GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-11 > 1291071389


From:
Subject: Re: [DNA] R1b and R1a fate
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 22:56:29 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <2057795451.1043327.1291071157097.JavaMail.root@sz0002a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net>


Dear Didier,



You repeatedly say "I am not sure" and "there are many uncertainties on dates and exact localizations". Of course. Nobody is sure and free from those uncertainties. It goes without saying. However, I, for instance, try to "optimize" available data, and put them into the least contradictory pattern. It is not "true" pattern, it is the most optimal pattern with respect to data, available today. Tomorrow new data will appear, and I (or somebody else) re-optimize the pattern.



At any rate, I try to put data next to each other. For example, there are four "items" - India, R1a1, Indo-European language, 3500 years bp.



I would like to put in the same manner something like "R1b, region, Indo-European language, the most distant time", but I cannot. Except "R1b, Europe, IE language, 2600 ybp". I could not find any earlier date. I would appreciate if anyone can.



I look at the alleged origin of the most ancient Celtic languages, and see only the 1st millennium BC. There are some exotic datings, but not generally accepted. At the same time, IE languages in Europe started to spread into branches around 6000 years bp. R1b were not there those times. I have tried hard, but could not find and connection between R1b1 and IE languages earlier than 3,000 ybp. Including those exotic version, more than 4,000 ybp. Too late.    



>Bernard tried to present his proposal but most of the replies were against "you" and no real exchange of ideas occurred



Yes, I prefer DATA, not fuzzy "ideas" or "proposals" without data.   



>I noticed that you have been very much attacked on the Altai origin.



I do not care. The thing is that I analyze DATA, and lately a few hundred R1a1 and R1b1 haplotypes were published, many of them from the Altai region (or, more generally, from Central Asia). Those who "attack" have not considered those haplotypes.  So, what is a point of "discussing"? I prefer to talk about taste of oysters with those who tasted them.  



Regards,



Anatole Klyosov




----- Original Message -----
From: "Didir Vernade" <>
To: ,
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:00:30 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] R1b and R1a fate

Dear Anatole,

You couldn't follow the discussion we had with Bernard (and a few others) on
dna-forums (french part) but I pointed the differences and I pointed that the
question of the language wasn't established. On dna-forums , Bernard tried to
present his proposal but most of the replies were against "you" and no real
exchange of ideas occurred. I decided to promote the proposal in Bernard's
terms (R1b proto IE ) to respect his proposal and as a challenging idea since
the language is the difficult part.
The "chassé - croisé " between R1a and R1b  is the "core" part and the Yamnaya
culture is central to this point (I maintain !).
Anatole Klyosov wrote :
> Yamnays culture is very obscure in a sense what part it was R1b and what
> part of R1a, if any. The R1a have migrated to the East European plain only
> at or after 4800 ybp. Before that only R1b could had been there.
> Therefore, your words "The key starting point is the Yamnaya culture which
> cited as typically IE" is generally incorrect. It might have been an area
> where R1b were some 7-5,000 ybp, and R1a came after that, and were moving
> in the opposite direction: R1b to the West, to Europe, and R1a to the
> East, to Central Asia, to set Andronovo culture, to Southern Ural, to
> "Avestan Aryans", to "Indo-Aryans". R1b have not been with them. R1b
> have been neither "the Aryans" nor the "Avestan people".
>
I am not so sure about the toponymes in Iberia. For example , the names of the
countries along the Atlantic coast are : Mauritani , Lusitani , Aquitani ,
Britani (and there are other local names from France following the ---tani
rule) . The sailors who let these names might be the Beaker people and they
may be IE related (connection with "town" in English). Recently, others have
realized that there are old IE toponymes in Iberia and it's a fact.
I agree (and I mentioned it) that Basque is still a problem.
AK wrote :
>
> You are correct that R1b have reached Iberia (4800 ybp) and set up the
> Beaker culture (4800-3300 ybp), moving up North, and to the Isles.
> However, they did not carry Indo-European languages. The Basques were (and
> still are) the good example of the ancient R1b language, which was
> transformed, of course, to the present day Basque language. 4500 years is
> a huge time for languages. According to glottochronology, after 4500 years
> only about 10% of basic words are still present in the 100-word list,
> which makes a few percent (or less) in a vocabulary. Indeed, there are
> some common words between the Basque and some North-Caucasian languages,
> pointing at the migration route some 6000-5000 years bp.
>
The dating for R1a-DYS388=10 , because of the incertitude is coherent with the
idea of a split when most R1a in the corded area moved east, a small group
moving west. I see no big difference, rather the existence of the minor group
is suggesting (to me...) that R1a wasn't too far from the western European
coast at that time.
AK wrote :
>
> R1a-DYS388=10 (the Tenths) split from the East European Plain R1a1
> approximately 4,700 years before present, and moved to the West. They went
> through a population bottleneck but survived. DYS388=11 did not survive,
> as most of R1a1 in Central Europe 4700-3500 ybp. As well as I1. You can
> guess what had happened to them. The "culture of crushed skulls" might
> help in answering this question.
>
Again, There are many uncertainties on dates and exact localizations. I won't
dispute on this : to me the differences are not significant. I noticed that you
have been very much attacked on the Altai origin. I am not sure about the
exact geographical origin and I only state that R1b was coming from "east"
when reaching the Yamnaya region (and was east of R1a).
AK wrote :
>
> Tocharians were not "moving East". Again, a misconception. Where those
> things come from? Where are DATA? Tocharians (R1a1) are found where they
> (R1a1) have always been - in Central Asia, Tibet, Tarim basin, where R1a
> always lived from 21,000 years ago. The Tocharian "presumably Centum"
> languare did not come from Europe. It was brought to Europe much later. It
> was a remnant of the original R1a1 "IE" language.        
>



This thread: