PDA

View Full Version : Neolithic migration was family-based, Bronze Age invasion was male-dominated



Tomenable
01-10-16, 14:42
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/09/30/078360

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/09/30/078360.full.pdf

Abstract:


(...) Dramatic events in human prehistory, such as the spread of agriculture to Europe from Anatolia and the Late Neolithic/Bronze Age (LNBA) migration from the Pontic-Caspian steppe, can be investigated using patterns of genetic variation among the people that lived in those times. In particular, studies of differing female and male demographic histories on the basis of ancient genomes can provide information about complexities of social structures and cultural interactions in prehistoric populations. We use a mechanistic admixture model to compare the sex-specifically-inherited X chromosome to the autosomes in 20 early Neolithic and 16 LNBA human remains. Contrary to previous hypotheses suggested by the patrilocality of many agricultural populations, we find no evidence of sex-biased admixture during the migration that spread farming across Europe during the early Neolithic. For later migrations from the Pontic steppe during the LNBA, however, we estimate a dramatic male bias, with ~5-14 migrating males for every migrating female. We find evidence of ongoing, primarily male, migration from the steppe to central Europe over a period of multiple generations, with a level of sex bias that excludes a pulse migration during a single generation. The contrasting patterns of sex-specific migration during these two migrations suggest a view of differing cultural histories in which the Neolithic transition was driven by mass migration of both males and females in roughly equal numbers, perhaps whole families, whereas the later Bronze Age migration and cultural shift were instead driven by male migration, potentially connected to new technology and conquest. (...)

Davidski's comments:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/09/male-dominated-conquest-of-europe-by.html


Looks like there were multiple waves of population movements from the steppe into Central Europe with three main Y-HGs involved: R1a-M417, R1b-L51 and also I2 (ancestors of Unetice), probably in that order. Women also came, but usually not very many in relative terms.

Angela
01-10-16, 16:04
Given papers like Brandt et al I think we anticipated this about the steppe migrations, but it's good to have this confirmation using the X vs autosome comparison.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24115443

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-t_KXpJ8f80w/Ulbx5NVzpmI/AAAAAAAAJLE/4ygZg4byqIc/s1600/timeline.jpg

I don't know why they would have thought the Neolithic migrations were anything but family based; I mean, look at what happened to the mtDna.

Anyway, this is interesting:

"Even for a small admixed population, the largest bias consistent with the observed X and autosomal ancestries is less than 1.2 males for every female, with a median over 1,000 simulations of 1.07. Consistent with the slightly larger X than autosomal ancestry observed for HG ancestry, under the simulation framework, we estimate a median of 1.91 females for every male from the HG population to early Neolithic Central Europeans. The signal of female bias in contributions from HG to CE might be caused by a male-biased inheritance structure in the new farming population. That is, it is possible that the migration from Anatolia involved substantial contributions from both men and women, but once in central Europe, a shift to patrilocality might have made absorption of local HG females easier than of HG males. However, the absolute difference between male and female contributions is small (~0.06). Correspondingly, differences in the numbers of female and male migrants would be small or are potentially a result of sampling."

Sile
01-10-16, 20:44
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/09/30/078360

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/09/30/078360.full.pdf

Abstract:



Davidski's comments:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/09/male-dominated-conquest-of-europe-by.html

lol, .........I said here years ago, that the R1's dominated Europe due to introducing a "Royal" system, where the R1 "king" controlled the women as a sort of personnel "concubine", allowing the "chief/king" to be the only one to impregnate the women of their territory followed by his sons and then their sons.........

It does not take many generations of this system to dominate an area in your Ydna

It is written that this "royal" system was still in use in the 19th century in Zulu-land , South Africa, where Shaka ( king of the zulu ) had the same system as above.
read the non-fiction book............the washing of the spears ...........to see how the system worked.

Fire Haired14
01-10-16, 21:17
Two aspects make the migration of Anatolian farmers and Steppe Patoralites differnt; 1. Anatolians and natives continued to mix for 1,000s of years while Steppe and natives stopped mixing after less than 1,000 years. 2. Anatolians recieved much much less native admixture than Steppe did.

Admixture between WHG and EEF continued for 1,000s of years after the first arrival of EEF from Anatolia. Less than 1,000 years after the arrival of Steppe folk we see many peoples with genetic makeups identical to modern inhabitants in the same land 4,000 years later. Amounts of WHG ancestry in farmers peak\ed after 2,000 years of admixture at 20-30%, admixture EEF/WHG ancestry in Steppe-derived groups was at 30% only after a few hundred years and 50% in less than 1,000 years.

To know if admixture between WHG and EEF was sex biased what you need to do is test the X-chromosme of farmers from every era, because admixture with WHG continued for 1,000s of years after the first arrival from Anatolia.

I'm confused how Steppe people migrated with mostly men if they made such a big genetic impact? In less than 1,000 years over half of Europe went from 0% Steppe to 50% on average. How could groups of 800 men and 200 women do this? I can't imagine that. That is as logical as saying the native EEF/WHG populations were mostly made up of women. IMO, a situation where large numbers of Steppe populations that were 50/50 male/female and that were absorbing smaller native populations with admixture usually being Steppe male and native female makes more sense. Steppe women and EEF/WHG men weren't non-existent, it's just they were reproducing less.

Nik
01-10-16, 22:45
Two aspects make the migration of Anatolian farmers and Steppe Patoralites differnt; 1. Anatolians and natives continued to mix for 1,000s of years while Steppe and natives stopped mixing after less than 1,000 years. 2. Anatolians recieved much much less native admixture than Steppe did.

Admixture between WHG and EEF continued for 1,000s of years after the first arrival of EEF from Anatolia. Less than 1,000 years after the arrival of Steppe folk we see many peoples with genetic makeups identical to modern inhabitants in the same land 4,000 years later. Amounts of WHG ancestry in farmers peak\ed after 2,000 years of admixture at 20-30%, admixture EEF/WHG ancestry in Steppe-derived groups was at 30% only after a few hundred years and 50% in less than 1,000 years.

