History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedGenetic evidence ends Aryan origin theory

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 40
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Genetic evidence ends Aryan origin theory
    Posted: 24-Oct-2008 at 21:50
The common but incorrect theory of Aryan invaders from the north had a long life but a disastrous ending, as its comming to face with an increasing number of evidence, both archeological and genetic, against it. Even a few years ago the proponents of this theory hailed Y-Chromosome haplogroup R1a  as the "diagnostic Indo-Iranian marker." But even then the argument was showing its weakness.



In 2001 one of those supporters, Wells, had to change some of the argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a

Quote Intriguingly, the population of present-day Iran, speaking a major Indo-European language (Farsi), appears to have had little genetic influence from the M17-carrying Indo-Iranians.


Very interesting conclusion; the same people who are supposedly the descendants of the Indo-Iranians arent really Indo-Iranians? Actually this contradiction comes only from the belief that R1a is a "Indo-Iranian" marker in the first place. To maintain the original theory, Wells provides alternative explanations.
 
Quote It is possible that the pre-Indo-European population of Iran— effectively an eastern extension of the great civilizations of Mesopotamia—may have reached sufficient population densities to have swamped any genetic contribution from a small number of immigrating Indo-Iranians. If so, this may have been a case of language replacement through the ‘‘elite-dominance’’ model.


In other words Wells is trying to say that pre-Aryan people of Iran were related to ancient Middle Eastern groups like the Akkadians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Amorites, etc. This is only his assumption based on present genetic evidence. Linguistic and archeological evidence proves that the pre-Aryans of Iran shared almost nothing in common with the Semites, neither in language or culture. Infact the flow of culture that began Mesopotamian civilization was from the regions near the Zagros to the Near East, intruding into the aboriginal cultures of those regions. So in the past, Middle Easterners and ancient Iranians were different people.

Quote Alternatively, an Indo-Iranian language may have been the lingua franca of the steppe nomads and the surrounding settled populations, facilitating communication between the two. Over time, this language could have become the predominant language in Persia, reinforced and standardized by rulers such as Cyrus the Great and Darius in the mid-first millennium B.C. Whichever model is correct, the Iranians sampled here (from the western part of the country) appear to be more similar genetically to Afro-Asiatic-speaking Middle Eastern populations than they are to Central Asians or Indians.


This explanations says that the Persians and other related people were merely Middle Easterners who borrowed the culture and language from the true nomadic Aryans. Of course, it could also be that the origin of the true Aryans might not even be the correct one. This was indeed the case, as more recent studies have shown that R1a, the "Indo-Iranian marker" originated around the area of North India/Pakistan/Southern Iran. How could the Aryans (supposedly from northern Eurasia) have originated in the place they went to last? Unless the connection between R1a and Aryans is incorrect, then we get a clearer picture. But dont throw all past theories away, old knowledge needs to be modified to fit what we now know.

Quote Some earlier studies came to the conclusion that R1a may have arose 15,000 years ago in the vicinity of Ukraine, possibly expanding from either the Ukrainian LGM refuge following the end of the last ice age, or from the Pontic-Caspian steppe as a result of the Kurgan migrations. However, some newer studies show that R1a lineages may have their origins in North India. Oxford University geneticist Stephen Oppenheimer has come to the conclusion through his genetic findings that "South Asia is logically the ultimate origin of M17 and his ancestors", and that "one estimate for the age of this line in India is as much as 36,000 years old".


Quote Exceptionally high frequencies of M17 are found among the Ishkashimi (68%), the Tajik population of Khojant (64%), and the Kyrgyz (63%), but are likely "due to drift, as these populations are less diverse, and are characterized by relatively small numbers of individuals living in isolated mountain valleys."[5] (The frequency of the Tajik/Dushanbe population is, at 19%, far lower than the 64% frequency of the Tajik/Khojant population.) Haplogroup R1a is also common among Mongolic- and Turkic-speaking populations of Northwestern China, such as the Bonan, Dongxiang, Salar, and Uyghur peoples.


Quote A further study (Saha et al 2005)[28] examined R1a1 in South Indian tribals and Dravidian population groups more closely, and questioned the concept of its Indo-Iranian origin. Most recently Sengupta et al. (2006)[29] have confirmed R1a's diverse presence including even Indian tribal and lower castes (the so-called untouchables) and populations not part of the caste system. From the diversity and distinctiveness of microsatellite Y-STR variation they conclude that there must have been an independent R1a1 population in India dating back to a much earlier expansion than the Indo-Aryan migration. Sengupta concludes saying North India including the Indus Valley contributed R1a1-M17 chromosomes to both the Central Asian and South Asian tribes much before the Indo-European event.


