Page 21 of 33 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 322

Thread: "The Genetic History of the Southern Arc: A Bridge between West Asia & Europe"

  1. #201
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    4,535
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-Z18271
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c5
    Y-DNA (M)
    R-U152
    mtDNA (P)
    U7a5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Quote Originally Posted by Hando View Post
    If J1 was not originally associated with Semitic, then which Y DNA would you correlate with Semitic?
    Just to clear things up, several major branches of J1 (especially under P58) most definitely were originally associated with Semitic-speaking groups all the way back to the stage of Common Semitic unity and arguably a bit prior to that as well. There is no other way to account for the intricate correlation between the haplogroup's branches and that of the Semitic language tree, here's a tree I made to showcase this (only major branches are shown here, the correlation extends further downstream and would require several trees per branch):

     


    So the view according to which J1 "invaded" early Semitic-speaking societies or was "Semitised" is a misconception to say the least, what is however true is that this haplogroup has no real Afroasiatic associations beyond the Semitic family and probably had nothing to do with the group that spoke the Semitic Parent Language, unlike E-M34's branches for instance (the earliest Afroasiatic-speaking groups are bound to have carried clades of E-M35). As for what language the P58-bearing groups originally spoke, your guess is as good as mine, while it is tempting to assign some sort of Caucasian background because of how the Proto-Northeast Caucasians in all likelihood had J-Z1842 as their main paternal lineage (hence the peak in present-day Dagestan), the fact that P58 probably originated in Northern Mesopotamia offers a diverse array of plausible candidates.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 06-23-2022 at 12:22 AM.
    מְכֹרֹתַיִךְ וּמֹלְדֹתַיִךְ מֵאֶרֶץ הַכְּנַעֲנִי אָבִיךְ הָאֱמֹרִי וְאִמֵּךְ חִתִּית
    יחזקאל פרק טז ג-

    אֲרֵי יִצְרָא לִבָּא דַּאֲנָשָׁא בִּישׁ מִזְּעוּרֵיהּ
    בראשית פרק ח כא-


    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  2. The Following 29 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     ADW_1981 (06-23-2022),  alchemist223 (06-23-2022),  AlluGobi (06-27-2022),  Andrewid (06-23-2022),  anthrofennica (06-23-2022),  Archetype0ne (06-22-2022),  Bruzmi (06-23-2022),  ChrisR (06-24-2022),  CopperAxe (06-23-2022),  drobbah (06-23-2022),  Hando (06-23-2022),  hartaisarlag (06-23-2022),  J Man (06-23-2022),  J.delajara (06-23-2022),  JMcB (06-23-2022),  Kale (06-23-2022),  Kelmendasi (06-23-2022),  Keneki20 (06-23-2022),  levantino II (06-23-2022),  MEurope55 (06-23-2022),  peloponnesian (06-23-2022),  Piquerobi (06-22-2022),  Pribislav (06-23-2022),  Principe (06-23-2022),  Psynome (06-23-2022),  Riverman (06-23-2022),  Russianbear (06-23-2022),  SUPREEEEEME (06-23-2022),  tikosg (06-23-2022)

  3. #202
    Registered Users
    Posts
    231
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    F0R1a1a-Z280
    mtDNA (M)
    R0H5B1

    Poland Slovakia Scotland England Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    Just to clear things up, several major branches of J1 (especially under P58) most definitely were originally associated with Semitic-speaking groups all the way back to the stage of Common Semitic unity and arguably a bit prior to that as well. There is no other way to account for the intricate correlation between the haplogroup's branches and that of the Semitic language tree, here's a tree I made to showcase this (only major branches are shown here, the correlation extends further downstream and would require several trees per branch):

     


    So the view according to which J1 "invaded" early Semitic-speaking societies or was "Semitised" is a misconception to say the least, what is however true is that this haplogroup has no real Afroasiatic associations beyond the Semitic family and probably had nothing to do with the group that spoke the Semitic Parent Language, unlike E-M34's branches for instance (the earliest Afroasiatic-speaking groups are bound to have carried clades of E-M35). As for what language the P58-bearing groups originally spoke, your guess is as good as mine, while it is tempting to assign some sort of Caucasian background because of how the Proto-Northeast Caucasians in all likelihood had J-Z1842 as their main paternal lineage (hence the peak in present-day Dagestan), the fact that P58 probably originated in Northern Mesopotamia offers a diverse array of plausible candidates.
    One odd thing is that afro asiatic languages which have historically been considered Hamitic (Ham) have more E-M35 while languages that historically have been considered semitic (Shem) have more J . This means before genetics semetic speakers knew that they were divergent (on average) It seems that in some cases oral traditions of folk and genealogies have a grain of truth to them.
    Maternal Uncle y-line= F0R1b1-L21

