Trojans were Basques?

[Everdred]

1. Which means you didn't understand what was being said to begin with, as the Haplogroup A00 predates the two previously held oldest subgroups in evidence. Those being A1 (formerly A1a-T) and A0 (formerly A1b). So it's the age of the oldest Y Chromosome DNA haplogroup in general that can be placed further back and not all the subgroups.

One of the important parts of that article beyond the A00 was the use of Kong et al.'s new mutation rate that was published last year:

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08/more-mutations-in-children-of-older.html

One of the results of using a reasonably accurate mutation rate like the above is that dates derived from it match the archaeological evidence. So the previous claim of geneticists that OoA occurred ~60kya is more or less doubled to ~120kya, which fits the finds of tools in the UAE dating c. 125kya and the sapiens remains c. 100kya found in Israel. Previously geneticists just explained the latter away with BS conjecture, but that's no longer necessary.

And of course this means that all of the age estimates for the splits of the various Y-DNA and mtDNA haplotypes need to be adjusted using the new rate.

[Nean]

If you add his together and John Hawks's then you can also make a wild guess and say there is no 'rate'. The rate changes according to bottlenecks and expansions, and to change in environment that require selection on new things. That's how genes work. Saying anything else is really the guess. I don't think anyone is supposed to treat it as anything but the roughest estimate but it's often presented almost like fact.

So you could easily have an age from before last ice age. DNA from 4000BP in basque country shows the same but it could be much much older. Has r1b been swept from sumeria westwards and oddly had the most diversity in the west and evidence of cultural isolate or is that where it comes from? Since for africa and most haplotypes we have this big assumption the most diversity means the origin it seems really odd that in this case it's supposed to be the other way around. But if so it's got to be older. So either it's older or there's some historical group we should be able to associate with them. A group that's huge and yet is not turkic culture.

It just seems inplausible the eastern edge of the range is the supposed origin, especially if it was not much before the turkics moved west. If they were tiny groups, why'd they migrate the same direction, and where are the previous europeans they must have displaced and how could they make it through so much presumably occupied territory? If they were one giant group, how can we not know about them? How did these other people get displaced so quickly, and how'd they burrow into the pyrrenes, which should be the last hold out to invaders, in that time?

It doesn't sound possible. Even if the explanation I see most likely is wrong, there's definitely something more we don't know, something big.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Nean

[Everdred]

I don't think it's too unreasonable to suppose that R1b arose in SW Asia. The idea of diversity is that the presence of numerous distinct varieties of R1b in an area suggests the place of origin, and there does seem to be some R1b diversity in SW Asia. In contrast European R1b is almost exclusively of the subclade defined by M269--so it's highly likely that the M269 subclade arose in Europe.

As for time, I'm seeing an older (2008) estimate of c. 18.5kya for R1, so R1b should be sometime after that. And of course that would make for a rough estimate of 37kya under Kong et al. We might suppose, then, that R1b may have been present in some of the earliest migrants into Europe. And then later migrations into Europe (neolithic farmers from Anatolia and the Indo-Europeans, who seem to be chiefly R1a, from the Black Sea region) are responsible for the higher distribution of R1b in Western Europe than in Eastern Europe.

[cormac mac airt]

One of the important parts of that article beyond the A00 was the use of Kong et al.'s new mutation rate that was published last year:

http://dienekes.blog...n-of-older.html

One of the results of using a reasonably accurate mutation rate like the above is that dates derived from it match the archaeological evidence. So the previous claim of geneticists that OoA occurred ~60kya is more or less doubled to ~120kya, which fits the finds of tools in the UAE dating c. 125kya and the sapiens remains c. 100kya found in Israel. Previously geneticists just explained the latter away with BS conjecture, but that's no longer necessary.

And of course this means that all of the age estimates for the splits of the various Y-DNA and mtDNA haplotypes need to be adjusted using the new rate.

I know about Kong's new mutation rate as well as the Nubian Complex sites you're talking about. The problem isn't with the dates being pushed back, it's that the Y Chromosome DNA dates aren't the only dates that should be pushed back.

Nean said:

We know for example things that are selected on mutate very slowly, hence why mtDNA estimates work completely different than Y DNA.

Who says the mtDNA estimates work slower than the Y Chromosome DNA estimates?

Why are only the "Y" estimates being singled out? Based on what? And pardon my math but considering the oldest Y DNA haplogroup date prior, A0 (formerly A1b), was dated to c. 141,500 BP and now we have A00 at c.338,000 BP then a 50% increase in dates is a gross understatement.

cormac

[Everdred]

I know about Kong's new mutation rate as well as the Nubian Complex sites you're talking about. The problem isn't with the dates being pushed back, it's that the Y Chromosome DNA dates aren't the only dates that should be pushed back.

Nean said:

Who says the mtDNA estimates work slower than the Y Chromosome DNA estimates?

Why are only the "Y" estimates being singled out? Based on what? And pardon my math but considering the oldest Y DNA haplogroup date prior, A0 (formerly A1b), was dated to c. 141,500 BP and now we have A00 at c.338,000 BP then a 50% increase in dates is a gross understatement.

cormac

I think Nean's exact wording isn't quite correct, but the idea that mtDNA and Y-DNA work differently certainly is. Obviously they're in different parts of the cell, and obviously nuclear DNA codes for different things than mtDNA. And I believe mtDNA has been shown to mutate much faster than nuclear DNA.

As for singling out Y, from what I understand Kong et al. didn't look at mtDNA. And since the mtDNA rates for humans are usually calculated based on the time of the human-chimp split, researchers will need to apply the new rate to estimations of the split, and then rework mtDNA rate estimations from that. So we'll need to wait on that before we can start re-estimating mtDNA dates.