The presence of R1a in N. India is very ancient and still remains there. There is nothing Aryan about R1a, even those in the Ukraine (Slavs) have more R1a contribution than any Iranian group, except for the Tajiks, who have been influenced by non-IE groups. Turkic and Altaic groups also have more significant R1a contribution. If you are wondering about the Ossetians, they have 0% R1a. All this implies that R1a belongs to the original inhabitants of North India, Iran and Central Asia in general (at least 15,000 BC). The high amount seen in Eastern Europe implies it went there relatively recent, otherwise it would have spread much further west and into the Balkans. This also tells us that the old implied Indo-European and Aryan homelands are not in these locations, but closer to where there is fewer R1a (Southeast Europe). And that we have to reconsider to who those northern Eurasian steppe artifacts really belong to.  



The only explanation that brings us closer to the truth about the origins of Aryans in really simple. If we only let go of those northern steppe Aryan homeland fantasies, of those myterious Scythians that are more real in our minds than on historical reality.

The timeline of the Aryans begins like this: Around 3,000BC the early Indo Europeans of S.E. Europe were moving into Anatolia. At this time Mesopotamian world ruled supreme, spearheaded by Hurrians in Cappadocia and Semitics furthern south. A few centuries later these IE people were able to make homes in regions such as Hattusa and the area near present day Armenia. The proto-Indo-Iranians formed their identity by mixing with the larger Middle Eastern population but maintaining the 'noble' Aryan culture. You can imagine it being similar to Spaniards coming to the New World and creating families with the South American natives, over time these groups have more native genetic contribution, but ethnically they are considered Hispanic. The early Aryans followed the traditions of their Indo-European forefathers, but they themselves also have roots in the Middle East. They were able to make their home in NW Iran and expand from there, ie the Medes. They also pushed the original populations of Iran away, those that carried R1a. This fits perfectly with the genetic evidence.





Assyrian Ashur (Supreme Diety)



Iranian Ahura Mazda


Edited by CiegaSordomud - 25-Oct-2008 at 00:59
Back to Top
IndianGreek View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard

Banned/Arash

Joined: 16-Oct-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IndianGreek Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 01:04

so at the end of the day there is no such thing as a aryan. Please go and tell this to 90% of Iranians who think they are a superior aryan race.

also i have a question, why do you say there is nothing aryan about R1A????

Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 01:35
Oh, finally I got it, this is Iranian protochronism, linking Persian age to Sumer and Akkad. Smile
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 04:33


The area from which this Haplgroup X1 seem to express itself...




Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 09:54
And some debunking ...
 
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud CiegaSordomud wrote:

The common but incorrect theory of Aryan invaders from the north had a long life but a disastrous ending, as its comming to face with an increasing number of evidence, both archeological and genetic, against it. Even a few years ago the proponents of this theory hailed Y-Chromosome haplogroup R1a  as the "diagnostic Indo-Iranian marker." But even then the argument was showing its weakness.
Actually the common "theory of Aryan invaders" (if by this is understood the common IE paradigm) is still widely held. Genetics hasn't disproved it (nor proved it for that matter) and archaeology, on the contrary, helped defining better frames of understanding. The discovery and dating of Hittite texts confirmed the laryngeal hypothesis. Today we know the earliest attesteted IE languages are Hittite and Luwian followed closely by Mycenean Greek and Old Indic (the latter being not only the language of Rig Veda, but being present in the largely Hurrian speaking kingdom of Mitanni). Their common origin is undisputable and all the arguments (e.g. vocabulary) point to a non-Indian origin of this language, therefore it seems that the creators of Rig Veda are part of a cultural heritage (if not also biological - though in a small degree must be also biological, someone must have brought it there) coming from north.
 
But this thread is not about disproving this theory (though it claims otherwise, it barely touches it), but about the assigning markers to this migration. And showing a certain marker is not an IE-expansion marker it means only that, not that the common IE paradigms fell.
 
Quote In 2001 one of those supporters, Wells, had to change some of the argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a
I assume this is a hasty reading, because that study ( http://www.pnas.org/content/98/18/10244.full ) apparently considers it a IE marker:
"The current distribution of the M17 haplotype is likely to represent traces of an ancient population migration originating in southern Russia/Ukraine, where M17 is found at high frequency (>50%). It is possible that the domestication of the horse in this region around 3,000 B.C. may have driven the migration. The distribution and age of M17 in Europe and Central/Southern Asia is consistent with the inferred movements of these people, who left a clear pattern of archaeological remains known as the Kurgan culture, and are thought to have spoken an early Indo-European language. "
 
Quote This explanations says that the Persians and other related people were merely Middle Easterners who borrowed the culture and language from the true nomadic Aryans. Of course, it could also be that the origin of the true Aryans might not even be the correct one. This was indeed the case, as more recent studies have shown that R1a, the "Indo-Iranian marker" originated around the area of North India/Pakistan/Southern Iran. How could the Aryans (supposedly from northern Eurasia) have originated in the place they went to last? Unless the connection between R1a and Aryans is incorrect, then we get a clearer picture. But dont throw all past theories away, old knowledge needs to be modified to fit what we now know.
If other studies find other origins for this marker, then so it may be, it is not a IE expansion marker.
 
Quote otherwise it would have spread much further west and into the Balkans
Your map shows it "further west and into the Balkans". Damn' geography! Wink
 
Quote This also tells us that the old implied Indo-European and Aryan homelands are not in these locations, but closer to where there is fewer R1a (Southeast Europe). And that we have to reconsider to who those northern Eurasian steppe artifacts really belong to.  
Non sequitur.
 
Quote If we only let go of those northern steppe Aryan homeland fantasies, of those myterious Scythians that are more real in our minds than on historical reality.
This is a confusion. The Scythians show in historical sources some 2-3 millenia after the IE (in your words "Aryan") expansion, and ~1 milennium after the entrance of IE languages in India.
The steppe culture of the Scythians (or "Scythians" if Robert Drews is right about the translation of the ethnonym) and the hypothesized steppe culture of the IE people are two distinct episodes of this odyssey.
 
Quote The timeline of the Aryans begins like this: Around 3,000BC the early Indo Europeans of S.E. Europe were moving into Anatolia. At this time Mesopotamian world ruled supreme, spearheaded by Hurrians in Cappadocia and Semitics furthern south. A few centuries later these IE people were able to make homes in regions such as Hattusa and the area near present day Armenia. The proto-Indo-Iranians formed their identity by mixing with the larger Middle Eastern population but maintaining the 'noble' Aryan culture. You can imagine it being similar to Spaniards coming to the New World and creating families with the South American natives, over time these groups have more native genetic contribution, but ethnically they are considered Hispanic. The early Aryans followed the traditions of their Indo-European forefathers, but they themselves also have roots in the Middle East.
Leaving all oddities aside, this paragarph largely fits the common IE expansion scenarios and also Wells study:
"It is possible that the pre-Indo-European population of Iran— effectively an eastern extension of the great civilizations of Mesopotamia—may have reached sufficient population densities to have swamped any genetic contribution from a small number of immigrating Indo-Iranians. If so, this may have been a case of language replacement through the ‘‘elite-dominance’’ model."
 
Therefore for both Iran and India, the IE speakers were the "Aryan invaders". What kind of "invasion" it is a new discussion.
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 40
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 15:33
Let me clarify if people have trouble following.

1) India is not the origin of Indo-Iranians.

2) Around North India and south Central Asia appears the oldest branch of R1a, more than 30,000 years ago.

3) The specific type of R1a found in Eastern Europe date at least 18,000.

4) The flow of early R1a groups was from the position near central Iran towards:

a. The eastern steppes (R1a predominates in Andronovo samples).

b. Southern India.

c. Urals then into Eastern Europe. It might have spread further into southwest Asia but was displaced by other groups (mainly native Middle Easterners).

5) In general all these migrations occurred prior to 10,000 years ago, before any Indo-Iranian expansion.

6) The majority of Iranians are genetically closer to native Middle Easterners.

7) The most recent genetic studies proves that the R1a carriers in Eastern Europe did not spread into India or Central Asia. Each region has its own distinct types, which means after an initial migration did they did not differentiate further. Referencing older studies is not reliable when figuring migration patterns because they incorrectly assume all R1a originated in Eastern Europe relatively recent.

8) The group that spread Indo-Iranian culture and language was predominately of Middle Eastern background, they did not come from northern Eurasia. This "proto-Aryan" group then was influenced by the early IE groups of Anatolia and Armenia.

9) Only older books and studies consider R1a an "Indo-European marker", more recent sources wont.
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 15:42

If these migrations happened ~10,000 years ago, then they are entirely irrelvant to the "Aryan origin theory" and this whole thread misses the point.

Quote The group that spread Indo-Iranian culture and language was predominately of Middle Eastern background, they did not come from northern Eurasia. This "proto-Aryan" group then was influenced by the early IE groups of Anatolia and Armenia.
Wrong. Iranian languages are IE, a large part of Iranian religion and culture is IE and it was proved so many times and in so many different ways. The group spreading the Indo-Iranian language culture migrated, according to your own claims, millenia after the migration you presented here.