To know if admixture between WHG and EEF was sex biased what you need to do is test the X-chromosme of farmers from every era, because admixture with WHG continued for 1,000s of years after the first arrival from Anatolia.

I'm confused how Steppe people migrated with mostly men if they made such a big genetic impact? In less than 1,000 years over half of Europe went from 0% Steppe to 50% on average. How could groups of 800 men and 200 women do this? I can't imagine that. That is as logical as saying the native EEF/WHG populations were mostly made up of women. IMO, a situation where large numbers of Steppe populations that were 50/50 male/female and that were absorbing smaller native populations with admixture usually being Steppe male and native female makes more sense. Steppe women and EEF/WHG men weren't non-existent, it's just they were reproducing less.
Why would they choose native females over their own kind in such large numbers? U mean that they kept 1 Steppe wife and raped several native women?

To me their conclusion seems fair as they simply passed on their genes on the local populations by not altering much their appearance. If both Steppe men and women moved in large amounts that I believe the Spaniards and Scots would look more alike then they actually do.

Fire Haired14
01-10-16, 23:05
Why would they choose native females over their own kind in such large numbers? U mean that they kept 1 Steppe wife and raped several native women?

No. All we know is that when admixture occurred between EEF/WHG and Steppe, most of the time the women was EEF/WHG and the man was Steppe. Most Steppe men might of usually reproduced with Steppe women, but when Steppe people admixed with EEF/WHG it was usually a Steppe men doing it. By the way, rape of foreign women won't change the genetic makeup of the man's population. The baby from that rape would go into the woman's population not the man's population. The women has to live with the man's population for her to influence their genes.

I just can't imagine a Steppe population that is 80% male could migrate from Russia to Germany without dying out. That sounds very unrealistic to me.

Milan
01-10-16, 23:19
Some sort of male Amazon's maybe,where they kept male only for procreation,they would raised the girls while get rid of men for religious purposes :laughing:

berun
01-10-16, 23:34
I must admit that I'm lost with that, very lost. My mind can't get it, too sophisticated. How could be that a relation of six Neolithic women for each Steppe man could deliver a 70% of Steppe autosomals in the Corded Ware culture. I'm thinking now that some steppe men were used to go as women... maybe a secondary effect of having too many lone herders waiting too much time in an empty land...
;)

Goga
01-10-16, 23:48
I must admit that I'm lost with that, very lost. My mind can't get it, too sophisticated. How could be that a relation of six Neolithic women for each Steppe man could deliver a 70% of Steppe autosomals in the Corded Ware culture. I'm thinking now that some steppe men were used to go as women... maybe a secondary effect of having too many lone herders waiting too much time in an empty land...
;)
According to David Reich ( http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32879-David-Reich-s-summary-of-the-population-history-of-Europe ) Neolithic folks could be simply replaced by Steppe people, like te Europeans replaced Native Americans in Northern America. Native Americans couldn't handel the viruses / plague brought by the Europeans and huge percentage of them died out. They found some tracks of black death / deadly pestilence in Native Europeans.

So you can compare native (neolithic) European population with native Americans (Indians) at the time of Columbus...


like Darwin said, only the strongest survive. And native European were the weakest and were for a great part replaced by the new incoming population.

Olympus Mons
01-10-16, 23:48
I must admit that I'm lost with that, very lost. My mind can't get it, too sophisticated. How could be that a relation of six Neolithic women for each Steppe man could deliver a 70% of Steppe autosomals in the Corded Ware culture. I'm thinking now that some steppe men were used to go as women... maybe a secondary effect of having too many lone herders waiting too much time in an empty land...
;)

oookkkk... So, steppe gave us gays. Makes sense.
Also, according to Yamnaya fanatics they brought horses to Europe... Damn!

A. Papadimitriou
01-10-16, 23:59
oookkkk... So, steppe gave us gays. Makes sense.
Also, according to Yamnaya fanatics they brought horses to Europe... Damn!
Persians used elephants, which is classier. Lol. Also Alexander the Great and Pyrrhus of Epirus did that afterwards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_war_elephants
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_elephant

Nik
02-10-16, 00:03
No. All we know is that when admixture occurred between EEF/WHG and Steppe, most of the time the women was EEF/WHG and the man was Steppe. Most Steppe men might of usually reproduced with Steppe women, but when Steppe people admixed with EEF/WHG it was usually a Steppe men doing it. By the way, rape of foreign women won't change the genetic makeup of the man's population. The baby from that rape would go into the woman's population not the man's population. The women has to live with the man's population for her to influence their genes.

I just can't imagine a Steppe population that is 80% male could migrate from Russia to Germany without dying out. That sounds very unrealistic to me.
The native populations were absorbed into the new IE society, hence the spread of IE and disappearance of the native ones. So rape still counts as an option.

And it is not assumed that the Steppe people's goal was to reach Germay as a final destination. They could have invaded and obdsorbed neighbouring western populations step by step, so every time a military campaign is launched a majority of men conquer the new lands and enjoy the spoils of war until the next neighbours become their prey. It could have taken generations until new lands were conquered, but the strategy remained the same. At least this is how I see it being possible.

Milan
02-10-16, 00:13
Persians used elephants, which is classier. Lol. Also Alexander the Great and Pyrrhus of Epirus did that afterwards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_war_elephants
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_elephant
Even elephants haven't helped them against the phalanx and the peltast :shocked:

Tomenable
02-10-16, 00:54
How could be that a relation of six Neolithic women for each Steppe man

What ??? How did you count this ???

Steppe men almost entirely replaced Neolithic men. So it is already ~50% of the population.

