Europeans had dark hair and dark eyes

Maciamo said:17-12-09 13:29

 Originally Posted by Haganus 

Interesting to read about haplogroup I. This is the root of all the ancestors of the Germanic tribes. It means that it has arrived about 
4000 BC in Scandinavia. In those times there was no agriculture in Sweden, so members of haplogroup I descend from the Mesolithic hunters who lived in Western Europe (Germany and France).

It is partly correct. The ancestors of Germanic people belonged to haplogroup I1, and a bit to I2b as well, but not I2a.

Furthermore, they did not become "Germanic" until they blended with the Indo-European R1a people (from the Corded-Ware culture) and the latter arrival of R1b from Central Europe (date unknown, but probably between 2000 and 1000 BCE). The R1b brought the centum branch of Indo-European languages that would, after fusion with the existing language, become ancient Germanic.

It has been discovered that one third of the Germanic words is not
Indo-European. Perhaps these bearers of Haplogroup I spoke a language
with words which were not Indo-European.

I believe that the various IE languages that developed in Western Europe are all dialects of the Proto-Italo-Celto-Germanic, that have partially absorbed the local languages of the region where they settled. In other words, Germanic and Italo-Celtic (now Romance) languages are all IE languages hybridised with pre-existing Neolithic tongues. 

The question is, did these Neolithic languages originated in the native European hunter-gatherers, in the Near-Eastern languages of the early farmers, or hybrids of both ? I prefer to favour the hybrid theory whenever in doubt. I just cannot believe that two groups of people merging into one would choose to speak only the language of one group without taking any loan words at all from the other. Naturally, one must have been dominant, at least for the grammatical structure. 

What is known about the hair and eyes colours of haplogroup I?
Because I read that R1a had genes for fair hair. 

In 1943/1944 some skeletons were discoverd in Skane (south Sweden)
from 4 a 5000 BC. I read that they looked like the modern Swedes
and had a nordic appearance.

We will know more about this soon. The Y-DNA, mtDNA and autosomal DNA for hair and eye colour of 250 individuals from the Funnelbeaker culture (aka TRB, 4000-2700 BCE) is currently being tested in Germany. I am really looking forward to see the results. This could confirm or disprove my whole theory about the Indo-Europeans bringing haplogroups R1a and R1b to Europe, and native Europeans belonging to haplogroup I. After all, the Genographic Project of National Geographic still insist that Paleolithic Western Europeans belonged to haplogroup R1b. I have clearly explained that this didn't make sense. I hope that ancient DNA tests will prove me right. 

I expect the Y-DNA results to belong primarily to haplogroup I1 or pre-I1 (a few defining mutations missing because they had not yet appeared in 3000 BCE), and possibly a bit of E1b1b, J2b and T, as Scandinavia was already a farming society.

I also think that the Indo-Europeans brought blond and red hair and blue eyes to Europe, based on the fact that all of them can be found in Central and South Asia, where haplogroup I is absent. But it is not impossible that fair hair and eyes existed in Europe before the IE migrations, if the mutations date from the Ice Age. It could very well be linked to mtDNA haplogroups U5, H1, H3 and/or V, which are found throughout Europe, including the IE homeland. But the very low incidence of fair hair and eyes among the Basques and Saami rather suggests that Europeans had dark hair and eyes before the Indo-European invasions.

2.  Originally Posted by rogers 

   Care to elaborate?

   Because It is not accurate AT ALL.

    

3. 

   willy said:16-03-10 03:42

    Originally Posted by Maciamo 

   It is partly correct. The ancestors of Germanic people belonged to haplogroup I1, and a bit to I2b as well, but not I2a.
   
   Furthermore, they did not become "Germanic" until they blended with the Indo-European R1a people (from the Corded-Ware culture) and the latter arrival of R1b from Central Europe (date unknown, but probably between 2000 and 1000 BCE). The R1b brought the centum branch of Indo-European languages that would, after fusion with the existing language, become ancient Germanic.
   
   
   
   I believe that the various IE languages that developed in Western Europe are all dialects of the Proto-Italo-Celto-Germanic, that have partially absorbed the local languages of the region where they settled. In other words, Germanic and Italo-Celtic (now Romance) languages are all IE languages hybridised with pre-existing Neolithic tongues. 
   
   The question is, did these Neolithic languages originated in the native European hunter-gatherers, in the Near-Eastern languages of the early farmers, or hybrids of both ? I prefer to favour the hybrid theory whenever in doubt. I just cannot believe that two groups of people merging into one would choose to speak only the language of one group without taking any loan words at all from the other. Naturally, one must have been dominant, at least for the grammatical structure. 
   
   
   
   We will know more about this soon. The Y-DNA, mtDNA and autosomal DNA for hair and eye colour of 250 individuals from the Funnelbeaker culture (aka TRB, 4000-2700 BCE) iscurrently being tested in Germany. I am really looking forward to see the results. This could confirm or disprove my whole theory about the Indo-Europeans bringing haplogroups R1a and R1b to Europe, and native Europeans belonging to haplogroup I. After all, the Genographic Project of National Geographic still insist that Paleolithic Western Europeans belonged to haplogroup R1b. I have clearly explained that this didn't make sense. I hope that ancient DNA tests will prove me right. 
   
   I expect the Y-DNA results to belong primarily to haplogroup I1 or pre-I1 (a few defining mutations missing because they had not yet appeared in 3000 BCE), and possibly a bit of E1b1b, J2b and T, as Scandinavia was already a farming society.
   
   I also think that the Indo-Europeans brought blond and red hair and blue eyes to Europe, based on the fact that all of them can be found in Central and South Asia, where haplogroup I is absent. But it is not impossible that fair hair and eyes existed in Europe before the IE migrations, if the mutations date from the Ice Age. It could very well be linked to mtDNA haplogroups U5, H1, H3 and/or V, which are found throughout Europe, including the IE homeland. But the very low incidence of fair hair and eyes among the Basques and Saami rather suggests that Europeans had dark hair and eyes before the Indo-European invasions.

   The DNA evolution of northen europeans I1 (fair air and eyes color) was similar to R1a the refuge was near the black sea for those 2 haplogroups the spread of R1a to South Asia was long time after that period .http://www.livescience.com/health/080131-blue-eyes.html "indo europeans" (there is not yet evidences about the origin of this langage or culture) was first europeans on the Black Sea area like I1c or R1a etc ... 
   ''The mutations responsible for blue eye colour most likely originate from the north-west part of the Black Sea region, where the great agricultural migration of the northern part of Europe took place in theNeolithic periods about 6,000 to 10,000 years ago,'' the researchers report in the journal Human Genetics.

   Nico 

    

4. 

   Wilhelm said:16-03-10 03:59

    Originally Posted by willy 

   The DNA evolution of northen europeans I1 (fair air and eyes color)

   Actually being fair haired has nothing to do with being I1.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25540-Haplogroup-I-and-Germanic-people