Edited by Chilbudios - 28-Oct-2008 at 15:44
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 40
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 15:51
Indeed they are, but we are mostly talking genetic here.

Because the Akkadians followed a Sumerian form of culture, does that make them non-Semitic or Afro-Asiatic in terms of genetics?

The spread of Indo-Iranian culture, would be about 4,000 years ago. This is when Middle Eastern types came into Iran.

This map serves as the actual representation of the Indo-Iranian expansion. From a
 northern variant of a Middle Eastern marker J2.






http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/12/sengupta-et-al-2006-online.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenician_gene

Notice it is exactly in the opposite spread of R1a (and goes into India). This is the intrusive group that came into Iran as the Indo-Iranians, with roots in the Middle East.

Also dont get confused with the description of this as the "Phoenician gene", its only a description based on the fact that carriers spread to the Mediterranean from the region of Phoenicia but doesnt make everyone with this marker a Phoenician. As usual, the European point of view taking precedent.


Edited by CiegaSordomud - 28-Oct-2008 at 16:02
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 15:59
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud CiegaSordomud wrote:

Indeed they are, but we are mostly talking genetic here.

Because the Akkadians followed a Sumerian form of culture, does that make them non-Semitic or Afro-Asiatic in terms of genetics?
The group spreading the IE languages and culture must have some genetics of its own, a language or a culture can't spread if there's no one to spread it. They might have been not numerous, they might have been genetically heterogenous (and thus hard to follow in their migration), but they certainly were. And they came from outside Iran or India.
 
There's no such thing as "Semitic race" or "Semitic genetics".
 
Quote The spread of Indo-Iranian culture, would be about 4,000 years ago. This is when Middle Eastern types came into Iran.
Even it would be so, so what? Many people probably entered Iran in 3rd-2nd millenia BC. Are those "Middle Eastern types" present in all the other IE areas? If not, they are not the marker you are looking for.
 
Quote http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/12/sengupta-et-al-2006-online.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenician_gene

Notice it is exactly in the opposite spread of R1a (and goes into India). This is the intrusive group that came into Iran as the Indo-Iranians, with roots in the Middle East.

Also dont get confused with the description of this as the "Phoenician gene", its only a description based on the fact that carriers spread to the Mediterranean from the region of Phoenicia but doesnt make everyone with this marker a Phoenician. As usual, the European point of view taking precedent.
You gotta be kidding. Are the lion motifs part of the universally shared IE culture? No. Then forget your theory.
 
Maybe you haven't noticed, but there's no strong argument against a homeland in the steppes.


Edited by Chilbudios - 28-Oct-2008 at 16:12
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 40
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 16:16
Quote Maybe you haven't noticed, but there's no strong argument against a homeland in the steppes.


Unless you find a recent genetic source that states any connection between the northern steppes and Iran (not "suggestions" please), then you have no argument. We are going by the information the studies provide us. You cant BS yourself with this topic...unless you bring something about UFOs moving people around....then no.

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

Quote Typically, modern populations of the southern Middle East (especially Arabic-speaking ones) have a higher frequency of the related haplogroup J1, whereas the great majority of Haplogroup J representatives among the populations of the Northern Middle East, Europe, and India belong to the subclade J2. Haplogroup J2 has been shown to have a more northerly distribution in the Middle East, although it exists in significant amounts in the southern middle-east regions, a lesser amount of it was found when compared to its brother haplogroup, J1, which has a more southerly distribution. This suggests that, if the occurrence of Haplogroup J among modern populations of Europe, Central Asia, and South Asia does reflect Neolithic demic diffusion from the Middle East, the source population is more likely to have originated from Anatolia, the Levant or northern Mesopotamia than from regions further south.

Haplogroup J2a-M410 in India is largely confined to the upper castes[5] with little occurrence in the middle and lower castes and is completely absent from south Indian tribes and middle and lower castes.

Those are the Aryans you were looking for.





Edited by CiegaSordomud - 28-Oct-2008 at 16:23
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 17:08
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud CiegaSordomud wrote:

Unless you find a recent genetic source that states any connection between the northern steppes and Iran (not "suggestions" please), then you have no argument. We are going by the information the studies provide us. You cant BS yourself with this topic...unless you bring something about UFOs moving people around....then no.
But you miss the point completely. You have first to prove (it is your thread, your theory) that IE migration is identified genetically by a marker (whatever you choose), otherwise there's nothing to debate. And your identification must show a migration which deals with all IE questions - vocabulary, culture, rituals, myths concerning the wheel, wagon, horse domestication, certain plants, gods, etc. Your "Phoenician" link not only that doesn't explan these, it creates even more problems.
 