And from the Mendez et al. paper:

So on the left are dates based on Kong et al.'s paper, and on the right are dates from an older rate from Cruciani et al. So A0 goes from 125 to 202kya, and A00 goes from 209 to 338kya. Both of those increases are about 60%, so I wouldn't say 50% was a massive understatement.

[cormac mac airt]

I think Nean's exact wording isn't quite correct, but the idea that mtDNA and Y-DNA work differently certainly is. Obviously they're in different parts of the cell, and obviously nuclear DNA codes for different things than mtDNA. And I believe mtDNA has been shown to mutate much faster than nuclear DNA.

As for singling out Y, from what I understand Kong et al. didn't look at mtDNA. And since the mtDNA rates for humans are usually calculated based on the time of the human-chimp split, researchers will need to apply the new rate to estimations of the split, and then rework mtDNA rate estimations from that. So we'll need to wait on that before we can start re-estimating mtDNA dates.

And from the Mendez et al. paper:

So on the left are dates based on Kong et al.'s paper, and on the right are dates from an older rate from Cruciani et al. So A0 goes from 125 to 202kya, and A00 goes from 209 to 338kya. Both of those increases are about 60%, so I wouldn't say 50% was a massive understatement.

Considering that it pushes the date for the MRCA of Y Chromosome Haplogroups from the earlier estimate of 141,500 BP, which was toward the end of the Wolstonian Glacial period, to the current 338,000 BP which is toward the beginning (an event that itself lasted over 220,000 years IIRC) then yes I'd say it was a massive understatement. Ten percent doesn't sound like much until you put it in terms of what it means. 196,500 years isn't exactly chump-change.

cormac

[cormac mac airt]

Considering that it pushes the date for the MRCA of Y Chromosome Haplogroups from the earlier estimate of 141,500 BP, which was toward the end of the Wolstonian Glacial period, to the current 338,000 BP which is toward the beginning (an event that itself lasted over 220,000 years IIRC) then yes I'd say it was a massive understatement. Ten percent doesn't sound like much until you put it in terms of what it means*. (196,500 years isn't exactly chump-change**).

cormac

* And according to the Mendez, et al. article itself:

Regardless of which mutation rate is applied, the analysis of relative ages of nodes 26 shows that the TMRCA of the A00-rooted tree is 67% older (95% CI than that of the A0-rooted tree.

So the difference between what was considered the earlier root of the Y Chromosome line and what stands as the current root is 17% older not 10%. Even at 136,000 years difference it's still not insignificant.

** earlier estimate for root of Y Chromosome Tree to current estimate.

cormac

Edited March 5, 2013 by cormac mac airt

[Everdred]

I see what you're saying, but I think we're on two different topics. My point was that we use the new mutation rate to push back each date--the two examples of A0 and A00 were pushed back by 60% each. You're talking about how the discovery of A00 combined with the new rate significantly pushes back the estimated Y-DNA common ancestor, which is certainly important and a massive leap back in time. But we still have to adjust each individual haplotype on the basis of the new rate, which is what I think Nean was talking about when he gave the 50% figure.

[GGG guy]

I think I can now define the Norse god Buri, whom is made as a mans image but of stone.

If we go to the Isle of Rhodes, there is a tribe called the Telchines. Crete was called Telchinea at one time so I suggest Minoan, and Mycenea, and Lycian, can all be derived from Telchines, who have a dog-headed-fish god, and who are also of blacksmith pedigree. Telchines relate to Curetes, Corybantes, and the Idaean Dactyls, aka the Kabeiros cult of Samothrace, and Lemnos Isle where I believe the northern Etruscans hail from. Thus, we have my two tribal relations as Dog/wolf and blacksmiths. The Druid priest were called "Cabiri" and the Kabeiros cult is also called Galli which I see as the Rhine regions, or the Fir Bolg, Eburones, Belgium, and/or Burgundians, to mention a few possibilities. This then allows a corridor in Gaul/France landscape of slightly later era.

The Telchines were mercenaries in Canaan or Palestine, and they made Poseidons' Trident, and the Cronus sun-god Sickle. Thus, it ties them to Lebanon, I suggest at Beirut (Berytus). next door was the Phoenicians of Tyre, roughly the same period. As we go along, all of these players qualify as Hyperboreans which some claim as the myth writers in Greece, even as the Idaean Dactyls being such writers.

A point of interest is the word Tsur in Lebanon regions. Tsur in Hebrew means "rock". The king named Bir Tsur is defined "The God Bir is a Rock". This then allows a northern Buri/Norse to be a rock-god, and allows for mountains as rock Burgs/Bergs by definition.

The word Hebrew is suspect. Hebrew script is written right-to-left syntax, so they, the Benjamites were known as left-handed warriors as they fought left-handed or, as south-paw using a modern term. The word Hebrew has etymology as Habiri, and a tribe in Canaan would be called the Khabiri. I suggest Kha as Egyptian for spirit/soul, so that Khabiri is defined to mean the spirit/soul of Biri, I contend as Bir/rock above. The name Benjamin in Hebrew means Ben (son), and yamin/jamin means right-hand, or as "son of my right hand", even though they were indeed left-handed folks. Now the Khabiri lived in the North by Mt. Carmel (reference cave called Kebara, and later in Hebron by Judah in the south. The Bejamites and the Khabiri have identical territorial locations, depending on era and historical events. One needs to consider the fact that of the Israel 12-tribes, the Benjamin tribe was born in Canaan, and all the others were born in Babylon. They all relate to Abraham of Sumerian city Ur before this Babylon/Akkad episode. Recall the Kassites of Babylon, which is one possible source for the Khabiri tribe, which I think I can play in to these defintions, and a Kurdish very early component of them, even before Babylon, where in Sumeria, the blacksmiths are located at Bad Tibira. Hence, the term; Tiberian-Hebrew, a major dialect of the Hebrew languages family, and the common Hebrew language today.

So who are the Khabiri of the Levant regions, and where did they come from? From the Egyptian Tel el-Amarna tablets dated to ~1400 BC, exemplifies the Khabiri tribe, as they were of the Egyptian court records in tablet form during this period. The Khabiri of the Levant has been studied by many historians, and I don't want to go through the whole of this. However, I can make comments for our purposes herein;

I'll use an excerpt from a book called "Future of God Amen" by Nicholas P Ginex. I select this because its condensed to words and names more common to Biblical English. I have other cross-references to these statements as well.

From page 134 on the Khabiri;

"In the city of Byblos,Rib-Addi, a faithful vassal of the pharaoh had sent dispatch after dispatch to the Egyptian court appealing for aid against king Aziru. But the letter sent by the hostile dynasties so confused the court that the Egyptain deputy in Galilee misinterpreted the threat, and in error sent his Bedouin mercenaries (reference that the Telchines of Rhodes sent mercenaries into Canaan lands likewise)into Byblos, overwhelming Rib-Addi's garrison troops. After sustaining the seige for three-years, Rib-Addi was now at the mercy of the enemy. He fled to Berut (Beirut/Berytus) to obtain help from the Egyptain deputy there, and having found no support, returned to Byblos to find his brother had seized control of the government. Adding to his distress, his brother, in his absence had delivered his children to Aziru. In short time, the Hittites and the Khabiri, or Bedoin mercenaries commanded by Aziru, swarmed the city walls and Byblos fell. Like the kings of other cities, Rib-Addi was slain, and with him, the last vassal of Egypt in the North had perished."

"By this time, even faithful vassals submitted to the enemy, which were the Khabiri; the Aramaean Semites. These Semites were Bedouin mercenaries of Aziru, who prevailed in the South, as did the Hittites in the North. The Khabiri coordinated strikes that took the cities of Kadesh, Damascus, Megiddo, Askalon (reference birthplace of St. George, and his sword named Ascalon), Lachish, and Gezer: an important stronghold of Southern Palestine. The inhabitants of these cities fled in terror from the Khabiri who burned the towns and laid waste to the fields. Many Palastinians left their towns to the hills, or sought refuge in Egypt. Ikhnaton (of Egypt) sent his general Bikhuru to restore order and suppress the Khabiri but he was entirely outnumbered. He advanced just north of Galilee, but soon retreated to Jerusalem and finally fell back to Gaza where he was probably slain."

"The provinces of Palestine and Syria had now passed entirely out of Egyptain control, The south was in such a state of anarchy that even survivors of Bikhuru's army gave up any attempt to maintain control, and residents who did not perish joined the enemy. Traders' caravans were no longer able to move from city to city to sell their wares without being constant prey of marauding dynasties; for the Egyptian Empire in Asia had ended."

Note that the Benjamite territories evolves same as does the Khabiri. Saul founded the 1st Israel kingdom and the city Jerusalem. Saul was a Benjamite. The tribe Benjamin is allowed because all the other brothers were involved in the selling of their brother to Egypt, into slavery. This is the reason given for the Benjamite name of their capital city, where god rewarded Benjamin (long deceased by now), but under the guise as Benjamites. I contend that Benjamin was actually born in Canaan, so they wouldn't be entirely foreigners according to Abraham family evolution of the tribal names in Levant regions.

Now I will tie this to the Nordic god Buri, and allows a calculation for a timeline for these myths in the northern Baltic regions.

Norse Earth related gods descend from Buri. This leads to Tyr, their god of the sword. Tyr is obvious to me due to the Lebanon-Phoenician Tyre city, and the fact that I call all of the above Hyperboreans, likewise. We find that Tyr was also left-handed because the giant wolf Fenris (Fenrir) bit off his right-hand when he was being chained to a boulder by Tyr in the story line (god Bir is a rock in Hebrew). Thus, Tyr and Benjamites are left-handed. If Tyr is same as Tyre, then I can make the claim that Tyr-Norse is of Telchine blacksmiths.

To make this interesting, Telchine name is believed by some to come from Tubal-Cain, and an earlier Cain, both biblical blacksmiths. Cain can be 1/2 human of the fallen angle Eve mother, where his brother is of Adam and the Eve from his rib, as his mother, also in the Genesis-Bible.

Earlier in this blog, I brought up definition for the sword Excaliber. I think my version is okay, but can add to this defintion. In the Saga called "the Dream of Rhonabwy (consider name as a reference to Rhodes and Rhine)", the tale with the Mabinogen; "then the Leard Cadws Earl of Cornwall being summoned, and saw him rise with Arthur's sword in hand, with a design of two "chimeras" on the golden hilt (consider chimeras come from Lycia - a name of Telchine Lycus who founded Lycia which means wolf). When the sword was unsheathed what was seen from the mouths of two chimeras was like two golden flames of fire, so dreadful that it was not easy for anyone to look." From Morbinogen translated by Jeffrey Gantz.

Thus, European swords are of Telchine blacksmiths, same mercenaries in Canaan called Khabiri.

To wash away any second thoughts on what I present herein, there is yet more information.

Two recent DNA studies claim Sumeria can be connected to India NW Himalaya's of Tibet where I've stated Hyperboreans resided in Kurus region here. Also Crete DNA suggest they are more European Celti, than Egyptain, the going argument due to Egyptain like Minoan artwork and buildings. DNA doesn't support Egyptain race here, according to the study. Anatolian DNA wasn't in this study, but may be extended yet, or as "in-process". I'm not certain.

