PDA

View Full Version : Indo European(ization)



Barellalee
03-30-2014, 09:27 PM
As my particular Subclade of Haplogroup I, Subclade I2a3a, arrived in Britain with the Dark Ages migrations, it is seen as referred to an "Anglo Saxon" Haplotype. As such, whoever it arrived with from the Continent, as it DID arrive from the North German Plain, were just about certainly speakers of a Germanic language. I2a3a, emerging from I2a1c, represented the old P37.2s who had settled northwest Germany in what were probably pre Germanic times, and no doubt anyway, I2a1 is a pre Indo European Haplogroup. As such, how would one expct this worked?? Would the later Indo European Germanic speaking groups have absorbed previous folks like my I2a1 ancestors in their German territories, to the point where by the Dark Ages, some I2a1s would have been parts of Germanic ethnic groups and thus "Germanic". On that note, I believe I1 is pre Indo European as well, yet it is recognized as a VERY Germanic lineage. Is this because pre Indo European I1s of Germany and Scandinavia were "absorbed" into Germanic speaking societies the same way??

Jean M
03-30-2014, 11:34 PM
I2a3a, emerging from I2a1c

Looks like some confusion. I2a3a does not exist. If it did, it would not be below any form of I2a1. Instead I2a1 and I2a3 would be parallel. What is the SNP?

http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpI.html

Barellalee
03-30-2014, 11:49 PM
It is newly called I2a3a, it was called I2a Western before. It's P37.2, and Downstream is L233. Other than a low frequency in England, it's found where it came from, the North German Plain. Most Germans testing positive for L233 that I've seen are from Lower Saxony. My Dad's from Yorkshire.

Jean M
03-31-2014, 08:52 AM
It is newly called I2a3a, it was called I2a Western before. It's P37.2.

Newly called by whom? ISOGG, to which I linked, has P37.2/PF4004 = I2a1. L233 = I2a1c. Do you carry L233?

All I know about I2a1* is on this page: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/haplogroupi.shtml

vettor
03-31-2014, 08:57 AM
Newly called by whom? ISOGG, to which I linked, has P37.2/PF4004 = I2a1. L233 = I2a1c. Do you carry L233?

All I know about I2a1* is on this page: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/haplogroupi.shtml

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I/2012-09/1347782616

Ken N ........talks about it as well as others .................but it seems alpine
I2a* "Alpine" is now part of a new I2a3 (or usingISOGG tree, I2a1* Alpine is part of a new I2a1c)

Also in a Ftdna project

Jean M
03-31-2014, 09:06 AM
That was in 2012. Looks like I2a3 was new then, but has gone now.


I2a1* Alpine is part of a new I2a1c

I2a1* cannot be part of I2a1c. I2a1 is the parent of I2a1c.

vettor
03-31-2014, 09:18 AM
That was in 2012. Looks like I2a3 was new then, but has gone now.



I2a1* cannot be part of I2a1c. I2a1 is the parent of I2a1c.

bold is copied from the link...not my idea.

But, IIRC kenN, stated a year or so ago.... this marker furthest easterly line was ........run down a line from Innsbruck to Venice and head west


BTW, there is a link to a Z93 map there with zero found in central asia........but then that was end of 2012

alan
03-31-2014, 10:42 AM
One thing I think that is interesting in terms of the high I among Germanic speakers is that Germanic is something of a basket case of a language - one of the most odd of all IE languages with a great deal of vocab that is non-typical for IEs and is either thought to be non-IE or requires very tangential tentative reconstructions using IE words. Either way it is an oddball branch of IE. People tend to think Proto-Germanic would be nearer to the IE core and Celtic peripheral but in fact proto-Celtic has a far lower percentage of potentially non-IE/very non-typical IE vocab.

One way or other I think proto-Germanic's formation history was clearly different from most other branches of IE. Is this because it absorbed a lot of I? If so, did it absorb this I locally or was it absorbed in the Carpathians etc en-route to what would become the Germanic zone. Either way, it is an IE language branch where a lot of non-R males were absorbed and this contrasts with significant sections of the Celtic world where (if you subtract likely latter comers) it would seem R men were rather less keen on being inclusive with non-R lines.