And you don't go by the information the studies provide, actually you misunderstand and misinterpret most of it. There are several suggestions of population migrations in that article, but none supporting your wild claims. Here is an example:
 
Quote Those are the Aryans you were looking for.
Is your haplogroup confined to "elites" in Europe (which was also IE-ed)? Your haplogroup actually shows to be (quasi-)absent in large parts of Europe where IE languages are spoken. The IE world is not only Iran and India.
 
One more thing: if you like to play with genetics, then I suggest you get some information on Renfrew's Anatolian hypothesis (which received support also from some geneticists, most notably Cavalli-Sforza). Maybe in this way you'll be able to find a convenient alternative to Eurasian steppes, having also some scholarly support.
 


Edited by Chilbudios - 28-Oct-2008 at 17:30
Back to Top
Afghanan View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Durr e Durran

Joined: 12-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1076
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Afghanan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 20:32

Well my Genographic study, Zagros's genographic study, a friend of mines, all point to R1a or R1b.

I am more enclined to think that although R1 haplogroups are more prevalent in Eastern Europe than Central Asia, but I would not rule out the fact that it exists in large numbers in Iran or Central Asia.  My family history is not anything special, my fathers family are descendants of nomads, as was  my friends.  I'm not sure about Zagros.
The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest.
~ Khushal Khan Khattak
Back to Top
Artabanos View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Artabanos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 21:20

@Chilbudios

Its right J2a would be mainly limited to Indo-Ayrans, i.e. those IE people of western
Asia and India. This also works for southern Europeans including Greeks and Italian IE people.

For the rest of
Europe, especially Germanic Europe HG I would be an explanation, its most likely the most closely related HG to J2a.
Most likely both I and J2a were direct geographic neighbours before they moved away from each other on the map.



Edited by Artabanos - 28-Oct-2008 at 21:20
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 22:48
I and J separated in Paleolithic, long before IE languages separated.
 
You have to understand that genetics alone can't find or prove the origin of IE languages / Aryans. At best can bring a supplementary confirmation to an existing hypothesis. And the only locations having some credibility today are Anatolia (and the latest revision of Renfrew's theory assumes a long journey with several "homelands", maybe haplogroup J could explain a migration from Anatolia but perhaps then other genetic markers became important in spreading this language and culture) or the Eurasian steppes.
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2007
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 552
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2008 at 23:16
And imagine the IE language was just some kind of lingua franca, then no men is needed to have moved. Then you can throw all your genetic evidence into a wastepaper-basket.
Back to Top
Suren View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Chieftain

Joined: 10-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1673
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Suren Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2008 at 00:54
  we are still superior to you, Germanic sub-Iranic language tribal federation, yeath that's how we rule!?Big%20smileWackoNuke 

Edited by Suren - 29-Oct-2008 at 01:05
Anfører
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 40
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2008 at 01:34
Imagine if all the non-Indo-Europeans, non-Afro-Asiatics would stand up and unite?

The non-Islamic Turks, Hungarians, Chechens, Caucasians, and others who are genetic descendants of the Sumerians, Hurrians, Etruscans, Minoans, Elamites, Kassites, etc who are R1a and G carriers. They will start to demand a lot of recognition.
Back to Top
Asawar Hazaraspa View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 21-Apr-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 100
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Asawar Hazaraspa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2008 at 02:16

Firstly I would respectfully demand your sources on the infos above and what organization carried all the way this new discovery?

And secondly what do those claims have to do with the story that Etruscans are related to Hurrians and Sumerians?

Back to Top
Asawar Hazaraspa View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 21-Apr-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 100
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Asawar Hazaraspa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2008 at 02:19

Originally posted by Suren Suren wrote:

  we are still superior to you, Germanic sub-Iranic language tribal federation, yeath that's how we rule!?Big%20smileWackoNuke 

You simply believed all these?! Such studies has nothing to do with superiority. But Do not forget William Durant words: "Indo-Europeans have lost many lands throughout history and proably will do the same in future".

Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Status: Offline
Points: 1064
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2008 at 22:13
Originally posted by Asawar Hazaraspa Asawar Hazaraspa wrote:

Originally posted by Suren Suren wrote:

  we are still superior to you, Germanic sub-Iranic language tribal federation, yeath that's how we rule!?Big%20smileWackoNuke 

You simply believed all these?! Such studies has nothing to do with superiority. But Do not forget William Durant words: "Indo-Europeans have lost many lands throughout history and proably will do the same in future".



I think he was just joking around.

A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.086 seconds.