This doesn't leave much squirm room for debate, and fully supports my GGG-Grand Global Genome theory in all attributes and locations. If true as my root tribal name/s, and as a Bohemian Burian surname, then I can make the claim in tracing my ancestors. I should note my family is left-handed, too. Outside of the Benjamin tribe, and Norse god Tyr, I don't have other left-hand traces yet, but there is mention with right and left-handed Idaean Daktyls of Kabeiros cult Aegean-Samothrace and Lemnos Isles.

To sum, Buryan=Burjan=Borean, and the wolf-blacksmith tamga/occupation can satisfy these definitions, and allow for Bir-Berg-Burg as rock, a blacksmiths reality. Also, in Sumeria we have Nibiru, or Planet-X which is just a big-rock clearly inscribed into this planets name, in my opinion.

Kassites are considered as Sea People in Sumeria, because they occupied the southern-most region, and thus are in the Persian Gulf and relate to Bahrain Isle, and other islands in the gulf, mainly. I believe Noah's ark wood came from Bahrain, but needs more attention yet. So the Khabiri can also relate here.

I would also suggest that the Ka in Kabeiros cult is likely an Egyptain Kha, in lieu of the Turkish Ka as "dog/wolf", where the meaning is the spirit/soul of Beiros. A Macedonian Burjan definition reads as the "Soul of Burjan". A wolf or a soul would either suffice in my model GGG, but I now believe the "soul" is likely the correct one.

I hope this brings the blog back to life, and I still think these players are around Basque regions, but not necessarily Basque themselves. This should be as Galli people in these regions, of the Kabeiros cult, again as Hyperboreans for all of the above. Because Telchines were of the Isle of Cos too, I can claim Spartans who learned of the wolf from them, or, they are the Telchines in root. Cos is within a few miles of the Spartan mainland. This seems unavoidable.

There are actually p/o the Boeotians in Greece, and, I think is the Boii, and of the Boian-culture as very early blacksmiths. The Kassites also introduced the chariot to Egypt, again of likely Kurdish-Iranian chariot archaeology in these regions. The Kassite phoenix also has a dog/wolf head.

In Lebanon, the Telchines tend to the Asher tribe per recent definitions in Lebanon, not necessarily Phoenicians, but, I'm beginning to believe they too are related because Phoenician language is similar to Hebrew, a Khabiri name. Telchines on Crete (Telchinea) were at Aptera as blacksmiths.

These data points will clean up my blogs real good, and allow us to get past these regions of interest. I believe I have a good definition for the Nordic god Buri now even as rock. I don't know if a Northern people could allow this name without a Hebrew/Sumerian component, but in theory, a southern branch of the same people could be isolated during the writing period of this Norse Buri. Wherein, Buri as "rock" and blacksmiths, and wolf tamga could be of Asia, purely and only, and the Levant is co-incidental with a shared religious pantheon. However, because I'm left-handed, I think the Hebrew part is very rational, and because all manuscripts in Norse fall short for these timelines, then Benjamites or Khabiri could readily be in the Baltic way before their myths were written anyway.

The dogs Actaon, Cerebus, and others hail from Telchines, and their sacred mountain on Rhodes is called Atabyrius which is also the earlier name for Mount Tabor by Jerusalem. Biblical Mount of Transfiguration.

Is the European Lugi-Buri tribe of the same players?

Hopefully, someone will get excited about these added revelations into the blog, quite difficult to assemble this model, none-the-less. Hope to hear from you all, GGG guy.

[The_Spartan]

[GGG guy]

On page 13 of this blog is an image for an Etruscan mirror with mythical images on the backside. In the lower left quadrant is an image of the Dioscuri twins. It is important to notice they also have a dog with them. I will attach a book covering Tacitus writings concerning Germanic tribes and and of the tribe Lugi-Buri (Burrii). This book has two numbered paragraph sections. First paragraph 43 about this Burrii people.

http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/europe/l/bl_text_Tacitus_Germania.htm

Accordingly, the Burrii are related to the Gothini neighbors stated as miners. They live in the mountainous regions. My knowledge is that miners were of slave labor, and blacksmiths wouldn't be the miners, but a more nobel position as craftsmen. Tributes we paid in metals as knives, swords, armor, or other objects to the ruling territorial tribe or tribes, or later, Rome.

In section two of this book called "Footnotes...manners and Inhabitants of Germany", go to paragraph 25. I believe the Tungri (Tongres) may derive their name from Siberian god Tengra. There are many different spellings for this Gods' name. including the original name for Mt. Masala in Bulgaria. Could be of Pannonia and of Hunnic roots.

Note paragraph 30 on old Gallic coins with Greek type letters. Druid priest were called Cabiri, and Kabeiros Cult people as Galli. Kabeiros dwarf images are on Macadonian coins, and Phonecians used this as a Sea God on their ship prow. They also caried small iconic statuettes in their pockets.

Go to section two paragraph 60 - quote; " Viradesthis was a goddess of the Tungri; Harimella, another provincial diety; whose names were found by Mr. Pennant inscribed on altars at the Roman station at Burrens. These were erected by German auxiliaries. -- Vide Tour in Scotland, 1772, part ii. p.406."

I haven't located Burrens yet, but could be Buren, or the "Counts of Buren" in the Netherlands. In Claire County of Ireland we find a location called "the Burren". Also, American 8th president Martin (Abraham) Van Buren was the first American President born on American soil, and he is Dutch. The expression "okay derives throught his election campaign as "old Kinderhook", the American-Dutch named town he was from being Kinderhook. All pervious Presidents were from England, and not born in America. As Dutch in the 15th century AD, Maximillion Van Buren can be found on Dutch coins, and Martin Van Buren has a dog on his CoA (coat of arms), or family crest. I believe they are of the Order of the Golden Fleece. You can see this necklace on paintings, and such, but, I haven't indentified this Order or necklace with Martin Van Buren yet. A Golden Fleece necklace was dug up near Buren in the Netherlands, but debate as to a couple possible owners hasn't been determined the last I looked at this a few years back.