One possibility is that Celtic appears to be obsessive with male lines of descent and clans etc. In the migration period Germanic seems to have established a kind of pattern that differed from this - the idea of a war band who were not necessarily related gathering around the hall of a warrior chief who redistributed booty for loyalty. You could call it a thuggish meritocracy of a kind. I believe this probably emerged no earlier than the last century or so BC in response to the conditions of that period when opportunities for military service either raiding against or supporting the Roman empire existed. Before then I am not sure the conditions existed where this was a likely social structure and AFAIK Germanic Europe was an impoverished area in pre-Roman empire Iron Age times.

You could say strong elements of this remained in the Feudal system of the high Medieval period when knights were basically landless warriors of various backgrounds until the king bestowed lands on the lucky few allowing them to begin their own dynasties.

Jean M
03-31-2014, 03:49 PM
Germanic is something of a basket case of a language - ... with a great deal of vocab that is non-typical for IEs

That's right. It absorbed a lot of vocabulary from a non-IE farming language that I presume was spoken in Funnel Beaker.


Is this because it absorbed a lot of I?

There may be words absorbed from hunter-gatherer I1 people in the north, but I2a1* looks more likely to have been picked up from farmers. There are too many unknown factors here to be certain.

GailT
03-31-2014, 04:45 PM
One thing I think that is interesting in terms of the high I among Germanic speakers is that Germanic is something of a basket case of a language - one of the most odd of all IE languages with a great deal of vocab that is non-typical for IEs and is either thought to be non-IE or requires very tangential tentative reconstructions using IE words. Either way it is an oddball branch of IE. People tend to think Proto-Germanic would be nearer to the IE core and Celtic peripheral but in fact proto-Celtic has a far lower percentage of potentially non-IE/very non-typical IE vocab. One way or other I think proto-Germanic's formation history was clearly different from most other branches of IE. Is this because it absorbed a lot of I?

If proto-Germanic arose on the northern fringe of Europe, and proto-Celtic arose in central or western Europe, proto-Germanic would have been more directly exposed to pre-Indo-European farmer and/or hunter-gatherer languages at the northern fringe of Europe. Perhaps the greater frequency of mtDNA U4 and U5 in norhteastern Europe might be an indicator of a non-Indo-Eurpean matneral influence on proto-Germanic?

Have any studies been done of words that might be specifically associated with hunting and gathering activities to see if these vary among Indo-European lanaguages?

Barellalee
03-31-2014, 05:06 PM
FTDNA calls it I2a3a, and yes, I see on ISOGG it is still I2a1c. Yes, I carry L233.

Barellalee
03-31-2014, 05:07 PM
Yes, L233 (I2a1c) is not Alpine. It is found at a low frequency in England, Scotland, Germany, France, and Holland. TMRCA Dating says as of 150 A.D., it was still localized to the North Sea coast of Germany.

Barellalee
03-31-2014, 05:18 PM
Right, so maybe a better way to ask this question, is would pre-Germanic Haplogroups, like I2a1 and I1, etc., that later become "Germanic" or associated with Germanic speaking peoples, simply have been subsumed or absorbed into the Germanic culture, language, and society of the later eras? Im asking because I dont quite get it. I am I2a1, regardless of the Subclade, and since my Branch arrived in Britain in the Dark Ages influxes, it is referred to as "Anglo Saxon". No P37.2 has been found that I know of in Scandinavia, so it isnt Viking, and my Autosomal DNA reflects no Scandinavian influence. For the record, this is my Dads side, whose origins are in Durham and Yorkshire. The I2a1c comes to me through the Brooks surname in Yorkshire. I2a1 in Germany is obviously very much so pre Germanic, as it is found in Neolithic remains in France, etc. So how did it become "Germanic" on this Subclade level is what I am saying.

Jean M
03-31-2014, 05:48 PM
Yes, L233 (I2a1c) is not Alpine. It is found at a low frequency in England, Scotland, Germany, France, and Holland. TMRCA Dating says as of 150 A.D., it was still localized to the North Sea coast of Germany.

Thanks. I have nothing about that subclade on my haplogroup I page, so I'm pleased to learn. Looks Germanic as you say.


So how did it become "Germanic" on this Subclade level is what I am saying.

If I2a1 was picked up by Pre-Proto-Germanic speakers as they integrated with Funnel Beaker farmers c. 2500 BC, then the L233 mutation could easily have cropped up in the rump of the group which had developed Proto-Germanic in northern Germany c. 500 BC. The rump developed Western Germanic after the groups split away which developed East Germanic and Norse. English, Dutch and German belong in the Western Germanic family.

