Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69

Thread: R2 - Origo.

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    342
    Sex

    R2 - Origo.

    Has R2 an indoeuropean origin?
    Do R2 came into India with Indoeuropeans?

    If not - were R2 originate and why came into India?
    Especialy - why R2 is neighbour to the sister clade R1(a)?
    It's only an accident?

    What do you think?

  2. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,503
    Sex
    Location
    Calgary
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2-S2361 < L801
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2b(1)
    mtDNA (P)
    H3

    Canada
    R2 split from R1 probably about 30 000 years ago, way back in the Middle Upper Paleolithic before the Last Glacial Maximum. So though they are related it was from a very long time ago.

    TMRCA of R2a-M124 is probably more than 10 000 years ago. Very late Paleolithic or very early Neolithic. TMRCA of R1a-Z93 is more like 5000 or 6000 years ago, in the Copper Age. So their original expansions were at different times and must have been for different reasons. Within India the distribution of R2a and R1a is not particularly correlated, if you find high R1a in a population that doesn't mean you'll find high R2a - or low R2a either, they seem mostly independent of each other.

    Indo-Europeans could in theory possibly have picked up a lot of already existing and diverse R2 in Central Asia and brought it into India where it previously was absent, but I don't see any reason to think that this happened.

    R1 is found all across Eurasia. Most parts of Europe, South Asia, and Central Asia, and to a lesser degree West Asia, have a lot of R1. R2 is found most commonly in South and South Central Asia but does extend further at low levels. Since the range of R1 is so very wide it is not surprising to find R2 overlap it somewhere. So yes, IMO it is an accident, except insofar as R in general has a vaguely Central/West Eurasian placement.

    My guess would be that R2 originated in South Central Asia or maybe Eastern Iran and spread into India with the earliest farmers. But that is just a guess, there is not enough data to really say.

  3. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Megalophias For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-04-2015),  DMXX (12-29-2016),  Jean M (11-04-2015),  khanabadoshi (11-03-2015),  Michał (11-02-2015),  Rethel (11-03-2015)

  4. #3
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    7,149

    Quote Originally Posted by Rethel View Post
    Has R2 an indoeuropean origin?
    Do R2 came into India with Indoeuropeans?

    If not - were R2 originate and why came into India?
    Especialy - why R2 is neighbour to the sister clade R1(a)?
    It's only an accident?

    What do you think?
    To me R2 looks be as Indo-european as R1a and/or R1b.
    I think the spread of Indo-European languages is much older than what many academics posit since most theories don't take into account the possibility of later shared innovations.

    We have to keep in mind that the separation point of R2 and R1 is not very different in time from the separation point of R1a and R1b. So it is not the time of separation that is at issue, but how long after separation was unity maintained, and after this unity was disrupted, for how long after that was proximity maintained for exchanges.

    Another thing to keep in mind is the spread of M479* - this spread covers the geographic IE horizon covered by R1a and R1b.
    South Asia
    Ossetia
    Bashkortostan
    Italy
    Spain
    Portugal

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to parasar For This Useful Post:

     khanabadoshi (11-03-2015),  Rethel (11-02-2015)

  6. #4
    Banned
    Posts
    4,169
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Nationality
    N/A
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1-L621- PH 908
    mtDNA (M)
    H 47

    Quote Originally Posted by parasar View Post
    To me R2 looks be as Indo-european as R1a and/or R1b.
    This is a simplistic assertion. R2 split from R1 in the ice Age. There were no IE's 30000 years ago. Lets use proper terminology; and call genetics genetics, and language language.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gravetto-Danubian For This Useful Post:

     Jean M (11-04-2015),  Rethel (11-03-2015)

  8. #5
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    7,149

    Quote Originally Posted by Gravetto-Danubian View Post
    This is a simplistic assertion. R2 split from R1 in the ice Age. There were no IE's 30000 years ago. Lets use proper terminology; and call genetics genetics, and language language.
    M269 and M417 also split in that same time-frame. So the issue is not the time of the split, but the component haplogroups of PIE speakers.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to parasar For This Useful Post:

     Megalophias (11-03-2015),  Rethel (11-03-2015)

  10. #6
    Banned
    Posts
    4,169
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Nationality
    N/A
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1-L621- PH 908
    mtDNA (M)
    H 47

    Quote Originally Posted by parasar View Post
    M269 and M417 also split in that same time-frame. So the issue is not the time of the split, but the component haplogroups of PIE speakers.
    Well, lets wait for a proper tracking of movements from aDNA before jumping the gun with broad-brushed language hypotheses.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Gravetto-Danubian For This Useful Post:

     Rethel (11-03-2015)

  12. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,503
    Sex
    Location
    Calgary
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2-S2361 < L801
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2b(1)
    mtDNA (P)
    H3

    Canada
    Quote Originally Posted by parasar View Post
    M269 and M417 also split in that same time-frame. So the issue is not the time of the split, but the component haplogroups of PIE speakers.
    This is quite true, just because they diverged early on doesn't tell us whether or not they were in physical proximity, only that they had a very long time to become separated. For that matter R1a and R1b in general may well have quite far apart (R1b-V88 sure was), but it was the subclades that were next door to each other that were caught up in the successful expansion due to being in the right place at the right time.