Note references to American Indians, I think pre-Columbus in paragraphs 51 with Eburones, and paragraph 57 on Celtic women. Great for my "Grand Global Genome" (GGG) analysis. I think Columbus of Genoa, and Geneva Switzerland to be related tribally anyway, wherein, I believe these same players at very early dates held these regions, to mean pre-Roman.

Also, paragraph 41 section 2, stone balls for slingshots. Lots of these were found around Stonehenge as well. Some believe the stones were rolled on these balls, however, they are usually grooved, some very fancy, and would make ultra-poor ball bearings, especially if the stones being moved weighed tons. My personal opinion on this concept. David, of David and Goliath had such stones and slings, and about one-hundred of them were very acurate with the sling, as such, an elite fighting group. Poor Goliath, size doesn't always count. I think Davfid was certain of his demise before volunteering as the story goes.

Paragraph 45 in section 1 covers Baltic amber.

I want to point out that in the previous section 1, paragraph 43 we have the tribe as Burrii. There is also the Lygian, said to be the most extensive, and diffuses its name through several communities. Thus Ptolomys map as Lugi-Buri, and the other two Lugi he shows would likely be of Lygians. This has their reference to "sacred groves", and suggests analogy to Castor and Pollux, the Dioscuri twins, as stated, their attributes being the same as "young men and brothers". These folks fight at night. This mimics the movie "the 13th Warrior", a true story based on Arabic-Russian ambassador ibn Fadlan, in the movie. The root city in Bolgar City in Russian Volga River, where in the movie, they burn up a Viking ship. This would then connect to the Baltic Sea. Part of the movie is in Baltic territories, too. Originally Bolgar City was called the Marduan Princedom around 750 BC and the Burjan tribe. The Khazars-Bulgars renamed it, and took over. I believe Christmas as the Winter Festival hails from here. This includes the decorated tree, a gift (runic "X") exchange, and a troika-Russian Sleigh with reeindeers. The Khazars sqelched this vestival from town square, so the celebrated way out in the countryside to continue the practice. 750 BC predates 10th century Bari (Barion, or Borion) Italy where we find the Saint Nicholas Shrine today. He is the "Saint of Gift Giving". The movie I think is done preety good and has some acuracy to a real story and of the early Arabic scholars people in Viking territories as well. This is part of Arabic ibn Fadlan writings.

I believe Lugi can be Lygian, and also Ligurian. This prospective is taking shape, albeit slowly.

I try to follow a data path, and read out of that, in spite of my overiding theory/s. A bit of Christmas as well, for Cristmas Eve today. See if this has some merit. Thanks, GGG guy.

[GGG guy]

To correct my date at Bolgar City to 750AD above, not BC as stated.

[SHaYap]

The Ice Maiden was a representative of the Pazyryk Culture that thrived between the 6th and 2nd centuries BCE in the Siberian steppe.

The Ice Maiden’s tomb was found on the Ukok Plateau near the border of China, in what is now the Autonomous Republic of Altai. The plateau, part of the Eurasian Steppes, is characterized by a harsh, arid climate. The area is known by the local people as the “second layer of heaven,” one step above ordinary people and events.^[2] Present day Altai herdsmen still bring their sheep and horses to the plateau during winter because the fierce wind blows the snow off of the grass and provides grazing land for the animals despite the freezing temperatures.

• wiki link
  

A Siberian mummy with intricate tattoos decorating her body has been revealed in Russia.

Researchers estimate the mysterious woman, known as the Ukok princess, was probably 25 years old when she died nearly 2,500 years ago, ABC News reports. She was most likely a member of the Pazyryk tribe, nomads who lived in the Altai mountains of Siberia. Her mummy was discovered in 1993. It was kept preserved in the permafrost, which is why her tattoos are still visible.

• Huffington link
  

A Case Study

The Siberian Ice Maiden, a well-preserved mummy unearthed on the steppes of eastern Russia in 1993, was a spectacular discovery. She was dressed in glorious finery—fine-woven wool skirt, wild-silk blouse, an elaborate high-status headpiece, and jewelry of wonderful craftsmanship. Interred with household items and familiar treasures, she was laid to rest with respect and reverence. Her finely wrought coffin, sealed with massive metal nails, was accompanied by six horses, ensuring her status and freedom of movement in the next world. The finds suggest that the society of tribal horse nomads she left behind must have been stable and wealthy.

• NOVA link
  

Anyone has any info on possible DNA test done on this Siberian Maiden / Princess ? A connection to Early Indo Euro peoples perhaps ?

~

[Swede]

Also, American 8th president Martin (Abraham) Van Buren was the first American President born on American soil, and he is Dutch. The expression "okay derives throught his election campaign as "old Kinderhook", the American-Dutch named town he was from being Kinderhook. All pervious Presidents were from England, and not born in America.

This is patently false. All the previous US presidents (Washington, J. Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams, Jackson) were born on US soil. Two in Massachusetts, four in Virginia, one (Jackson) on the frontier of the time, possibly S. Carolina.

.

[jaylemurph]

This is patently false. All the previous US presidents (Washington, J. Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams, Jackson) were born on US soil. Two in Massachusetts, four in Virginia, one (Jackson) on the frontier of the time, possibly S. Carolina.

.

They're doing hair-splitting. Not so much patently false as grossly, pointlessly manipulated. Van Buren was the first president born in US -- that is, post-Independence-from-Britain America. All the previous presidents were born within America when it was still a colonial possesion.