And some Steppe women also came (I think the authors underestimate female contribution).

BTW, it would be good to see which mtDNA haplogroups were characteristic of Steppe people.

Tomenable
02-10-16, 00:59
Why would they choose native females over their own kind in such large numbers?

This is very easy to explain, if you know how early Indo-European societies worked. Indo-Europeans commonly practiced polygyny, which means that one man could have many wifes. The most powerful and influential men had the largest number of wives.

For example, chieftains could have 10 wifes each (or at least several).

However, the proportion of males to females in every population is always close to 50:50. So if only 1 man marries 10 women, it means that 9 other men had to remain "singles". There were just not enough women in the population for them to marry.

And in my opinion, that was one of driving forces of Indo-European expansions.

Those low-status men, who could not find native Steppe wifes on the Steppe, had to:

1) Either kidnap wifes from somewhere else, and then bring them back to the Steppe;

OR:

2) Emigrate from the Steppe, invade another tribe, and capture their women as wifes.

In fact, genetic and archaeological data provides evidence, that both happened. The increase of CHG admixture among Steppe people, was due to kidnapping wifes from the Caucasus region, and then bringing them back to the Steppe. Later on, they stopped kidnapping & bringing wifes to the Steppe, and instead started emigrating from the Steppe in search of wifes to conquer. That was most likely due to improvements in technology (they acquired metals, horses, wheels and wagons - becoming more mobile).

Before acquiring those technological advantages, they were only able to organize raids for women (quickly surprise-attacking a settlement of farmers, kidnapping women and food, then quickly running away back to the Steppe).

But after gaining an advantage in military power, they could conquer sedentary populations.

Tomenable
02-10-16, 01:27
I just can't imagine a Steppe population that is 80% male could migrate from Russia to Germany without dying out.

Are you saying that Muslim "refugees" are going to die out ??? Because they are also 80% male.

Just read what I wrote above.

It was exactly as I described it. Those Indo-Europeans who invaded Europe were young low-status single males who couldn't find native Steppe wifes, because all native women were already taken by powerful chieftains with 10+ wifes each.

Where is polygyny still practiced today? Correct, in the Muslim World. Sheikhs have huge harems.

How are Muslim immigrants in Germany going to marry and procreate, if 80% of them are males ???

Well, of course they are going to procreate with native German women. They will try to do this at least.

Yetos
02-10-16, 01:41
hmm

MAYBE STEPPE WOMEN WERE UGLY????

Tomenable
02-10-16, 01:50
Were for example Amazons described by Ancient Greeks as ugly?

By the way, Amazons could emerge when Steppe males emigrated, leaving women alone on the Steppe. :laughing:

No, just kidding. It was as I described - there was shortage of women (and excess of men) due to polygyny.

Single men of low social status, who could not find Steppe wives, were forced to look for foreign wives.

Yetos
02-10-16, 01:55
Were for example Amazons described by Ancient Greeks as ugly?

By the way, Amazons could emerge when Steppe males emigrated, leaving women alone in the Steppe. :laughing:

No, just kidding. It was as I described - there was shortage of women (and excess of men) due to polygyny.

Single men of low social status, who could not find Steppe wives, were forced to look for foreign wives.

well, as a man Iwould not marry an Amazon for sure,
they cut one of their breast, and they carry guns,
who wants such a wife?

Tomenable
02-10-16, 02:12
I would not marry an Amazon for sure, they cut one of their breast

Don't complain. Brad Pitt's wife cut both of her breasts.

Fire Haired14
02-10-16, 05:39
Tomenable, so are you saying Corded Ware culture was created by low status single males from the Steppe? It takes many men and women. I'm not an expert at all but IMO it takes an entire population with every age and gender to do what Corded Ware and others did. Lone men would be absorbed by native populations and learn their language, as Muslim refugees are.

bicicleur
02-10-16, 10:00
This is very easy to explain, if you know how early Indo-European societies worked. Indo-Europeans commonly practiced polygyny, which means that one man could have many wifes. The most powerful and influential men had the largest number of wives.

For example, chieftains could have 10 wifes each (or at least several).

However, the proportion of males to females in every population is always close to 50:50. So if only 1 man marries 10 women, it means that 9 other men had to remain "singles". There were just not enough women in the population for them to marry.

And in my opinion, that was one of driving forces of Indo-European expansions.

Those low-status men, who could not find native Steppe wifes on the Steppe, had to:

1) Either kidnap wifes from somewhere else, and then bring them back to the Steppe;

OR:

2) Emigrate from the Steppe, invade another tribe, and capture their women as wifes.

In fact, genetic and archaeological data provides evidence, that both happened. The increase of CHG admixture among Steppe people, was due to kidnapping wifes from the Caucasus region, and then bringing them back to the Steppe. Later on, they stopped kidnapping & bringing wifes to the Steppe, and instead started emigrating from the Steppe in search of wifes to conquer. That was most likely due to improvements in technology (they acquired metals, horses, wheels and wagons - becoming more mobile).

Before acquiring those technological advantages, they were only able to organize raids for women (quickly surprise-attacking a settlement of farmers, kidnapping women and food, then quickly running away back to the Steppe).

But after gaining an advantage in military power, they could conquer sedentary populations.

same happened when Chinese rice farmers came to Indochina ca 4 ka
the 1st generation cemeteries had mixed skulls, native and Chinese
but today the main Y-haplogroup in Indochina is the Chinese farmer O, they didn't mix with HG males

but I'm not sure it was all rape
maybe women were attracted to these men with new technologies and higher status

Olympus Mons
02-10-16, 10:30
Tomenable.
If one has to "explain" that much...then its a novel.

