thread for this stuff, Eki?

      This is all seriously off topic.
      Last edited by Stevo; 30 September 2006, 11:11 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Here is a brief article on the idea of a Eurasiatic language family from which Indo-European derived.

        Comment


        • #19
          The linguist Frederik Kortlandt says, on page 3 of this article, "I conclude that the reality of an Eurasiatic language family is very probable."

          Here is a little bio on Dr. Kortlandt just to give you an idea of his qualifications.
          Last edited by Stevo; 30 September 2006, 07:15 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Stevo
            I do not think Is of any kind were responsible for any Indo-European languages. They were responsible for changes in Indo-European languages but not the original languages themselves.

            Proto-Germanic is a case in point. Germanicists believe it arose from within the Jastorf and Harpstedt cultures of North Germany and the Netherlands respectively, areas with a preponderance of R1b but also with a healthy proportion of I1a.

            Proto-Germanic, while Indo-European, has a consonantal shift away from the original Indo-European. Many linguists believe this reflects the influence of a non-Indo-European substrate population. Since that shift does not occur in other IE languages in areas where R1bs prevail, it does not seem likely the R1b population was responsible for the Germanic consonant shift. They were responsible for introducing the original Indo-European language into the area but not the shift away from its consonants.

            Who does that leave in the Jastorf/Harpstedt region who could have altered the original IE consonants? I believe it is likely the non-Indo-European, indigenous I1a population affected that consonant shift.

            Proto-German would have spread from Jastorf/Harpstedt into Scandinavia. It does not seem likely a purely I1a population would have developed any Germanic languages or dialects on its own, since those languages and dialects were/are Indo-European.

            The Germanic languages belong to the Western or centum branch of Indo-European. Centum Indo-European was spread to North Germany and Scandinavia by R1bs. In those regions the original centum IE brought by the R1bs was affected by the mix of local populations and transformed into Proto-Germanic.

            The germanic substrate hypothesis has fallen out of favour with many linguists. Proto-germanic may simply have retained more elements of proto-PIE roots than other IE languages. Other examples are tocharian and anatolian. As such, proto-germanic shows affinities to both satem and centum IE languages, although you are correct that it is usually classified in the centum brach of IE.

            There is absolutely no evidence that I1as and R1bs were geographically separated at the time that IE languages became predominant in Europe. All of the research I have seen indicates that both were present before and after the LGM.

            If R1b introduced centum IE to Europe by way of invasion, archeologists should be able to find the resulting carnage and destruction. There is absolutely no evidence for the type of massive invasion that would be required to make R1b the most pre-dominant y haplogroup in western europe.

            Further the R1a/R1b split took place long before the LGM. IE dates back to about 8,700 years ago, originating well after the LGM. As a result, such an attractively simple solution R1b=centum, R1a=satem simply holds no water.

            Does anyone know of a scientific paper that postulates that R1b entered western europe LESS than 8,700 years ago?

            In my opinion, R1bs and I1as were living together in the proto-germanic areas, much as they are today.

            John

            Comment


            • #21
              I thought those Icelanders all had their genealogies traced WAY back, that's one reason why they were chosen as the population for the study of the human genome, besides being a relatively isolated people. So, what this forum needs is an Icelandic professional genealogist to give us his opinion of the amount of Irish or Celtic slaves & servants that were brought to Iceland. But wait a minute, if all the family trees have been traced, then there shouldn't be any professional genealogists there. Instead, maybe we need an Icelandic historian. Any out there listening?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Johnserrat
                The germanic substrate hypothesis has fallen out of favour with many linguists. Proto-germanic may simply have retained more elements of proto-PIE roots than other IE languages. Other examples are tocharian and anatolian. As such, proto-germanic shows affinities to both satem and centum IE languages, although you are correct that it is usually classified in the centum brach of IE.

                There is absolutely no evidence that I1as and R1bs were geographically separated at the time that IE languages became predominant in Europe. All of the research I have seen indicates that both were present before and after the LGM.

                If R1b introduced centum IE to Europe by way of invasion, archeologists should be able to find the resulting carnage and destruction. There is absolutely no evidence for the type of massive invasion that would be required to make R1b the most pre-dominant y haplogroup in western europe.

