Recent content by razor

Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabula_Peutingeriana Scroll down to the external links. look at e.g. the interactive version, and Segment VIII

The Venedi were still around when the tabula Peutingeriana was revised in the 4th c. (after the foundation of Constantinople). They are mentioned in two places. Check it out.

The (Baltic) Venedi were first mentioned by Pliny in his "Natural History", completed ca. 75 CE. His source is unknown. Tacitus spoke of them in ch. 46 of his "Germania" (published in 98 CE) , as inhabiting areas east of the Vistula. Ptolemy repeatedly referred to them in his Geography.

I'm afraid "post glacial" or mesolithic proto-Indoeuropean isn't in the cards for the overwhelming majority of professional linguists. And I don't see how gene analysis can prove this. OK thanks for the other info.

So the idea is that the introduction of the IE language by Corded Ware (and its eventual victory over Uralic-speaking competitors)was not accompanied by very significant autosomal shifts. That seems quite possible. There were other examples elsewhere. Hungary and Turkey come to mind.

Could you give some details about these current archaeological interpretations? If Corded Ware was insignificant, how would the IE influence have alternatively come to Lithuania do they say?

Strictly from memory: I remember an article published in a Ukrainian language archaeological journal back in 1991 which contended that around the end of the 13th c. BCE (ca. 1200 BCE) the Western part of the area of the Zrubna (Srubnaya) culture (this would be the territory between Dnipro and...

This map is about as accurate as a soccer game in minute 1 or a baseball game in the first half of the first inning (:=)) I see my name on its list but I have no spot on the map and I'm certainly not in Poland. As in many other matters (aDNA included) we have to wait for more testing in Ukraine.

With the small point: Nordtvedt's site has Disles as I2a1b1 rather than I2a1b1*

So at the the moment, the only thing we can say about the origin of I2-Din is that it began sometime after ca. 4000 BCE and sometime before ca. 300 BCE, in connection with the L147.2 definer (as of now) /and we don't know when that was/. We also can't say for sure where it had its inception...

Is this what is called the "interclade node"?

Partly. You mean the ancestor of I2a-Din presumably (back ca. 4000 BCE). Some continuing I2a1* or I2a1b* type. But what I was wondering about is the actual (not surviving) initiator of I2a-Din as I2a1b1a (Nordt. nomencl.) distinct from the MRCA. Or is that a misunderstanding?

A question for Sparkey: I don't have the exact reference but as I remember, Nordtvedt's calculations for the MRCA of Din-N was ca. 300 BCE and Din-S ca. 30 BCE But as you pointed out earlier this is not quite the same thing as the putative date for the emergence of the clade as such. Again, I...

Byzantine historical nomenclature was based on ancient literature, esp. Herodotus. And it wasn't an innovation in the time of Anna Comnena. The 3rd century Greek-scripting historian Deuxippus constantly spoke of the Goths as "Scythians" because they were from the territory of ancient Scythia...

In any case I think I'll wait until we have more aDNA available before drawing any definitive conclusions about these issues. The absence of "Gedrosia" in Oetzi and the Sardinians doesn't yet imply its absence elsewhere. That may very well be true. It may also very well be false. Caution is...