... And after that brad Pitt just got involved with that other actress and they broke up. Right? Lol

berun
02-10-16, 10:49
According to David Reich ( http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32879-David-Reich-s-summary-of-the-population-history-of-Europe ) Neolithic folks could be simply replaced by Steppe people, like te Europeans replaced Native Americans in Northern America. Native Americans couldn't handel the viruses / plague brought by the Europeans and huge percentage of them died out. They found some tracks of black death / deadly pestilence in Native Europeans.

So you can compare native (neolithic) European population with native Americans (Indians) at the time of Columbus...

:laughing:
And which virus did say Reich killed men and spared women? (the Neolithic mtDNA was at 70% level in CW)

berun
02-10-16, 10:56
In fact, genetic and archaeological data provides evidence, that both happened. The increase of CHG admixture among Steppe people, was due to kidnapping wifes from the Caucasus region, and then bringing them back to the Steppe. Later on, they stopped kidnapping & bringing wifes to the Steppe, and instead started emigrating from the Steppe in search of wifes to conquer. That was most likely due to improvements in technology (they acquired metals, horses, wheels and wagons - becoming more mobile).

The recent paper on Maykop mtDNA is not supporting this "massive kidnapping" theory.

Tomenable
02-10-16, 11:30
Berun,

So maybe they kidnapped women from the Trypillian culture, or some other population?

====================

BTW, it seems that Goldberg, Rosenberg et al. underestimate Steppe female immigration.

This spreadsheet shows the frequencies of Steppe-related mtDNA in various populations:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GToouHMsUnoUpGSY91OIMA3bjc86bhNRSzknZ_BKLYE/edit#gid=0

Only U5a, U4, U2e, T1a, J2b1a, J1b1a1, I, N1a1b, H-16362, H2a1 and H2a2b were counted as Steppe-related there. What about U2d2, U5b2a1a1, K1b, T2a1, T2c1, H6a1, H5, H13, J2b1, W6, W3a1a, X2b, R1, C4a3 - weren't these mtDNA haplogroups also Steppe-related? On the other hand, it seems that only U5a1 was typically Steppe (U5a2 was not) and only I3 (not all of I), but all of N1a1 and J1b (not just N1a1b and J1b1a1).

Of course only haplos common in the Steppe but uncommon among European Farmers can be securely labeled as Steppe-related.

Fire Haired, what do you think about these additional haplogroups (which could also be Steppe-related) that I listed?

Tomenable
02-10-16, 11:51
(the Neolithic mtDNA was at 70% level in CW)

"Neolithic" mtDNA was already common among Steppe people. Typical Mesolithic European mtDNA is U5, U4, U2, U8a, U8c (of those, U5b, U5a2, U8a and U8c were more common in western-central Europe, while U5a1, U4 and U2e were more common in European Russia).

Steppe people had a lot of Mesolithic mtDNA (mostly U5a1, U4, U2e, U2d2, U5b2a1a1).

But they also had a lot of Non-Mesolithic mtDNA (see the list from my previous post).

Some of their mtDNA was probably of Ancient North Eurasian and Siberian origin as well.

========================

Here CW and Yamna mtDNA comparison (check also Afanasievo, Catacomb, Poltavka):

https://s31.postimg.org/h12f4uxyh/CWC_YAM_mt_DNA.png

Large part of German Corded Ware mtDNA was already of Middle Neolithic farmer origin.

berun
02-10-16, 12:32
"Ongoing male migration from the steppe over multiple generations is therefore required to explain observed patterns of X and autosomal ancestry"

And why the Yamnayans needed several migrations to Central Europe?

"Males from the steppe and central European females show substantial ongoing migration, with continuing admixture rates of almost ½. That is, almost half of the male parents in each generation of BA individuals are new migrants from the SP population."

After all the Yamnayans were gentlemen and were not forcing the 100% of the local women... what a kidding

"This result corresponds to approximately 14 male migrants for every female migrant from the steppe contributing to the ancestry of the BA population."

Tomenable you have the mean harem of a mean Yamnayan cacique: 13 women... but the worst is that after such migration the caciques were left alone in the steppes with their harems isn't?
;)

but the best is that the cacique's sons were the responsible for the successive migratory waves? oh I think it's a good joke start...

Tomenable
02-10-16, 12:35
And why the Yamnayans needed several migrations to Central Europe?

Anglo-Saxon migrations to Britain were also not just during one generation.

People were coming over across the North Sea during several generations.

Strontium isotope analyses - among other things - show that it was the case.

Tomenable
02-10-16, 12:39
corresponds to approximately 14 male migrants for every female migrant

Or - more likely - it was something like this:

1 male migrant + 1 female migrant come from the Steppe.

Male migrant kills 13 local farmer males, and takes their women.

Male migrant has children with 1 Steppe and 13 Farmer women.

================

So it is not about number of migrants, but how fast they reproduced.

================

Quote:



We find evidence of ongoing, primarily male, migration from the steppe to central Europe over a period of multiple generations
more likely there were continuing waves of local women marrying Steppe men and moving into their husband's villages.

Indeed, signals that they detected could be "working in both directions".

berun
02-10-16, 12:50
If the Yamnayans of the Caspian steppe needed to go as far as Trypolie to kidnapp women I understand now the real use of chariots...
:)

The butchering that you calculate is not valid in the same paper as they say that in each wave a woman in two married a local, so it was not factible to have the harems you think.

Tomenable
02-10-16, 12:53
:laughing:
And which virus did say Reich killed men and spared women? (the Neolithic mtDNA was at 70% level in CW)

In Latin America today, Native American mtDNA is also majority, but most of Y-DNA is of Iberian origin.

For example Paraguay is like ca. 90% Guarani mtDNA haplogroups + 90% Iberian Y-DNA haplogroups.

berun
02-10-16, 13:02
The period of the Anglo-Saxon migration took two generations from 450 till 500. Very fast taking into account that there was a sea in the middle.

Tomenable
02-10-16, 13:04
The period of the Anglo-Saxon migration took two generations from 450 till 500.