                Further the R1a/R1b split took place long before the LGM. IE dates back to about 8,700 years ago, originating well after the LGM. As a result, such an attractively simple solution R1b=centum, R1a=satem simply holds no water.

                Does anyone know of a scientific paper that postulates that R1b entered western europe LESS than 8,700 years ago?

                In my opinion, R1bs and I1as were living together in the proto-germanic areas, much as they are today.

                John
                Well put.

                I might add where did all these R1b come from? If a rapid expansion took place you would need a lot of men in reserve (several 100.000). How is this possible? If there weren't a rapid expansion, ought not the genes and languages mix pretty well along the way?

                And finally why are there so many non-indo-european-speaking R1b (and R1a)?

                Regarding Gaelic male-admixture in Iceland this study tried to answer this:
                Estimating Scandinavian and Gaelic Ancestry in the Male Settlers of Iceland
                It is however worth noting that estimate for Norway doesn't correspond with other studies of y-dna in Norway (this study appear to suggest that Norwegians are about 50% hg I, 25% hg R1b and hg 18% R1a. A much larger study found Hg I = 37%, hg R1b = 31 % and hg R1a = 25%). Furthermore this study also showed that the level of R1b in the Western parts of Norway (where most Norwegian migrants to Iceland actually came from) had almost exactly the same haplogroup distribution as Iceland (roughly R1b= 40, I=35, R1a = 25).

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Johnserrat
                  The germanic substrate hypothesis has fallen out of favour with many linguists. Proto-germanic may simply have retained more elements of proto-PIE roots than other IE languages. Other examples are tocharian and anatolian. As such, proto-germanic shows affinities to both satem and centum IE languages, although you are correct that it is usually classified in the centum brach of IE.
                  I respectfully disagree. The idea that a non-IE substrate is largely responsible for the Germanic consonant shift is pretty current in the linguistic community.

                  You basically endorsed it yourself when you wrote, "Proto-germanic may simply have retained more elements of proto-PIE roots than other IE languages," because that is what it means.

                  Originally posted by Johnserrat
                  If R1b introduced centum IE to Europe by way of invasion, archeologists should be able to find the resulting carnage and destruction. There is absolutely no evidence for the type of massive invasion that would be required to make R1b the most pre-dominant y haplogroup in western europe.
                  Massive invasion? In the late Neolithic/early Bronze Age?

                  Here you are attacking a straw man.

                  If you actually read my original post, you will see where I referred to small bands of centum Indo-European R1bs. They would have arrived as independent, nomadic kinship/tribal groups, not as large, unified nations under a single, central command.

                  You should not imagine Western Europe as heavily populated during the periods I am describing. Small bands of Indo-Europeans with horse-and-chariot technology and a proclivity for producing male offspring could have easily accomplished a y-dna population replacement there.

                  BTW, there is archaeological evidence of intrusion into Western Europe beginning in the Neolithic Period and culminating in the Bronze Age: abandoned and burned settlement sites, the sudden appearance of fortifications, the appearance of new types of physical remains, burial rites, pottery and other artifacts. Those things are all indicative of a period of upheaval and the arrival of newcomers.

                  Originally posted by Johnserrat
                  Further the R1a/R1b split took place long before the LGM. IE dates back to about 8,700 years ago, originating well after the LGM. As a result, such an attractively simple solution R1b=centum, R1a=satem simply holds no water.
                  The splits that occurred between all of the Eurasian descendants of K (L-R) occurred even earlier, yet linguists posit the existence of the Eurasiatic language family that was once common to all of them.

                  It is very likely that all Rs spoke a common language before R1b or R1a arose. Once they did arise, that language was maintained, only dividing into centum and satem over the course of time and after the West/East (R1b/R1a) split in y-haplogroup R.

                  The centum/satem solution is attractive precisely because it makes much more sense than any of the other proposed solutions to the Indo-European question.

                  It is a fact that the centum/satem split in Indo-European mirrors almost exactly the R1b/R1a split in y-haplogroup R. The only exceptions I know of are the Armenians, who speak a satem language yet have a high proportion of R1b, and the Albanians, of whom the same may be said.

