Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Proto-Indo-Europeans and Y-Haplogroup R

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

  • The Proto-Indo-Europeans and Y-Haplogroup R

    The following post is my own personal opinion, my own theory. If what follows sounds as if I am pontificating on absolute, established fact, just remember the sentence above with which I began this thread.

    Some linguistics scholars believe there was once a great Eurasian "super" language family from which at least the Uralic languages and Indo-European languages stem. Since those language families show certain similarities, I believe that is not only possible but likely.

    Genetically speaking, as descendants of K, y-haplogroups L-R are relatively closely related to each other and are believed each of them to have had its genesis somewhere on the Eurasian steppe.

    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.

    In the case of the Rs, however, their primitive Eurasian speech developed into Proto-Indo-European. Of course, Proto-Indo-European would later develop and subdivide into a number of languages that themselves evolved into the predecessors of the modern Indo-European languages.

    The first and most basic division of the Indo-European languages is that between the Eastern or satem branch and the Western or centum branch.

    It seems to me some of the genetics experts, like Dr. Spencer Wells, looked at the distribution of y-haplogroup R1a and, knowing what they know of the Kurgan Hypothesis, concluded that R1a must be the exclusive Proto-Indo-European y-haplogroup. That makes a certain amount of sense, given that one sees R1a spread in quantity from Eastern Europe into the Indian Subcontinent.

    What experts like Dr. Wells have missed, however, is that R1a has a strong, observable connection with the East and with the satem IE languages but a very weak connection with the centum IE languages of the West.

    What R1a there is in Western Europe can easily be traced to later, historically documented incursions and is not traceable to the Indo-Europeans.

    Here is a nice little chart/tree of the centum or Western IE languages.

    Here is the same sort of tree showing the satem or Eastern IE languages.

    The prevalence of R1a among speakers of the Eastern IE languages should be readily apparent.

    What also should be readily apparent is the strong connection of R1b - the single most prolific and populous Western European y-haplogroup - to the Western centum Indo-European languages.

    The obvious explanation is that, just as R1as (and the closely connected R1s and R2s) were the primary spreaders of Indo-European in the East, R1bs were the primary propagators of Indo-European in the West.

    It is interesting in this connection to note that the Uyghurs of northwestern China claim descent from the Indo-European Tocharians. The Tocharians, an exception in Central Asia, spoke a Western or centum Indo-European language with certain Celtic affinities (although Tocharian was not itself Celtic). The Uyghurs have a high proportion of R1b.

    I am fully aware that my theory goes against some of the current popular speculation that R1b migrated into Europe during the Paleolithic Period and weathered the last Ice Age in Iberia. With all due respect for those who hold that opinion, I disagree. There is no evidence that is true.

    At the same time, it is true that R1b haplotypes become more diverse, and arguably older, the farther east one travels in Europe. That diversity reaches its maximum, according to researcher Alan Foster, in the Ural-Volga region (surprise!).

    It is my belief that most of the R1b in Western Europe was spread there by relatively small bands of centum Indo-European settlers beginning in the Neolithic Period and culminating in the Bronze Age.

    The centum/satem split in the Indo-European language family mirrors almost exactly the basic West-East (R1b/R1a) split in y-haplogroup R.
    Last edited by Stevo; 29 September 2006, 07:22 AM.

  • #2
    Very well argumented

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Stevo
      Here is a nice little chart/tree of the centum or Western IE languages.
      It's interesting to notice that Swedish and Danish descend directly from North Germanic, while Norwegian, Icelandic and Faroese descend through Old Norse. Could this be further evidence for my theory that Iron Age Norway was also genetically different from Denmark and Southern Sweden? Maybe the sequence of events was:

      1) I1a-AS and I1a-N lived in Denmark and spoke Old Norse
      2) I1a-N migrated to Norway and continued to speak Old Norse
      3) R1b migrated to Denmark assimilated I1a-AS and their language developed to Danish
      4) R1b and I1a-AS migrated to Sweden and the Swedish language developed from Danish
      5) R1b and I1a-AS from Denmark and Southern Sweden migrated to Norway and the language in Norway developed towards Danish and Swedish, while Icelandic and Faroese remained close to Old Norse