It took a longer time. Probably from 425 to 625, or ca. 8 generations.


If the Yamnayans of the Caspian steppe needed to go as far as Trypolie to kidnapp women I understand now the real use of chariots...
:)

Farmer women were well-nourished and fat, so a chariot was useful.

Or you could put several thin women into one chariot at once. :)

When on horseback, you could only get one woman per one raid: :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_kidnapping

http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/6d5eba7ac7ba42e9acabfffa4b082236/print-of-american-indian-man-on-horseback-with-struggling-caucasian-c84yk0.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/RaidbyKURDS.jpg

https://www.crowdedgallery.co.uk/media/catalog/product/c/o/cop170289131--_magmi.imagename_

arvistro
02-10-16, 13:04
I have met occasionally in different texts (IE-derived or not) the motive of -
Some warrior band goes to distant place, a major battle happens, local men are killed, local women are taking wives and new mixed population happens.

How much of that is historical reality and how much fantasy is other story, but it is clear that kind of set up was somewhat familiar to those story tellers. In some cases it could have also happened back then.

Angela
02-10-16, 15:14
There are two things that I don't get:

l. Where did all these men come from? Even if it was successive waves, as they insist, and not just one wave, the steppe couldn't support a huge population. In comparison to MN Central Europe it was sparsely populated so far as I know.

2. If they practiced this kind of polygamy why didn't it persist in the European cultures descended from them? Maybe it's just that I'm not aware of it. Was there polygamy in Corded Ware, in Bronze Age Britain etc.?

There's some piece still missing here.

Oh, gentlemen, let's not get carried away with ourselves. Has everyone forgotten there were no chariots until 2000 BC, and that was all the way over to the east? There were no chariots, no bronze swords etc., in Corded Ware. In the beginning they barely had copper. As for the chariots they were small and rather ramshackle affairs in the beginning and hardly suitable for forest travel. Let's rein in the perverse romanticism.

Goga, Southern Europeans have about half the 50% Yamnaya that is in the northern Europeans, so let's not exaggerate with all this talk of replacement, at least on an autosomal level. The yDna is another story.

MarkoZ
02-10-16, 15:24
I think the sample size is rather small, which makes the results seem overly dramatic. However the general pattern looks rather solid. I have no idea why they would invoke chariot and horse warfare when there's so little evidence of this though. The best explanation at present still seems to be a discrepancy in the rates of reproduction considering that median life expectancy increased somewhat in the bronze age [Angel, Lawrence J. (1984) "Health as a crucial factor in the changes from hunting to developed farming in the eastern Mediterranean."]. Violent clashes probably weren't the rule. Indeed, an explosion of violence seems to have occurred in the Middle to Late Neolithic, preceding the processes that would take place in the Bronze Age.

It also looks as though much of the farmer-hunter admixture took place at the eastern fringes of Europe (~Ukraine?), whereas the advantage of the Corded people became somewhat diminished as they migrated deeper into the continent.

Tomenable
02-10-16, 15:39
MarkoZ,

You mentioned only the Corded people, but Y-DNA of the Beaker people also came from the Steppe.

bicicleur
02-10-16, 15:52
Or - more likely - it was something like this:

1 male migrant + 1 female migrant come from the Steppe.

Male migrant kills 13 local farmer males, and takes their women.

Male migrant has children with 1 Steppe and 13 Farmer women.

================

So it is not about number of migrants, but how fast they reproduced.

================

Quote:



Indeed, signals that they detected could be "working in both directions".

there were no signs of violence between CW or Bell Beaker and farmer people in Europe
there were signs of violence between CW and local HG in the forest zone west of the Urals

nevertheless farmer males didn't reproduce
they became unfertile when steppe males arrived

bicicleur
02-10-16, 16:06
There are two things that I don't get:

l. Where did all these men come from? Even if it was successive waves, as they insist, and not just one wave, the steppe couldn't support a huge population. In comparison to MN Central Europe it was sparsely populated so far as I know.

2. If they practiced this kind of polygamy why didn't it persist in the European cultures descended from them? Maybe it's just that I'm not aware of it. Was there polygamy in Corded Ware, in Bronze Age Britain etc.?

There's some piece still missing here.

Oh, gentlemen, let's not get carried away with ourselves. Has everyone forgotten there were no chariots until 2000 BC, and that was all the way over to the east? There were no chariots, no bronze swords etc., in Corded Ware. In the beginning they barely had copper. As for the chariots they were small and rather ramshackle affairs in the beginning and hardly suitable for forest travel. Let's rein in the perverse romanticism.

Goga, Southern Europeans have about half the 50% Yamnaya that is in the northern Europeans, so let's not exaggerate with all this talk of replacement, at least on an autosomal level. The yDna is another story.

there were not so many men coming from the steppe

allmost all Central and western European R1b are R1b-L51 and very little steppe R1b is R1b-L51

so just a small steppe tribe of R1b-L51 came to Central Europe and expanded within Central and western Europe

the same can be said about R1a1a-M417, which was a European tribe, except one tribe, R1b-Z93 which went back to the steppe as the Sintashta and Srubnaya tribe

somehow these few steppe males reproduced themselves very fast in Central and western Europe while other males didn't

as I mentioned above, the same happened when Chinese farmers moved south into Indochina 4ka
the haplo O farming males reproduced, while HG haplo C1b and K2 didn't allthough HG females were involved in the reproduction
the HG males ended up deep in the forest as Aeta HG or Negritos or moved further south into Australia

Angela
02-10-16, 17:27
there were not so many men coming from the steppe

allmost all Central and western European R1b are R1b-L51 and very little steppe R1b is R1b-L51

so just a small steppe tribe of R1b-L51 came to Central Europe and expanded within Central and western Europe

the same can be said about R1a1a-M417, which was a European tribe, except one tribe, R1b-Z93 which went back to the steppe as the Sintashta and Srubnaya tribe

somehow these few steppe males reproduced themselves very fast in Central and western Europe while other males didn't

as I mentioned above, the same happened when Chinese farmers moved south into Indochina 4ka
the haplo O farming males reproduced, while HG haplo C1b and K2 didn't allthough HG females were involved in the reproduction
the HG males ended up deep in the forest as Aeta HG or Negritos or moved further south into Australia

But that's not what the paper is implying, is it? Aren't they positing a massive flow of men into central Europe?