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to venustas For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-23-2022),  Hando (06-23-2022)

  5. #203
    Registered Users
    Posts
    87
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    Just to clear things up, several major branches of J1 (especially under P58) most definitely were originally associated with Semitic-speaking groups all the way back to the stage of Common Semitic unity and arguably a bit prior to that as well. There is no other way to account for the intricate correlation between the haplogroup's branches and that of the Semitic language tree, here's a tree I made to showcase this (only major branches are shown here, the correlation extends further downstream and would require several trees per branch):

     


    So the view according to which J1 "invaded" early Semitic-speaking societies or was "Semitised" is a misconception to say the least, what is however true is that this haplogroup has no real Afroasiatic associations beyond the Semitic family and probably had nothing to do with the group that spoke the Semitic Parent Language, unlike E-M34's branches for instance (the earliest Afroasiatic-speaking groups are bound to have carried clades of E-M35). As for what language the P58-bearing groups originally spoke, your guess is as good as mine, while it is tempting to assign some sort of Caucasian background because of how the Proto-Northeast Caucasians in all likelihood had J-Z1842 as their main paternal lineage (hence the peak in present-day Dagestan), the fact that P58 probably originated in Northern Mesopotamia offers a diverse array of plausible candidates.
    It amazes that most of these lineages stem from the Levant, esp Arabic with old South Arabian grouping while modern South Arabian speakers are much more archaic.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Russianbear For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-23-2022),  Hando (06-23-2022)

  7. #204
    Registered Users
    Posts
    87
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by venustas View Post
    One odd thing is that afro asiatic languages which have historically been considered Hamitic (Ham) have more E-M35 while languages that historically have been considered semitic (Shem) have more J . This means before genetics semetic speakers knew that they were divergent (on average) It seems that in some cases oral traditions of folk and genealogies have a grain of truth to them.
    Let's not conflate the two together. One can belong to the J haplogroup without being Semitic and vice versa(many Palestinian Christian men belong to E for example).

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Russianbear For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-23-2022),  Hando (06-23-2022)

  9. #205
    Quote Originally Posted by venustas View Post
    One odd thing is that afro asiatic languages which have historically been considered Hamitic (Ham) have more E-M35 while languages that historically have been considered semitic (Shem) have more J . This means before genetics semetic speakers knew that they were divergent (on average) It seems that in some cases oral traditions of folk and genealogies have a grain of truth to them.
    Did you forget that the Canaanites were considered descendants of Ham as well?
    Latest blog entry:
    Hidden Content

    Also worth checking out:
    Hidden Content

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CopperAxe For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-23-2022),  Hando (06-23-2022)

  11. #206
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,473
    Sex
    Location
    Brazil
    Ethnicity
    Rio de Janeiro Colonial
    Nationality
    Brazilian
    Y-DNA (P)
    J1a1 FGC6064+ M365+
    mtDNA (M)
    H1ao1a

    Suebi Kingdom Portugal 1143 Portugal 1485 Portugal Order of Christ Brazilian Empire Brazil
    Iranian and Armenian J1 have ancient basal diversity and deeply rooted nodes since the Mesolithic in the same region and speaking Indo-European languages. Levantine and Arabian J1 have recent and derived shallow nodes in relation to the Ancestral Northern J1 nodes. Semitic is just a new branch of the broader and older Afroasiatic languages, so J1 is a recent correlation there because J1-P58 moved or invaded the South and became the majority where there were also ancient E1b, G, J2 and T clades.
    J1 FGC5987 to FGC6175 (188 new SNPs)
    MDKAs before Colonial Brazil
    Y-DNA - Milhazes, Barcelos, Minho, Portugal.
    mtDNA - Ilha Terceira, Azores, Portugal
    North_Swedish + PT + PT + PT @ 3.96 EUtest 4

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to RCO For This Useful Post:

     Hando (06-23-2022)

  13. #207
    Registered Users
    Posts
    231
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    F0R1a1a-Z280
    mtDNA (M)
    R0H5B1