                  Originally posted by Johnserrat
                  Does anyone know of a scientific paper that postulates that R1b entered western europe LESS than 8,700 years ago?
                  I know of one due to be published very soon by Ellen Levy Coffman. If you subscribe to the Rootsweb DNA List you may be familiar with her work and the fact that she agrees with me (or I agree with her, since she is more knowledgable than I).

                  I do know of a paper by Dr. Jim Wilson, et al (2001), that found that mtDNA in the British Isles had Central European affinities lacking in most British Isles y-dna (R1b). In other words, Brit mtDNA was much more like Central European mtDNA than Brit y-dna was like its Central European counterparts.

                  Does that mean Central European women invaded Britain to mate with the "indigenous" R1bs there?

                  Or does it mean, as is more likely, there was once a widespread European population whose males were displaced and largely replaced in the West (including the British Isles) by R1bs?

                  Originally posted by Johnserrat
                  In my opinion, R1bs and I1as were living together in the proto-germanic areas, much as they are today.

                  John
                  I agree to an extent. It was the interaction of R1bs, I1as, I1cs, and R1as that gave rise to Proto-Germanic.

                  But it was the Rs who brought the Indo-European ingredients to the stew.

                  Last edited by Stevo; 1 October 2006, 09:50 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    [QUOTE=Stevo]The Uralic language family has a strong connection to y-haplogroup N, which seems to have arisen, as did y-haplogroup R, in the Ural-Volga region. N and R are also fairly closely related.

                    I believe that in the distant past Ns and Rs spoke the same primitive Eurasian speech. In the case of the Ns, this language developed into the Uralic language family.
                    QUOTE]

                    Didnt you ealier considered hg N to be "Mongol"?

                    Noaide

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally Posted by Johnserrat: Does anyone know of a scientific paper that postulates that R1b entered western europe LESS than 8,700 years ago?

                      Originally posted by Stevo
                      I know of one due to be published very soon by Ellen Levy Coffman. If you subscribe to the Rootsweb DNA List you may be familiar with her work and the fact that she agrees with me (or I agree with her, since she is more knowledgable than I).
                      I am really looking forward to reading Coffman's paper. Please let us know when that paper is released. I have seen no other paper that even argues that R1b arrived in Europe AFTER the LGM. If you and Coffman are right, this would be a revolutionary development.

                      John

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        The problem with R1b being a really old European haplogroup becomes apparent when one tries to subdivide it or find clusters. It is as though all are descended from a recent ancestor & that in succeeding generations the population was amplified to the hilt. I have yet to see any R1b results from western Europe that suggest a common ancestor older than about 4,000 years. Maybe I'm just not looking in the right place.

                        Of course R1b/ R1a ancestors were SOMEWHERE during the LGM & based on other members of the K-haplogroup, coupled with Indo-European language affinities to eastern Siberian languages, I think it is most plausible that the R family came from eastern Siberia, almost went extinct during the LGM & survivors began moving westward after the LGM. Some have suggested that horse domestication & use was the amplifying factor.

                        The R settlement in Europe may have coincided with the spread of agriculture from the Near East. It is easy to assume that all ancient Near Easterners must have belonged to J or E3b, but considering the Hittites, it is possible that there was an R presence in Anatolia quite early & that R & J2 together brought agriculture into Europe.

                        Timothy Peterman

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Stevo
                          I do know of a paper by Dr. Jim Wilson, et al (2001), that found that mtDNA in the British Isles had Central European affinities lacking in most British Isles y-dna (R1b). In other words, Brit mtDNA was much more like Central European mtDNA than Brit y-dna was like its Central European counterparts.

                          Does that mean Central European women invaded Britain to mate with the "indigenous" R1bs there?

                          Or does it mean, as is more likely, there was once a widespread European population whose males were displaced and largely replaced in the West (including the British Isles) by R1bs?
                          The best explanation I've read for this situation is that pre-neolithic societies were largely patrilocal-- females moved in with the male's family, while the males generally stayed put.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by paitenceofjob
                            The best explanation I've read for this situation is that pre-neolithic societies were largely patrilocal-- females moved in with the male's family, while the males generally stayed put.
                            The females moved from Central Europe to the British Isles while the males stayed put?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Stevo
                              The females moved from Central Europe to the British Isles while the males stayed put?