If it wasn't a big group of mostly men taking lots of local wives, but just the movement of a small tribe, then how did it happen?

Angela
02-10-16, 19:04
But that's not what the paper is implying, is it? Aren't they positing a massive flow of men into central Europe?

If it wasn't a big group of mostly men taking lots of local wives, but just the movement of a small tribe, then how did it happen?

It can't be plague, or whatever, unless it affected native women less than native men?

In Latin America the Spanish and Portuguese were few in number as well, but they had a big advantage in terms of weaponry. In Europe, Corded Ware, at least, didn't. As I said, they barely had copper. Plus, as Bicicleur pointed out, there are no signs of mass warfare and destruction. Unless the Central Europeans were starving, ill, demoralized, and also few in number? If the more pastoralist lifestyle of these newcomers originally was more optimal for survival, and thus attracted the women the their settlements, would this explain it mathematically?

Sile
02-10-16, 19:19
There are a lot of ancient H ( mtdna ) samples found and tested in central Europe from early Neolitihic times who have no R1 ( ydna ) union

berun
02-10-16, 19:19
Well, Paraguay is not the best example for language replacement...: " It is one of the official languages of Paraguay (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguay) (along with Spanish (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_language)), where it is spoken by the majority of the population, and where half of the rural population is monolingual."

From the paper there are other inconsitencies that are hard to meet empiricaly: from 16 samples with Steppe admixture, 4 display a 100% of autosomal steppe ancestery but a 0-30% steppe ancestry in the X chromosome, other 3 samples display a level of a 60% but their X displays only a 0-10%. My few neurons apt for maths are burning out, maybe some more smart can explain?

I think that the issue is more cultural than migratory, maybe it has another explanation that is not taken into account in the paper:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide

or with its modern counterpart

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-selective_abortion

Nik
02-10-16, 21:26
This is very easy to explain, if you know how early Indo-European societies worked. Indo-Europeans commonly practiced polygyny, which means that one man could have many wifes. The most powerful and influential men had the largest number of wives.

For example, chieftains could have 10 wifes each (or at least several).

However, the proportion of males to females in every population is always close to 50:50. So if only 1 man marries 10 women, it means that 9 other men had to remain "singles". There were just not enough women in the population for them to marry.

And in my opinion, that was one of driving forces of Indo-European expansions.

Those low-status men, who could not find native Steppe wifes on the Steppe, had to:

1) Either kidnap wifes from somewhere else, and then bring them back to the Steppe;

OR:

2) Emigrate from the Steppe, invade another tribe, and capture their women as wifes.

In fact, genetic and archaeological data provides evidence, that both happened. The increase of CHG admixture among Steppe people, was due to kidnapping wifes from the Caucasus region, and then bringing them back to the Steppe. Later on, they stopped kidnapping & bringing wifes to the Steppe, and instead started emigrating from the Steppe in search of wifes to conquer. That was most likely due to improvements in technology (they acquired metals, horses, wheels and wagons - becoming more mobile).

Before acquiring those technological advantages, they were only able to organize raids for women (quickly surprise-attacking a settlement of farmers, kidnapping women and food, then quickly running away back to the Steppe).

But after gaining an advantage in military power, they could conquer sedentary populations.
I completely agree with every point u made, I just simply didn't choose to call those events marriages and those women wives lol

i believe in most of the cases they were not holding the respectful status of a wife, not since the beginning of the newly acquired lands at least, hence I prefer to go with the rape/forced procreation option.

Maciamo
02-10-16, 23:19
Interesting paper. I haven't had time to check it in detail yet. Just a quick observation on mtDNA.



BTW, it seems that Goldberg, Rosenberg et al. underestimate Steppe female immigration.

This spreadsheet shows the frequencies of Steppe-related mtDNA in various populations:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GToouHMsUnoUpGSY91OIMA3bjc86bhNRSzknZ_BKLYE/edit#gid=0

Only U5a, U4, U2e, T1a, J2b1a, J1b1a1, I, N1a1b, H-16362, H2a1 and H2a2b were counted as Steppe-related there. What about U2d2, U5b2a1a1, K1b, T2a1, T2c1, H6a1, H5, H13, J2b1, W6, W3a1a, X2b, R1, C4a3 - weren't these mtDNA haplogroups also Steppe-related? On the other hand, it seems that only U5a1 was typically Steppe (U5a2 was not) and only I3 (not all of I), but all of N1a1 and J1b (not just N1a1b and J1b1a1).

Of course only haplos common in the Steppe but uncommon among European Farmers can be securely labeled as Steppe-related.

Most of these lineages are linked to the Proto-Indo-Europeans and especially to R1a tribes. In fact, many match exactly the mtDNA lineages corresponding to haplogroups R1a (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25613-Identifying-the-original-Indo-European-mtDNA-from-isolated-settlements) and R1b, which I isolated since 2010.

Among the above, I have linked these lineages to R1a tribes: C4a, H2a1, H6, K1b(1b), T2a1, U2e, U4, U5a1, W3 and W6.

I have linked these to R1b: I and J1b1a (one of the strongest association, an almost certain marker of PIE R1b-M269).