      Now, there's the problem of R1b being present in Iceland. But it's known the Norse took Irish slaves to Iceland, so maybe R1b came from Ireland. If you compare the populations of Western Norway and Iceland at yhrd.org, you'll notice that they share on 3 of their 20 most common haplotypes. One of them is I1a-N and one is I1a-uN, the third one I don't know. Does anyone know if it's R1b, R1a or something else? It is:

      14-13-29-24-11-13-13-11-13 (DYS19-DYS389I-DYS389II-DYS390-DYS391-DYS392-DYS393-DYS385a-DYS385b)

      Comment


      • #4
        I fear Stevo's reply to your post, Eki...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by F.E.C.
          I fear Stevo's reply to your post, Eki...
          Well, he started it (the thread) But I'm not picking up a fight, I'm just curious.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Eki
            It's interesting to notice that Swedish and Danish descend directly from North Germanic, while Norwegian, Icelandic and Faroese descend through Old Norse. Could this be further evidence for my theory that Iron Age Norway was also genetically different from Denmark and Southern Sweden? Maybe the sequence of events was:

            1) I1a-AS and I1a-N lived in Denmark and spoke Old Norse
            2) I1a-N migrated to Norway and continued to speak Old Norse
            3) R1b migrated to Denmark assimilated I1a-AS and their language developed to Danish
            4) R1b and I1a-AS migrated to Sweden and the Swedish language developed from Danish
            5) R1b and I1a-AS from Denmark and Southern Sweden migrated to Norway and the language in Norway developed towards Danish and Swedish, while Icelandic and Faroese remained close to Old Norse

            Now, there's the problem of R1b being present in Iceland. But it's known the Norse took Irish slaves to Iceland, so maybe R1b came from Ireland. If you compare the populations of Western Norway and Iceland at yhrd.org, you'll notice that they share on 3 of their 20 most common haplotypes. One of them is I1a-N and one is I1a-uN, the third one I don't know. Does anyone know if it's R1b, R1a or something else? It is:

            14-13-29-24-11-13-13-11-13 (DYS19-DYS389I-DYS389II-DYS390-DYS391-DYS392-DYS393-DYS385a-DYS385b)
            The haplotype looks like a R1b, Eki.

            Furthermore how would you explain the fact that the dialects that are by far the most similar to old Norse are found in the R1b-rich Western Norway?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
              The haplotype looks like a R1b, Eki.

              Furthermore how would you explain the fact that the dialects that are by far the most similar to old Norse are found in the R1b-rich Western Norway?
              The same way I explain the fact that modern Norwegian, unlike Icelandic, resembles more Danish and Swedish than it resembles Old Norse. Danes and Swedes have moved to Western Norway and brought their language and their genes.

              Even if the third haplotype is R1b, it isn't that common in Iceland, just less than 1.5%, while I1a-uN is about 8% and I1a-N about 4%.
              Last edited by Eki; 30 September 2006, 05:04 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
                The haplotype looks like a R1b, Eki.

                Furthermore how would you explain the fact that the dialects that are by far the most similar to old Norse are found in the R1b-rich Western Norway?
                The link about Old Norse Noaide provided in the other thread says about Faroese:

                "Modern Icelandic is the descendant that has diverged the least from Old Norse. In its normalised written form, Old Norse is understandable to modern day Icelandic-speakers. However, pronunciation, particularly of the vowel phonemes, has changed at least as much as other North Germanic languages. Faroese retains many similarities but is influenced by Danish, Norwegian, and Gaelic (Scots and/or Irish). Although Swedish, Danish and the Norwegian languages have diverged the most, they still retain mutual intelligibility. This could be because these languages have been mutually affected by each other, as well as having a similar development influenced by Middle Low German."

