Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 65

Thread: R1b in North Africans

  1. #21
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    13,209
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF41>FGC36981
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2c3a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-M269
    mtDNA (P)
    K1a1a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    It's significant for my map. If it's just 690 years old then I'm not going to include it.

    If it's 2300 years old then I will include it.

    If nobody knows how old is it, then I will simply include it as "270 BC - 1325 AD".
    That's reasonable, although I suspect a date somewhat nearer 1325 AD than 270 BC.

  2. #22
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by rms2 View Post
    If you were hoping to make M269 aboriginal in western Europe, this doesn't do it, and it's been tried before.
    No, I'm not making claims about the origins of M269.

    History of the Canary Islands is interesting enough to investigate this further, though.

    It would be nice to know to which subclade(s) that early Canarian M269 belonged.

    For example if that was U152, then probably it came with the Romans.

    But if it was for example DF27 - now that would be interesting!

  3. #23
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    13,209
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF41>FGC36981
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2c3a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-M269
    mtDNA (P)
    K1a1a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    No, I'm not making claims about the origins of M269.

    History of the Canary Islands is interesting enough to investigate this further, though.

    It would be nice to know to which subclade(s) that early Canarian M269 belonged.

    For example if that was U152, then probably it came with the Romans.

    But if it was for example DF27 - now that would be interesting!
    Not all that interesting, IMHO, given that range of dates. DF27 probably arrived in Iberia by the Late Neolithic or Early Bronze Age. That gave it a lot of time to get out to the Canary Islands by 1325.

  4. #24
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    And why do you stick to this 1325? It's the latest possible date.

    The islands were isolated so there weren't many opportunities for immigration after Roman times.

    Check here - a good post about mysterious Guanche history, by an user from Canary Islands:

    http://historum.com/european-history...06?postcount=5

    BTW - of course U106 or L21 would be even more interesting. Or R1a or Q for that matter.
    Last edited by Tomenable; 08-17-2015 at 10:26 PM.

  5. #25
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    13,209
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF41>FGC36981
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2c3a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-M269
    mtDNA (P)
    K1a1a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    And why do you stick to this 1325? It's the latest possible date.

    The islands were isolated so there weren't many opportunities for immigration after Roman times.

    Check for example here - a good post about mysterious Guanche history:

    http://historum.com/european-history...06?postcount=5
    Because it makes more sense than 270 BC since it gives Europeans more time to get out to the Canaries. Why do you seem to prefer the earlier, less likely date?

    Anyway, whether R1b got out to the Canaries around 270 BC or around 1325 AD makes little difference to me. Either date is sufficiently underwhelming.

  6. #26
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    Because it makes more sense than 270 BC since it gives Europeans more time to get out to the Canaries.
    But Ancient Europeans were much better sea travellers than Early Medieval Europeans.

    So it is more probable that they reached the islands in Ancient times.

    Especially it is rather certain that the Romans reached them, but long after 270 BC, IIRC.

    Also in 1325 AD the Canarians lived at the Stone Age level of technology.

  7. #27
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    DF27 probably arrived in Iberia by the Late Neolithic or Early Bronze Age.
    DF27 is strange because unlike other R1b M269 clades, it doesn't correlate with Indo-European languages at all. The distribution of DF27 actually correlates with Non-IE languages spoken in much of Iberia until the Roman conquest and replacement by Latin (only what is now called Basque survived).

    As for the Guanches - they were Stone Age people in 1400 AD, but they could had been more advanced at some point in time before that. Technological regress is not such a rare phenomenon (Tasmanians is a good example of extreme regress, since - IIRC - they even forgot how to start a fire).