The far more significant point is that by that time, well into the 19th Century, the Dutch were of no significance, politically or else wise, within the US. They were the standing object of fun, particularly within the city and state of New York, and I cannot recall a single real dissenting opinion about that. The works of Washington Irving stand as a testament to the anti-Dutch sentiment.

--Jaylemurph

[PersonFromPorlock]

I like to point out that if Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the US Constitution is read literally, van Buren was also the last president to hold office who was legally qualified to do so.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5: Qualifications for office:

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President...."

Annotated: "No Person except (1) a natural born Citizen, or (2) a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution (in 1793), shall be eligible to the Office of President...."

Doesn't say: "No Person except (1), or (2 in 1793), shall be eligible to the Office of President...."

Actually says: "No Person except (1), or (2), (in 1793), shall be eligible to the Office of President...."

(1) and (2) are, by the accepted rules of grammar, clauses to which the condition (in 1793) applies separately. "No person except (1) in 1793," and "No person except (2) in 1793" are both correct.

Therefore, no person not present in 1793 is eligible to become President.

Van Buren was the last such. This one is fun to spring on folks who get all wound up about who is and isn't 'a natural-born citizen'.

[GGG guy]

I do have some recent DNA of Siberia, or East Central Asia. I'll attach a link for Mal'ta Boy.

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-malta-adna-findings.htm

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121130151606.htm

The second attachment relates to Basque region, too.

I'm not so certain on American (USA) presidents and Martin Van Buren did nationalize the backing system which is one thing he did dramatically change, good or bad. The part on birth locations I've read, but I don't know the truth about the statement, nor the previous presidents. He was also against slavery prior to the Civil War, an abolitionist. He was indeed hated by many as he wanted to invest in precious metals to shore up his nationalised banking concept. I don't think there was much "extra money" at the time, so he was demonized on this concept, at least by some. (ref; hard times tokens minted as a mockery and second form of coinage, and political tool to belittle him, or his nationallized backing concept.) He was also said to have likely spoken Dutch in the White House, but publically used English. Data is thin on his overseas origins.

In Belgium, a domestic dog was found at similar dates to Mal'ta Boy. It was suggested that this domestic dog was independant of most dogs believed to be of Central Asian, or Siberian wild wolves. I think Mal'ta Boy's DNA may change that thinking due to the ancient date line and distribution of his haplogroups, both yDNA, and mtDNA. The paper I attached resolves the charts and graphs real good as some don't have enough magnification to read them. I think this DNA is yet difficult to fully acertain its meaning concerning migrations. Mal'ta is within about 100 miles of Lake Baikal, a religious center in Siberia, likewise.

Thanks for the insight on the comments. Indirectly, I'm am heading to a Basque region and Basque people, however, I am also attempting to differentiate Basque neighbors, or other tribes which may, or may not be Basque related, including Iberians of Spain, an earlier group of settlements, and the megalithic stone structures around these regions. I think there is some progress from this blog.

I don't expect people to take my word for these subjects as demonstrated above. I'm good to go with this, especially if I do make mistakes.

Thanks, GGG guy.

[cormac mac airt]

I do have some recent DNA of Siberia, or East Central Asia. I'll attach a link for Mal'ta Boy.

http://forwhattheywe...na-findings.htm

http://www.scienceda...21130151606.htm

The second attachment relates to Basque region, too.

I'm not so certain on American (USA) presidents and Martin Van Buren did nationalize the backing system which is one thing he did dramatically change, good or bad. The part on birth locations I've read, but I don't know the truth about the statement, nor the previous presidents. He was also against slavery prior to the Civil War, an abolitionist. He was indeed hated by many as he wanted to invest in precious metals to shore up his nationalised banking concept. I don't think there was much "extra money" at the time, so he was demonized on this concept, at least by some. (ref; hard times tokens minted as a mockery and second form of coinage, and political tool to belittle him, or his nationallized backing concept.) He was also said to have likely spoken Dutch in the White House, but publically used English. Data is thin on his overseas origins.

~SNIP~

In support of what Swede said in Post #614 I CAN tell you about Presidents John and John Quincy Adams as I'm related to both on my maternal side (Adams). Both Presidents were born in Braintree, Massachusetts which means you were incorrect in claiming they were born in England.

cormac

[GGG guy]

I'm attaching another link for Mal'ta Boy DNA studies as the paper above didn't attached didn't open proper.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131120133925.htm

Thanks for the Martin Van Buren comments. I guess the question is, was America called America yet, at the earlier presidents' dates of birth as one responce suggested, or, was it still a colony, even if they were born on American soil. Anyway, I may have misinterpreted what I read, and its an unrelated point in this topic/forum. Buren of the Netherlands is more related, but has sketchy history, too.

Thanks Cormac for the upgrade. I'm curious what you thoughts are on Mal'ta Boy's DNA test report. There are many other commentors also on the Internet concerning this particular relic, and the DNA meaning. The artifacts I've known for a long time which in part lead me to my GGG concept, but the DNA testing is relatively new. Mal'ta is ~100 miles from Lake Baikal, Siberia.

See what you think, GGG guy.

[cormac mac airt]

I'm attaching another link for Mal'ta Boy DNA studies as the paper above didn't attached didn't open proper.

http://www.scienceda...31120133925.htm

Thanks for the Martin Van Buren comments. I guess the question is, was America called America yet, at the earlier presidents' dates of birth as one responce suggested, or, was it still a colony, even if they were born on American soil. Anyway, I may have misinterpreted what I read, and its an unrelated point in this topic/forum. Buren of the Netherlands is more related, but has sketchy history, too.