These are unclear : H5a (could be Neolithic or linked to R1b), N1a1 (found in Yamna, but overwhelmingly Near Eastern Neolithic in origin), N1a1b, R1 (mostly Caucasian), T1a (could be PIE is T1a1a), X2b

These are not PIE and came from Neolithic farmers: H13 (mostly Caucasian, but not PIE), J2b1a, T2c1 (strongly Middle Eastern Neolithic, but not European Neolithic)

These are not PIE and came from other Mesolithic Europeans: H2a2b and U5b2a

Fire Haired14
03-10-16, 01:07
Only U5a, U4, U2e, T1a, J2b1a, J1b1a1, I, N1a1b, H-16362, H2a1 and H2a2b were counted as Steppe-related there. What about U2d2, U5b2a1a1, K1b, T2a1, T2c1, H6a1, H5, H13, J2b1, W6, W3a1a, X2b, R1, C4a3 - weren't these mtDNA haplogroups also Steppe-related? On the other hand, it seems that only U5a1 was typically Steppe (U5a2 was not) and only I3 (not all of I), but all of N1a1 and J1b (not just N1a1b and J1b1a1).

Of course only haplos common in the Steppe but uncommon among European Farmers can be securely labeled as Steppe-related.

Fire Haired, what do you think about these additional haplogroups (which could also be Steppe-related) that I listed?

I don't believe it is possible to know the percentage of Steppe mtDNA in a population. I do believe a collection of mtDNA lineages are 90% of the time of Steppe origin and that those lineages greatly underestimate the actual percentage of Steppe mtDNA. All the lineages you listed except H5, H13, J2b1, X2b, and C4a3 are probbaly Steppe as well. aDNA actually makes it obvious J2b1(a) is from EEF. I don't trust the C4a3 results an old study reported from Neolithic Ukraine.

Moi-même
03-10-16, 06:11
If the more pastoralist lifestyle of these newcomers originally was more optimal for survival, and thus attracted the women the their settlements, would this explain it mathematically?

I would think something like that could have happened. There may have been some bad years for both the steep herders and the European farmers. The herders moved South and West to find better grazing ground, they found suitable lands around the farmers. Some herders took wives among the farmers. Then, the bad weather lasted quite a few years, maybe even something like the little Ice Age, the farmers barely made it through, somehow managing to just keep their number, while herders thrived and their population exploded. After a few centuries, the herders outnumbered the farmers by 10 to 1.

No massacre, no harem, just one land usage that was more adapted to a temporary rough time.

bicicleur
03-10-16, 08:16
I would think something like that could have happened. There may have been some bad years for both the steep herders and the European farmers. The herders moved South and West to find better grazing ground, they found suitable lands around the farmers. Some herders took wives among the farmers. Then, the bad weather lasted quite a few years, maybe even something like the little Ice Age, the farmers barely made it through, somehow managing to just keep their number, while herders thrived and their population exploded. After a few centuries, the herders outnumbered the farmers by 10 to 1.

No massacre, no harem, just one land usage that was more adapted to a temporary rough time.


yes I would also think about bad climate for the farmers, except afaik there is no proof of that
somehow the farmers were not faring well at that time

Yetos
03-10-16, 09:57
I was thinking about the eternal fight of nomadic vs farming population,

to reveal,
have you thought that if you want to 'kill' a farmer all you have to do is send some goats/sheeps at his field?
they will eat the grass, and nno crop will grow,

even at 18th century we have seen that at nw world,
cow boys vs farmers for the fences,

Hauteville
03-10-16, 10:25
With Bronze age migration increased J2 imo.

rafc
03-10-16, 11:33
there were not so many men coming from the steppe

allmost all Central and western European R1b are R1b-L51 and very little steppe R1b is R1b-L51

so just a small steppe tribe of R1b-L51 came to Central Europe and expanded within Central and western Europe

the same can be said about R1a1a-M417, which was a European tribe, except one tribe, R1b-Z93 which went back to the steppe as the Sintashta and Srubnaya tribe

somehow these few steppe males reproduced themselves very fast in Central and western Europe while other males didn't

as I mentioned above, the same happened when Chinese farmers moved south into Indochina 4ka
the haplo O farming males reproduced, while HG haplo C1b and K2 didn't allthough HG females were involved in the reproduction
the HG males ended up deep in the forest as Aeta HG or Negritos or moved further south into Australia

I think the key is mobility and empty spaces. Europe wasn't all that populous at the end of the Neolithic. If large parts were uninhabited a group that had the means and will to move over large distances could spread very fast. Older groups, stuck in isolated old settlements with little impetus to move would miss the boat. R1b just got lucky, living in the right place to adopt new ideas and methods brought west by steppe folk, and for some reason they started moving and found lot's of empty space in between existing settlements, leading to a quick boom.

rafc
03-10-16, 11:39
This study concludes there was a population collapse around 3000BC, might indicate that farmers were struggling: "Regional population collapse followed initial agriculture booms in mid-Holocene Europe", Shennan et al., 2013 (I'm not allowed to link, but you can google it).

Brennos
03-10-16, 13:47
MarkoZ,

You mentioned only the Corded people, but Y-DNA of the Beaker people also came from the Steppe.

Excuse-me, probably, I lost something... when did you change your mind? Weren't you a fiercely against a steppe origin for R1b?

bicicleur
03-10-16, 14:21
This study concludes there was a population collapse around 3000BC, might indicate that farmers were struggling: "Regional population collapse followed initial agriculture booms in mid-Holocene Europe", Shennan et al., 2013 (I'm not allowed to link, but you can google it).

thx, it's exactly what I was thinking


yes I would also think about bad climate for the farmers, except afaik there is no proof of that
somehow the farmers were not faring well at that time

I have no time to read it now, but I will

bicicleur
03-10-16, 16:49
This study concludes there was a population collapse around 3000BC, might indicate that farmers were struggling: "Regional population collapse followed initial agriculture booms in mid-Holocene Europe", Shennan et al., 2013 (I'm not allowed to link, but you can google it).


thx, here it is

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/full/ncomms3486.html

and I've read it.

this graph says it all

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/images/ncomms3486-f2.jpg

there is the initial expansion of farmers into Eruope some 8 ka, then an additional TRB expansion some 6 ka on top of that and then a big bust ca 5.5 ka, some 6-700 years before the arrival of the CW and Bell Beaker people

the neolithic societies were simply unstable by themselves, it wasn't the IE that caused their decline, they merely came in and filled up the empty spaces

but why then would neolithic females have survived while males didn't ?