                              And why not?

                              I suspect that women were treated as "trade commodity". FtDNA says that mtDNA H1b makes about 5% of H, which is clearly a European haplogroup, among the Finno-Ugric Mansis near the Ural mountains. I suspect the traders who brought Y-DNA N to Finland also took wives back to their place of origin:

                              http://www.familytreedna.com/hclade2.html

                              "H1b – H1b is detected at its highest frequency in Eastern Europe and North Central Europe. It is also found in about 5% of haplogroup H lineages in Siberian Mansis".

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Johnserrat
                                Originally Posted by Johnserrat: Does anyone know of a scientific paper that postulates that R1b entered western europe LESS than 8,700 years ago?



                                I am really looking forward to reading Coffman's paper. Please let us know when that paper is released. I have seen no other paper that even argues that R1b arrived in Europe AFTER the LGM. If you and Coffman are right, this would be a revolutionary development.

                                John
                                Ellen Levy Coffman's paper is due to be published soon, but she did not give a specific date.

                                If you would like to know the reason why you have seen no scientific papers that challenge the speculation (which is what it is) that R1b has been in Western Europe since the last Ice Age, I can tell you. First, it has nothing to do with science. The scientific evidence tells us things about R1b, but it does not tell us anything about where R1b was during the LGM. As a matter of fact, it does tell us that R1b gets older as one moves east across Europe, but that still leaves open the question of where the bulk of R1bs were during the LGM.

                                The reason some geneticists believe R1b is the aboriginal W. Euro y-haplogroup comes down to a single people: the Basques.

                                Historians in the 18th and 19th centuries were proposing that the Basques represented the remnants of the original native Western European population. That thinking has persisted. So, when it was discovered that the Basques are mostly (although not entirely) R1b, geneticists leapt to the conclusion that R1b is the aboriginal Western European y-haplogroup. It seems they did not stop to consider whether or not the original premise concerning the Basques was correct in the first place. They also apparently did not stop to consider whether or not the Basques have always been mostly R1b.

                                As Ellen Levy Coffman has pointed out on the Rootsweb DNA List (her soon-to-be published paper deals with this topic) the Basques are not the pristine, isolated, aboriginal European population some consider them to be. Studies of ancient mtDNA from an old Basque cemetery revealed the presence of a mixture of mtDNA haplogroups and a connection to the Middle East. That connection does not exist for y-haplogroup R1b, however.

                                The old Basque marriage custom of the groom coming to live with the bride's family is tailor-made for the introduction of outsider y-dna and the simultaneous preservation of the bride's language and culture.

                                If Basque R1b represents the aboriginal W. Euro y-dna, it seems incredible that nowhere else in Western Europe, with its overwhleming level of R1b, was any similar non-Indo-European speech preserved. How odd.

                                Not in insular Ireland or even the fastnesses of the Scottish Highlands or the Swiss or Bavarian Alps.

                                Weird, huh?

                                The Basque language has been classed by some linguists as a member of the Dene-Caucasian language family, a controversial viewpoint. If true, it would seem likely that the Basques were not originally R1b.

                                I believe the unquestioning acceptance of an old, wrongheaded, 18th and 19th century tautology (i.e., that the Basques are the aboriginal W. Europeans) has led to the current misunderstanding of the place of R1b in the prehistory of Western Europe.

                                Another problem with the current state of genetics papers in Western Europe is that none of them is value neutral. Everything is political. There is a certain amount of political capital for Irish researchers and others to maintain that the y-dna that predominates in Ireland has always been there. It is more appealing to some to think their ancestors are the longsuffering "natives" than to admit they might be relative newcomers in Western Europe. Such a view is also much more in keeping with the current fashion for political correctness than the old, traditional idea that the ancestors of most Western Europeans arrived as Indo-European invaders from the East.

                                At any rate, a better understanding of the Basques, their dna, and their place in European prehistory should help clear things up.

                                It would also be wise for researchers to remember that the Basques are an extremely small ethnic minority in Western Europe. It was never a good idea to base theories about the single most prolific y-haplogroup in Western Europe upon such an exceptional group.
                                Last edited by Stevo; 2 October 2006, 02:07 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X