Thanks Cormac for the upgrade. I'm curious what you thoughts are on Mal'ta Boy's DNA test report. There are many other commentors also on the Internet concerning this particular relic, and the DNA meaning. The artifacts I've known for a long time which in part lead me to my GGG concept, but the DNA testing is relatively new. Mal'ta is ~100 miles from Lake Baikal, Siberia.

See what you think, GGG guy.

No, the real question is why are you making false claims about the earlier Presidents when even a cursory effort at researching same would have told you that you were needlessly wrong.

Mal'ta Boy is at best distantly related and even at that goes well with what we already know, which is that there were at least three waves of migration into the Americas and that some NA haplogroups/subgroups are restricted to the Americas as can be seen by the following:

cormac

[Swede]

They're doing hair-splitting. Not so much patently false as grossly, pointlessly manipulated. Van Buren was the first president born in US -- that is, post-Independence-from-Britain America. All the previous presidents were born within America when it was still a colonial possesion.

The far more significant point is that by that time, well into the 19th Century, the Dutch were of no significance, politically or else wise, within the US. They were the standing object of fun, particularly within the city and state of New York, and I cannot recall a single real dissenting opinion about that. The works of Washington Irving stand as a testament to the anti-Dutch sentiment.

--Jaylemurph

Yes, agree with the irrelevant "hair-splitting" aspect. It was the explicit phraseology (ie "first American president born on American soil") that generated my response. The generalized utilization of "America" as opposed to the US, etc. renders the statement inaccurate.

Also agree in regards to the significance of Dutch cultural influence by the second quarter +/- of the 19^th century. While the Dutch influence in the early Fur Trade was notable, the extended impact post the 1664 events became quite minimal.

.

[Swede]

I do have some recent DNA of Siberia, or East Central Asia. I'll attach a link for Mal'ta Boy.

http://forwhattheywe...na-findings.htm

http://www.scienceda...21130151606.htm

The second attachment relates to Basque region, too.

I'm not so certain on American (USA) presidents and Martin Van Buren did nationalize the backing system which is one thing he did dramatically change, good or bad. The part on birth locations I've read, but I don't know the truth about the statement, nor the previous presidents. He was also against slavery prior to the Civil War, an abolitionist. He was indeed hated by many as he wanted to invest in precious metals to shore up his nationalised banking concept. I don't think there was much "extra money" at the time, so he was demonized on this concept, at least by some. (ref; hard times tokens minted as a mockery and second form of coinage, and political tool to belittle him, or his nationallized backing concept.) He was also said to have likely spoken Dutch in the White House, but publically used English. Data is thin on his overseas origins.

In Belgium, a domestic dog was found at similar dates to Mal'ta Boy. It was suggested that this domestic dog was independant of most dogs believed to be of Central Asian, or Siberian wild wolves. I think Mal'ta Boy's DNA may change that thinking due to the ancient date line and distribution of his haplogroups, both yDNA, and mtDNA. The paper I attached resolves the charts and graphs real good as some don't have enough magnification to read them. I think this DNA is yet difficult to fully acertain its meaning concerning migrations. Mal'ta is within about 100 miles of Lake Baikal, a religious center in Siberia, likewise.

Thanks for the insight on the comments. Indirectly, I'm am heading to a Basque region and Basque people, however, I am also attempting to differentiate Basque neighbors, or other tribes which may, or may not be Basque related, including Iberians of Spain, an earlier group of settlements, and the megalithic stone structures around these regions. I think there is some progress from this blog.

I don't expect people to take my word for these subjects as demonstrated above. I'm good to go with this, especially if I do make mistakes.

Thanks, GGG guy.

Records would tend to indicate that Van Buren spoke Dutch during his childhood home-life. Post this period, and given his professional/political pursuits, the established language of his peers, and the lingua franca of the period (French), it is rather unlikely that Dutch was the prevailing language during the course of general or formal White House exchanges. Short utterances? Possibly.

Based upon genealogical research and historical documentation, Van Buren would appear to have been the fourth generation of his lineage to have been born on North American soil.

Such details are of importance as they are reflective of the level/accuracy of your personal "research".

.

[Swede]

I like to point out that if Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the US Constitution is read literally, van Buren was also the last president to hold office who was legally qualified to do so.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5: Qualifications for office:

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President...."

Annotated: "No Person except (1) a natural born Citizen, or (2) a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution (in 1793), shall be eligible to the Office of President...."

Doesn't say: "No Person except (1), or (2 in 1793), shall be eligible to the Office of President...."

Actually says: "No Person except (1), or (2), (in 1793), shall be eligible to the Office of President...."

(1) and (2) are, by the accepted rules of grammar, clauses to which the condition (in 1793) applies separately. "No person except (1) in 1793," and "No person except (2) in 1793" are both correct.

Therefore, no person not present in 1793 is eligible to become President.

Van Buren was the last such. This one is fun to spring on folks who get all wound up about who is and isn't 'a natural-born citizen'.

Good point!

.

[jaylemurph]

Yes, agree with the irrelevant "hair-splitting" aspect. It was the explicit phraseology (ie "first American president born on American soil") that generated my response. The generalized utilization of "America" as opposed to the US, etc. renders the statement inaccurate.

Also agree in regards to the significance of Dutch cultural influence by the second quarter +/- of the 19^th century. While the Dutch influence in the early Fur Trade was notable, the extended impact post the 1664 events became quite minimal.

.

That said, Irving's History of New-York is a fun, affectionate look at the period of Dutch colonization.

--Jaylemurph

[The Puzzler]

Call me a necroposter if you like but I had to rejuvenate this topic because I came across some interesting things that I wasn't aware of and last time I was here I was totally sidelined by GGGguy.

Theo Vennemann.

His theory is exactly what I see and what I had been going on about at the start of the topic. He has 2 theories actually and both are equally as interesting as each other, to me anyway. You guys probably prefer harassing a "blind old woman"...

He seems quite respectable:

Theo Vennemann genannt Nierfeld (German: [ˈfɛnəman]; born 27 May 1937 in Oberhausen-Sterkrade) is a German historical linguist known for his controversial theories of a "Vasconic" and an "Atlantic" substratum in European languages, published since the 1990s.^[1]

He was professor for Germanic and Theoretical linguistics at Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich from 1974 (retired 2005).

even though other scholars panned his theories, although some notable people do endorse them.

According to Vennemann, Afroasiatic seafarers settled the European Atlantic coast and are to be associated with the European Megalithic Culture. They left a superstratum in the Germanic languages and a substratum in the development of Insular Celtic. He claims that "Atlantic" (Semitic or Semitidic) speakers founded coastal colonies beginning in the fifth millennium BC. Thus "Atlantic" influenced the lexicon and structure of Germanic and the structure of Insular Celtic. According to Vennemann, migrating Indo-European speakers encountered non-IE speakers in northern Europe who had already named rivers, mountains and settlements in a language he called "Vasconic". He considered that there were toponyms on the Atlantic coast that were neither Vasconic nor Indo-European. These he considers derive from languages related to the Mediterranean Hamito-Semitic group.

http://en.wikipedia....itic)_languages

The Vasconic substratum is exactly what I see in the words I mentioned previously here, from city=ili = Ilium to Achilles name. The death of Achilles could equate to the death of Aries, as in the Rage of Achilles theme throughout The Iliad. Achilles name can mean 'the ram/ak (dominant male=Aries/war God) dies/hil' + said suffix. I've got a bundle of them.

Vennemann's controversial claims about the prehistory of European languages include the following:

• A "Vasconic" language family ancestral to Basque is a substratum of European languages, especially Germanic, Celtic, and Italic. Vennemann claims this could be evidenced by various loan words, toponyms, and structural features such as word-initial accent. The linguistic origin of Old European hydronymy, traditionally considered as Indo-European,^[3] is classified as Vasconic by Vennemann. Numerous toponyms that are traditionally considered as Indo-European by virtue of their Indo-European head words are instead names that have been adapted to Indo-European languages through the addition of a suffix.
  

Iber means river in Basque, Iberia is the suffixed word. It's a whole peninsula consisting of a river system, just as the Caucasian Iberia was a land of rivers.

This next one makes so much sense it's not funny really. Genetics show wave after wave of Semitic types entering Europe, from Neolithic farmers to Phoenicians. Why wouldn't the language be mixed in. I myself, an mtDNA K type, will always come up in any mention as a Jewish/Basque haplogroup, which arrived in Europe en masse around 5000 years ago.

The Ancient Basques Geneticists have taken a great interest in the Basques of far northern Spain because of their unusual language, which suggests they descend from some of the original settlers who arrived in southwestern Europe during and after the Ice Age. Though haplogroup K is relatively rare among the Basques today, mitochondrial DNA extracted from prehistoric burials suggests it was much more common in the past. In remains excavated from three cemeteries dating to between 4,000 and 5,000 years ago, haplogroup K showed up at levels of 17 to 24%. A similar sample from a medieval Basque cemetery found that by around 1,500 years ago the haplogroup's levels had fallen to its present-day level of about 4%.

What could account for this near-disappearance of haplogroup K among the Basque? It could be that female migrants to the region married into the Basque population, swamping out the K lineages with their own haplogroups. Or it could be that the Basque population experienced a crash at some time in the past that disproportionately eliminated haplogroup K from the gene pool.

K in the Ashkenazi A few branches of haplogroup K, such as K1a9, K2a2a, and K1a1b1a, are specific to Jewish populations and especially to Ashkenazi Jews, whose roots lie in central and eastern Europe. These branches of haplogroup K are found at levels of 30% among Ashkenazi. But they are also found at lower levels in Jewish populations from the Near East and Africa, and among Sephardic Jews who trace their roots to medieval Spain. That indicates an origin of those K haplogroup branches in the Near East before 70 AD, when the Roman destruction of Jerusalem scattered the Jewish people around the Mediterranean and beyond.

http://www.eupedia.c...s/26612-mtDNA-K

Even the document I got with the test result says it. There's also a lot in Germany not mentioned there.

Semitic is a substratum of the Celtic languages, as shown by certain structural features of Celtic, especially their lack of external possessors.^[4]

• Punic, the Semitic language spoken in classical Carthage, is a superstratum of the Germanic languages. According to Vennemann, Carthaginians colonized the North Sea region between the 6th and 3rd centuries BC; this is evidenced by numerous Semitic loan words in the Germanic languages, as well as structural features such as strong verbs, and similarities between Norse religion and Semitic religion. This theory replaces his older theory of an unknown Semitic substrate language he called "Atlantidic" or "Semitidic". The Runic alphabet is derived directly from the Phoenician alphabet used by the Carthaginians, without intervention by the Greek alphabet. The Germanic sound shift is dated to the 6th to 3rd centuries BC, as evidenced by the fact that some presumed Punic loan words participated in it, while others did not.
  

Because I've been playing lego-linguistics for years now in the Oera Linda thread, Ive seen huge amounts of connected words and know many PIE root words off by heart and know which IE words come from what PIE roots. Also in that time Ive been doing the research that's left of field by looking for connecting words that don't fit the patterns they should or look to belong to other language families. I know whether many common Germanic words come from Proto-Germanic or from Latin or Greek because of the study of the Frisian language. Basque words are my second favourite to learn. I'm no Theo Vennemann but unless you are looking for these things you won't find them, he's obviously looking and finding.

The bolded bit is most interesting.

Edited June 1, 2015 by The Puzzler