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Norse_language

                I wouldn't be surprised if also Western Norway received new blood from the Gaelic and also from Germans.

                Comment


                • #9
                  From the Old Norse article, I found a link to an article about runes. It says the oldest runes are found on a comb and read "harja". Then they claim it comes from a Proto-Germanic word for "warrior". Are they blind? It's a COMB for God's sake! In Finnish, the word for a hair-brush and for the long hair on horse's head is "harja". One hair of a hair-brush or of the horse's head is "harjas". In Old Norse, the word for hair is "Hár". Remember Harald Harfager (Harald Fairhair)? Isn't it obvious that the word "harja", just like a comb, more likely has something to do with hair and not with a warrior?

                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elder_Futhark

                  "The oldest known runic inscription dates to ca. 160 AD and is found on a comb discovered in the bog of Vimose, Funen. The inscription reads harja, either a personal name or an epithet, viz. Proto-Germanic harjaz (PIE *koryos) "warrior". "
                  Last edited by Eki; 30 September 2006, 07:22 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I didn't really want this thread to turn into a discussion of Scandinavian languages and dialects.

                    I don't know how many male "Irish slaves" were taken to Iceland; my impression is that they were few and that most of the Irish who went to Iceland were female. Does anyone know of any documentation on this subject?

                    It seems to me that if the R1b in Iceland could be attributed to Irish slaves, then Irish R1bs would be getting a lot of Icelandic matches and vice versa and that R1b1c7s would be shoing up in Iceland. That does not seem to be the case at all.

                    R1b is about 1/3 of Icelandic y-dna. It doesn't seem likely that enough slaves were taken to Iceland to account for that high a figure. It takes a certain kind of economy to support a large slave population, a fact often overlooked by many. Iceland never had that kind of an economy, i.e., one in which gang labor would be profitable. Remember, when one owns slaves, he must feed and care for them.

                    Besides, the Vikings often raided in the Scandinavian homeland and in other places where I1a is common. It is just as likely their thralls were I1a as R1b.

                    One must also remember that ultimately the Vikings in Ireland were utterly defeated, humbled, and humiliated by the Irish and their King Brian Boru. Perhaps any I1a in Ireland is that of Scandinavian slaves taken by the Irish.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      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.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Stevo
                        I didn't really want this thread to turn into a discussion of Scandinavian languages and dialects.

                        I don't know how many male "Irish slaves" were taken to Iceland; my impression is that they were few and that most of the Irish who went to Iceland were female. Does anyone know of any documentation on this subject?
                        http://www.mnh.si.edu/vikings/voyage...d/history.html

                        "The Book of Settlements tells that the first to discover Iceland were Vikings that had been blown off course, and that the name Iceland was given by a Norwegian Viking named Floki Vigerdason. The first settler, Ingolfur, was a fervent believer in the Old Norse gods, and was killed by his Irish slaves, who fled to the Vestmaneyar just off the coast of Iceland. It then goes on to list the names of all the original settlers, and the districts in which they settled. While the overall narrative suggests that this colonization was a Scandinavian venture, about 60 of the 400 names were distinctly Celtic. Both the Book of Icelanders and Book of Settlements also refer to Irish slaves accompanying the Viking settlers."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Eki

                          "The first settler, Ingolfur . . . was killed by his Irish slaves . . ."
                          Guess those Irish boys didn't make the best or safest of slaves.

                          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.

                          Undoubtedly most of the thralls in Iceland and in the Scandinavian homeland were I1a.

                          Now that we have indulged Eki's usual R1b animus, can we return to the topic of the Indo-Europeans?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Probably my R1b1c9 ancestors lived in Scandinavia 2000 years ago
                            They weren't thralls at all...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by F.E.C.
                              Probably my R1b1c9 ancestors lived in Scandinavia 2000 years ago
                              They weren't thralls at all...
                              In my opinion, they introduced Indo-European speech to Scandinavia.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X