  8. #28
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    13,209
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF41>FGC36981
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2c3a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-M269
    mtDNA (P)
    K1a1a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    DF27 is strange because unlike other R1b M269 clades, it doesn't correlate with Indo-European languages at all. The distribution of DF27 actually correlates with Non-IE languages spoken in much of Iberia until the Roman conquest and replacement by Latin (only what is now called Basque survived).
    That is not accurate at all. Indo-European languages were spoken fairly early in Iberia, and there is evidence that the Iberians and Aquitanians were relative latecomers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    As for the Guanches - they were Stone Age people in 1400 AD, but they could had been more advanced at some point in time before that. Technological regress is not such a rare phenomenon (Tasmanians is a good example of extreme regress, since - IIRC - they even forgot how to start a fire).
    I'll have to take your word for the Guanches being a "Stone Age" people as of 1400, but that covers a lot of territory. Simple subsistence farming with stone tools was pretty common throughout Europe for much of its history.

    Besides, we're talking three R1b (if I recall correctly) who could be as recent as 1325 or only as old as 270 BC. How they got there no one knows. Some sort of sexual liaison between European sailors and native women, consensual or otherwise? Who knows?

    Anyway, R1b in the Canaries sometime between the Iron Age and the 14th century is not exactly earth shattering news.

  9. #29
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    That is not accurate at all. Indo-European languages were spoken fairly early in Iberia, and there is evidence that the Iberians and Aquitanians were relative latecomers.
    Turdetanian, Tartessian, Iberian and Aquitanian are considered Non-Indo-European - see this map:

    http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthre...ll=1#post97466

    So in historical times, entire eastern and southern coasts of Iberia were peopled by Non-IE tribes:

    http://www.arkeotavira.com/Mapas/Ibe...puli150dpi.jpg



    there is evidence that the Iberians and Aquitanians were relative latecomers
    Are you suggesting, that those areas had been Indo-European and later became Non-IE again ???

    ========================

    Languages of pre-Roman Iberia:

    1) Non-Indo-European:

    Iberian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_language
    Tartessian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartessian_language
    Turdetanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turdetani
    Aquitanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquitanian_language
    Basque - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Basque_language

    2) Non-Celtic Indo-European:

    Lusitanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusitanian_language
    Sorothaptic - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorothaptic_language

    3) Celtic Indo-European:

    Celtiberian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtiberian_language
    Gallaecian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallaecian_language

    And if Eupedia's map is right, then DF27 seems to correlate with Ancient Non-IE areas:
    (higher frequencies of DF27 in the north-east, in the east and in the south-east):



    Of course we now have one sample DF27 from Bell Beaker culture in Germany, IIRC.

    So maybe DF27 was originally IE and was later assimilated by Non-IEs.

    But DF27 could also be originally Non-IE and start to speak IE languages only later.

    Coming back to this issue:

    there is evidence that the Iberians and Aquitanians were relative latecomers
    And they could come with DF27, bringing it there.

    It's not certain whether DF27 was in Iberia before they came. All we know is that it seems to correlate with areas historically Iberian/Aquitanian, i.e. inhabited by speakers of Non-IE languages.
    Last edited by Tomenable; 08-20-2015 at 12:45 AM.

  10. #30
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    13,209
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF41>FGC36981
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2c3a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-M269
    mtDNA (P)
    K1a1a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    I'm suggesting just what I said, that there is evidence that Iberians and Aquitanians were relative latecomers and that Indo-European languages were widespread in Iberia fairly early (as is evident from your map). I believe Koch has argued that Tartessian is Indo-European and possibly Celtic.

    Your map shows Aquitanian straddling the Pyrenees along the Franco-Spanish border, and I have read that its speakers advanced into what is now Spain fairly late, displacing Celtic speaking tribes who were already there. The Iberians and Turdetani ring the south coast of Iberia. As I said, I have read they were relative latecomers, and that map could certainly be interpreted as evidence of a maritime arrival, although other interpretations are possible.

    Anyway, R1b-L23 of any kind, including DF27, is conspicuous by its absence from Europe outside Russia before the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Who are North Africans descended from?
    By Sikeliot in forum Northern
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 08-26-2020, 09:10 AM
  2. LivingDNA is not good for north Africans.
    By Adamm in forum Living DNA
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-12-2019, 09:26 PM
  3. Replies: 97
    Last Post: 07-19-2019, 04:32 PM
  4. North-Norwegians, North-Swedes and Finns
    By hintsu in forum Anatomy and Physiology
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-03-2018, 11:54 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-01-2017, 06:13 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •