Talk:Haplogroup E-V68

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

E-V13 originated in North-Africa and migrated directly from North Africa to southern Europe edit

According to some more recent sources, E-V13 originated in North Africa and migrated directly from North Africa to southern Europe, crossing the Mediterranean from Tunisia to Sicily, then to Italy and to the southern Balkans. See Eupedia for exemple :

"It has usually been assumed among academics that E-V13 and other E1b1b lineages came to the Balkans from the southern Levant via Anatolia during the Neolithic, and that the high frequency of E-V13 was caused by a founder effect among the colonisers. This theory has it that E1b1b people were associated with the development of Neolithic lifestyle and the advent of agriculture in the Fertile Crescent and its earliest diffusion to Southeast Europe (Thessalian Neolithic) and Mediterranean Europe (Cardium Pottery culture). The only concrete evidence for this at the moment is the presence of the E-V13 subclade, commonest in the southern Balkans today, at a 7000-year old Neolithic site in north-east Spain, which was tested by Lacan et al (2011). However, since E1b1b has not been found in any of the various Neolithic sites from the Balkans and Central Europe, it is more likely that the Catalan E-V13 individual was descended from Mediterranean Mesolithic hunter-gatherers."
"This alternate hypothesis is that E-V13 migrated directly from North Africa to southern Europe, crossing the Mediterranean from Tunisia to Sicily, then to Italy and to the southern Balkans. This scenario would explain why E-V13 reaches its peak frequency just on the opposite side of the Strait of Otranto from Italy, i.e. in Albania (+ Kosovo) and Thessaly."
So why is this more recent alternate hypothesis, considered by many studies as a more valid hypothesis, not mentionned in the article  ?86.200.169.181 (talk) 08:11, 6 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Eupedia is not a "reliable source" according to the norms of Wikipedia, but more like a Wiki itself. Interesting about it is that is allows a level of originality, sometimes leading to quite interesting ideas. But you can see in the text you quote that the author is aware that they are in disagreement with "academics". By the way, my own online musings on forums may ultimately be one source for the above idea. The basic problem for Wikipedia is simply that expert genealogists are not writing a lot about this subject for the time being.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:59, 6 April 2015 (UTC)Reply


I agree that V13 has more easy explanation.We know from History that Carthage went in these areas big time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.7.89.176 (talk) 16:25, 16 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Haplogroup E-V68. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:58, 29 October 2017 (UTC)Reply