    Poland Slovakia Scotland England Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by CopperAxe View Post
    Did you forget that the Canaanites were considered descendants of Ham as well?
    Yes that's the interesting thing the people of the Levant did not consider themselves to be descendents of the Cananites (at least from reading the Bible perhaps I am missing something) by and large but rather from Ur of the Chaldeans. So yes I am aware there are many exceptions and the people in the Levant are largely descendents of the Cananites however perhaps J comes from a place like Iraq as the stories suggest (or the Caucasus/Iran). So the stories are not 100 percent reliable but they seem to have a grain of truth to them. In any case the old legends about semetic people coming from a different patriarch than Hamitic people seem to have a grain of truth to them (for the most part on average there are many exceptions of course) .
    I am aware ancient Cananites burials had J so perhaps I am wrong but I still think the association is interesting. Also I am aware most semetic populations have E1b1b as a large plurality like between 10-30 percent but by and large semitic seem to have much lower E1b1b than most historical Hamitic populations and it is likely the percentage rose in recent centuries in some semetic speaking places due to the rise of Islam (however it may have gotten lower in Arabia than it used to be as well). One ancient group that I have not seen the y DNA results of before like 500ad are the Jews in Israel and Palestine and Syria and Jordan and the does any one have any ancient samples of these people with y DNA results? I think there may be some from Rome however it would be interesting to see what the ones around the Levant had (were any of the Roman samples near 0ad of the Jewish Identity?). In any case I just have an observation and not an opinion so I will wait till the paper is released to form one. I know these can be controversial so I won't argue however I did the post because the associations I found seem to be quite interesting I would be happy to be right or wrong or anything in between.
    Maternal Uncle y-line= F0R1b1-L21

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to venustas For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-23-2022),  Hando (06-23-2022)

  15. #208
    Registered Users
    Posts
    922
    Sex
    Location
    Moscow
    Ethnicity
    East Europe + Finland
    Nationality
    Russian
    Y-DNA (P)
    N-Z1936-Y19110
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a5b

    Russian Federation
    In any case, the David Reich team will have to answer the question about the Y-DNA of the first Proto-Indo-Anatolian speakers on the eastern edge of Southern Arc. If this question could be circumvented, and guided only by the autosomal profile, then the question of the proto-Indo-European steppe homeland would have been solved back in 2015, nevertheless, paleogeneticists have been looking for corresponding Y-DNA lines in the steppe for 7 years, the latest work by Allenthoft and Willerslev. And if this is not the R1b-V1636 line, the assignment of which to proto IA can pass without much effort, then the assignment of other lines of type J1 will entail a fundamental revision of already existing concepts. This will affect the origin of the Semitic language and the languages of the North Caucasus and the Tocharian languages, because J1 was also present in the Chemurchek culture.

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to VladimirTaraskin For This Useful Post:

     Hando (06-23-2022),  levantino II (06-23-2022),  parasar (06-25-2022),  razyn (06-23-2022),  RCO (06-23-2022)

  17. #209
    Registered Users
    Posts
    64
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    J2b2a J-PH1602
    mtDNA (M)
    T2a1b

    United States of America Poland Germany Wales England
    I might have missed it up thread, but will the aforementioned Reich presentation be recorded?

  18. #210
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,173
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    Just to clear things up, several major branches of J1 (especially under P58) most definitely were originally associated with Semitic-speaking groups all the way back to the stage of Common Semitic unity and arguably a bit prior to that as well. There is no other way to account for the intricate correlation between the haplogroup's branches and that of the Semitic language tree, here's a tree I made to showcase this (only major branches are shown here, the correlation extends further downstream and would require several trees per branch):

     


    So the view according to which J1 "invaded" early Semitic-speaking societies or was "Semitised" is a misconception to say the least, what is however true is that this haplogroup has no real Afroasiatic associations beyond the Semitic family and probably had nothing to do with the group that spoke the Semitic Parent Language, unlike E-M34's branches for instance (the earliest Afroasiatic-speaking groups are bound to have carried clades of E-M35). As for what language the P58-bearing groups originally spoke, your guess is as good as mine, while it is tempting to assign some sort of Caucasian background because of how the Proto-Northeast Caucasians in all likelihood had J-Z1842 as their main paternal lineage (hence the peak in present-day Dagestan), the fact that P58 probably originated in Northern Mesopotamia offers a diverse array of plausible candidates.
    Another interesting aspect is this: Proto-Semitic came up when Afro-Asiatic groups mixed in the Northern Levante with a J1 dominated population, after which J1 turned out to be dominant in early Semitic. From there, the Semites expanded Southward in the Bronze Age. The most likely scenario is that related but different branches of Afro-Asiatic, including with a much higher level of E1b1b, being present in e.g. Southern Arabia and the Persian Gulf.
    I'm not aware of any relicts, but are there any linguistic hints to substrate languages in e.g. Yemen and the Persian Gulf?

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-23-2022)

Page 21 of 33 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-19-2021, 11:58 AM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-25-2018, 11:02 AM
  3. "The genetic forge of Europe", by Carles Lalueza-Fox
    By razyn in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 03-18-2018, 05:52 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-16-2017, 05:36 PM
  5. Replies: 43
    Last Post: 01-18-2015, 02:11 PM

Posting Permissions

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