Barellalee
03-31-2014, 06:12 PM
Thank you, that makes sense. So the "Pre Germanic" speakers of that territory, which is without doubt who the I2a1s there were, would most likely belonged originally to Funnelbeaker or Gravettian cultures I take it, like you said. Interestingly, there was someone on this site who commented on my Thread "I2a3a" who is from Lower Saxony and is L233. He said most of his "matches" have been people in England.

Jean M
03-31-2014, 06:55 PM
So the "Pre Germanic" speakers of that territory, which is without doubt who the I2a1s there were, would most likely belonged originally to Funnelbeaker

Forgive me if I get technical. Pre-Proto-Germanic is the term linguists use for the people who started off speaking a dialect of Indo-European which eventually would become Proto-Germanic. Looks like you are thinking of the people that this group encountered as they moved north. Here's a map: Click to enlarge.

1667

Linguists usually work out the place that a language developed by contacts with other languages. Germanic has an amazing number of such contacts. Picture a journey starting in the Indo-European homeland, in contact with the dialect that would become Proto-Balto-Slavic, then breaking right away from that contact and spending a long time in closer contact with the developing Proto-Celtic. Germanic picked up a lot of vocabulary from a non-Indo-European farming language, which was probably spoken by the Funnel Beaker people. They farmed a large region right up into southern Scandinavia, before the arrival of Indo-European type graves and artefacts, which archaeologists generally label the Corded Ware culture. So we follow Corded Ware into southern Scandinavia. There our group lost contact with Celtic, but encountered hunters and fishermen speaking non-Indo-European languages. Then the climate changed for the worse around 700 BC, forcing farmers south out of Scandinavia into what is now northern Germany and Poland. There they met the iron-working Celts expanding northwards. This was presumably the time in which Proto-Germanic borrowed the Celtic words for 'iron' and 'king'. Here it seems they finally developed Proto-Germanic.


or Gravettian cultures
Gravettian is much earlier. It had long gone by then.

Barellalee
03-31-2014, 07:44 PM
Oh I see what you mean. Well I guess it shall remain a mystery for the moment. Maybe I2a1 would more likely fit into the Gravettian than Funnelbeaker. Who knows. I don't think there is that much P37.2 in Germany as it is, I2a1c being one of the lineages of it present there. That makes it even more complicated. Maybe there were, but I'm unaware of any other P37.2 groups connected to Germanic languages.

Jean M
03-31-2014, 08:17 PM
Gravettian was 28,000–22,000 years ago. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravettian

Haplogroup I* (L41) is estimated to be some 25,000 years old. So I* could fit in Gravettian.

Haplogroup I2* (M438) has been found in Mesolithic Europe c. 6000 BC, though the particular samples from ancient DNA were of lineages that did not survive.

Haplogroup I2a1 (P37.2/PF4004) has been found in Neolithic Europe c. 3000 BC.

Jean M
03-31-2014, 08:24 PM
Here is Ken's latest tree, from http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/

1668

alan
03-31-2014, 10:52 PM
I think from archaeology, IE settlers in say north Germany or Denmark would likely have encountered very similar migrant Neolithic cultures as they would have in the isles. So, its not likely the migrant Neolithic farmer element in the mix that caused a difference in pre-IE substrate. It may be that hunter gatherer genes got absorbed by the newly arriving farmers on a bigger scale than in the isles though and that may have made the Neolithic genepool rather different. I think the best evidence of this is the very slow increase in the importance of agriculture after its first arrival in agriculturally marginal area of Scandinavia. Also important is the fact that a lot of Scandinavia except the southern fringe was not settled by TRB farmers and was occupied by Pit Comb Ware hunter gatherers and others. My reading of the archaeology suggests to me that the peculiar non-farming substrate which IE settlers would have encountered in what is now Germanic Europe would have increased from south to north and maybe a lot of the oddness in Germanic was acquired not during the Corded Ware phase (when settlement tended to be mainly similar in macro distribution to the TRB farmers) but in the Nordic Bronze Age when a wider area of the north was incorporated. After all proto-Germanic is rather late in date (c. end of the Bronze Age) and there was nearly 2500 years between the arrival of corded ware and proto-Germanic - plenty of time to absorb ususual substrates.


If proto-Germanic arose on the northern fringe of Europe, and proto-Celtic arose in central or western Europe, proto-Germanic would have been more directly exposed to pre-Indo-European farmer and/or hunter-gatherer languages at the northern fringe of Europe. Perhaps the greater frequency of mtDNA U4 and U5 in norhteastern Europe might be an indicator of a non-Indo-Eurpean matneral influence on proto-Germanic?

Have any studies been done of words that might be specifically associated with hunting and gathering activities to see if these vary among Indo-European lanaguages?

alan
04-01-2014, 12:08 AM
The Wiki article is interesting on the subject of pre-German substrate

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

vettor
04-01-2014, 09:38 AM
Here is Ken's latest tree, from http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/

1668

Ken still calls L233, Alpine
while others further down are L485 ( western ) and L343 ( Flanders)

Interesting that he has not forgo Alpine

Jean M
04-01-2014, 11:11 AM
Ken still calls L233, Alpine

No I don't think so. It looks like Alpine is a side branch off the main L233 line, without its own SNP as yet. It must be difficult to display all the data on one tree. But "L333" is above the main line leading to Western, not on the line underneath leading to Alpine.

Barellalee
04-02-2014, 07:23 PM
Yes, my I2a1c is L233 and it is not Alpine. Maybe Alpine is Parent, I don't know, but the L233 offshoot is not Alpine, you are correct. As a matter of fact I2a1 "Alpine" has never been found in Britain, ever, at least as of yet :-). My current understanding of my I2a1c L223 is that I imagine it can be considered an "Anglo-Saxon" Subclade when it Britain. This is because it came with the "Germanic" migrations of the Dark Ages, and this Subclade has its' origin on the North German Plain. Perhaps it was "Pre-Germanic" in that sense, but technically I1a, a major Marker associated with Germanic groups, is also "Pre-Germanic"/"Pre Indo-European", and was later incorporated into Germanic culture.

Hando
01-04-2015, 05:14 PM
That's right. It absorbed a lot of vocabulary from a non-IE farming language that I presume was spoken in Funnel Beaker.



There may be words absorbed from hunter-gatherer I1 people in the north, but I2a1* looks more likely to have been picked up from farmers. There are too many unknown factors here to be certain.

Were these farmers from the Funnel Beaker mostly of Near Eastern origin or of indigenous Mesolithic hunter gatherers who took up farming? I ask because I am wondering what YDNA I originated from.

Christina
04-25-2015, 04:45 AM
There was a fascinating book you may want to pick up, reviewed in 2012 or 2013 by the Economist. The title was called something like "The Germans." It was hailed as an incredibly well-synthesized history of Germanic origins. I wish I remembered more.

Anyway, the author does an exhaustive review of linguistic and archaeological evidence. Posits that there was a pre-IE substrate living in and around the Baltic, so N Germany and S Scandinavia. The author details how almost all words for seafaring in German are non-IE, but almost all words for farming are IE.

Putting what we know of Hg frequency overlaying her very well researched archaeological and linguistic conclusions, it would make sense that R1a and other IEs mixed with these I1 and I2 natives. Her description (again based on other evidence) fit quite neatly into what many of you have posted here.

So to answer the question: which Hg is uniquely "German?" I see the point: German of course in an IE language. But it is totally possible that the root stock of much of the German population was I1 and I2, and became Indo-Europeanized.

Regardless, that branch that is found in Germany and made its way to England, even if not an IE German-SPEAKING branch originally, is now a marker of the population that speaks German. I hope that makes sense.

BillMC
10-17-2015, 02:34 PM
Does anyone know how old I-S1954 is? This has been claimed to be an Anglo Saxon marker, but it does not appear in Schleswig-Holstein. It does appear in Denmark, NE Germany N. Poland, Netherlands and Lower Saxony.

lgmayka
10-17-2015, 04:57 PM
Does anyone know how old I-S1954 is?
YFull uses the alternate name I-YSC261 (http://yfull.com/tree/I-YSC261/). YFull estimates that it diverged from its sibling I-Z2538 (http://yfull.com/tree/I-Z2538/) about 4200 years ago, but examples of I-YSC261 encountered so far have a TMRCA of only 3400 years. Its only direct child clade is I-L338 (http://yfull.com/tree/I-L338/).

BillMC
10-22-2015, 06:40 PM
When ScotlandsDNA told me that my DNA marker is I-S1954 - they said that it was an 'Anglo Saxon' one. Looks like its been around for a lot longer than that.

Jean M
10-22-2015, 07:00 PM
There was a fascinating book you may want to pick up, reviewed in 2012 or 2013 by the Economist. The title was called something like "The Germans." It was hailed as an incredibly well-synthesized history of Germanic origins.

Peter Schrijver, Language Contact and the Origins of the Germanic Languages (Routledge Studies in Linguistics) 13 Dec 2013. ??