    However, the TMRCAs of M269 and M417 are quite close to each other, while that of R2 is much earlier (if you look at the Y-Full tree there are 4 successive levels of R2a with TMRCAs of 10 000 years ago). So while they may have been connected somehow I don't see how they could have been part of the same historical process.

    That is not to say that some particular R2 subclades were not spread by Indo-Europeans. And later processes that spread Indo-European lineages (e.g. colonization by Northwest Indians) would also spread R2 lineages.

  13. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Megalophias For This Useful Post:

     DMXX (12-29-2016),  khanabadoshi (11-03-2015),  Michał (11-02-2015),  parasar (11-03-2015),  Rethel (11-03-2015)

  14. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    342
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Gravetto-Danubian View Post
    Lets use proper terminology; and call genetics genetics, and language language.
    But in my language the term: "Indoeuropeans" and "indoeuropean" refers to a people in first place.
    You can call it tribe, nation, ethnic group - whatever. Language is only a verbal tool to communicate
    with each other, which is associate with group of genetic related people (sometimes not).

    So Indoeuropeans - that are not only speakers of some language, and indoeuropean it is not only a term from lingustics.
    This is an ethnos: clan with common ancestor, kinsmen, language, culture, some genes - everything what can be associate
    with this people. Especialy a prime line from the first ancestor whom we called M-173 (or maybe M-207?).
    Last edited by Rethel; 11-03-2015 at 12:18 AM.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Rethel For This Useful Post:

     paulgill (11-03-2015)

  16. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    342
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by parasar View Post
    To me R2 looks be as Indo-european as R1a and/or R1b.
    Yes, and this is the point. It looks like it, and R2 on itself, seems not to fit to India.

    I think the spread of Indo-European languages is much older
    Maybe this is not the question, how old is language, because the prelanguage (or rather last common dialect)
    can be traced back 4000 or 40.000 years ago as well. The point is, did R2 came (as very small part) to India
    with IE-people, and did come from the same original tribe, or not. The time of mutations origin and the time of
    migration can be diffrent and the two mutations can live together in the same tribe/area - why not?

    If R2 came into India (or were there) before Aryans then it is probable, that they were a totaly different people
    from very deep prehistoric times - and if it is the case, then the next very interesting question is: who they are?
    But if their existace in India before Aryans is not comfirm, then probability, that they are IEs, is much higher, and
    if some ancient R2s examples will be find among early IE people, then we will have centainty.

    R2 among early IEs could be a small subgroup (for example 1%) and after arriving to India could enlarge itself.
    So if it was a very small minority, it will be very difficult to find anything among early IEs.

    So I have two questions, maybe someone knows:

    1. Do are known some archeological findings of R2, and how old they are?
    2. How and where is the most big differentiation of R2?
    Last edited by Rethel; 11-03-2015 at 12:42 AM.

  17. #10
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    7,149

    Quote Originally Posted by Megalophias View Post
    This is quite true, just because they diverged early on doesn't tell us whether or not they were in physical proximity, only that they had a very long time to become separated. For that matter R1a and R1b in general may well have quite far apart (R1b-V88 sure was), but it was the subclades that were next door to each other that were caught up in the successful expansion due to being in the right place at the right time.

    However, the TMRCAs of M269 and M417 are quite close to each other, while that of R2 is much earlier (if you look at the Y-Full tree there are 4 successive levels of R2a with TMRCAs of 10 000 years ago). So while they may have been connected somehow I don't see how they could have been part of the same historical process.

    That is not to say that some particular R2 subclades were not spread by Indo-Europeans. And later processes that spread Indo-European lineages (e.g. colonization by Northwest Indians) would also spread R2 lineages.
    I'm going by the overall distribution of R2-M479, R1a, and R1b. IMO, the steppe is not the locus of M269's spread, just its likely point of origin. Similarly, R2's point of spread may be different from its place of origin. No doubt it spread massively in India, but I think its origin was in China/S. Siberia/Baikal, and it dropped down into India via the antecedent rivers. I think IE is much older in India than assumed, entering directly from China. There also appears to be a later IE element in India which perhaps is a returnee from the western steppes (cf. Metspalu's k4 component http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthre...ll=1#post78346 ).

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to parasar For This Useful Post:

     paulgill (11-03-2015)

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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