I suspect the same thing happened in SW Asia, a big bust of the neolithic societies followed by the expansion of the Semitic tribes. They even replaced the Summerians.

Angela
03-10-16, 17:24
thx, here it is

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/full/ncomms3486.html

and I've read it.

this graph says it all

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/images/ncomms3486-f2.jpg

there is the initial expansion of farmers into Eruope some 8 ka, then an additional TRB expansion some 6 ka on top of that and then a big bust ca 5.5 ka, some 6-700 years before the arrival of the CW and Bell Beaker people

the neolithic societies were simply unstable by themselves, it wasn't the IE that caused their decline, they merely came in and filled up the empty spaces

but why then would neolithic females have survived while males didn't ?


I suspect the same thing happened in SW Asia, a big bust of the neolithic societies followed by the expansion of the Semitic tribes. They even replaced the Summerians.

Yes, as I mentioned in the German magazine thread, we probably see the same process in the Near East. However, given the clues in their subsequent cultural practices, I can easily believe that polygamy played an important role. I'm not so sure about Europe.

Polygamy was not, to my knowledge, a prominent part of eastern European or Celtic and Germanic practices, was it? Perhaps it came down to the fact that the pastoral life style was more suited to the changed climate and they could take advantage of previously unwanted lands. They just out-bred the farmers, as the farmers had previously out-bred the hunter-gatherers? Perhaps the native women were more easily absorbed?

I don't know if this process would result in the kind of quick change envisioned by the authors of the paper, however.

rafc
03-10-16, 17:52
If I read the paper correct they used "Central_LNBA" to estimate the steppe migration. As far as I see this category corresponds to a number of samples from Germany and Poland where the majority of Y-DNA was R1a. I do think here it worked a little different in that R1a seems very connected to the sudden arrival of Corded ware. I could believe a steppe population with a majority of men spreading real fast around 2900BC in this region. I think the idea that they propose, that steppe migrations would be more suited to groups of men would fit well here (but not for R1b).

bicicleur
03-10-16, 19:21
If I read the paper correct they used "Central_LNBA" to estimate the steppe migration. As far as I see this category corresponds to a number of samples from Germany and Poland where the majority of Y-DNA was R1a. I do think here it worked a little different in that R1a seems very connected to the sudden arrival of Corded ware. I could believe a steppe population with a majority of men spreading real fast around 2900BC in this region. I think the idea that they propose, that steppe migrations would be more suited to groups of men would fit well here (but not for R1b).

when looking how it is plit into different areas, the biggest expansions ca 4.5 - 5 ka happened in Jutland, Scania and S-Germany
in S-Germany it is a very thin peak, as if people were just passing through
it would have been interesting to see how the picture was in Poland and Bielarus

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/images/ncomms3486-f3.jpg

arvistro
03-10-16, 20:08
Polygamy was not, to my knowledge, a prominent part of eastern European or Celtic and Germanic practices, was it?
That is a good question. Quick google gave me a lot of links. It was definitely present for elites. But how deep it was in regular society, not sure.

Coriolan
03-10-16, 21:37
this graph says it all

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/images/ncomms3486-f2.jpg

there is the initial expansion of farmers into Eruope some 8 ka, then an additional TRB expansion some 6 ka on top of that and then a big bust ca 5.5 ka, some 6-700 years before the arrival of the CW and Bell Beaker people

the neolithic societies were simply unstable by themselves, it wasn't the IE that caused their decline, they merely came in and filled up the empty spaces

but why then would neolithic females have survived while males didn't ?


Out of curiosity, what would the graph look like if Neolithic societies had collapsed because of Indo-European invasions instead of naturally due to failing crops? Is the graph an average for all Europe or just one region?

A population collapse where women survive and not men sounds like an invasion to me.

Coriolan
03-10-16, 21:50
That is a good question. Quick google gave me a lot of links. It was definitely present for elites. But how deep it was in regular society, not sure.
To my knowledge, all ancient Celtic and Germanic elites practiced polygamy. If just a tribe's chieftain had three wives instead of one, and had three times more children in average, how many generations would it take for the chieftain's Y-DNA lineage to reach 10% of the population if that population is always stable at 1000 for each generation? To make it easy let's say that all couples have one boy and one girl, but the chieftain has three of each. Only the eldest son becomes chieftain and can have three wives.

So after one generation the chieftain has tripled his Y-DNA from 1 to 3 per thousand. After the second generation it's 5 (3 chieftain's sons + 1 son for each of his brothers). Then it's 7, and so on. I let you count.

OK, the answer is 50 generations, so maybe 1000 to 1500 years. It's much faster if the system allows the chief's brothers to have three wives too.

Moi-même
04-10-16, 00:32
So farmers were indeed struggling, leaving room for herders to outbreed them. Which leave the question, why the heavy farmer ancestry among female.

There could have been an advantage to take a local wife (linked to local knowledge I would guess, but maybe something genetic too), which translated as more kids early in the game. So when the population expanded, these herder man + farmer woman couples had a much greater number of descendants than the average herder man + herder women couples.

bicicleur
05-10-16, 08:32
So farmers were indeed struggling, leaving room for herders to outbreed them. Which leave the question, why the heavy farmer ancestry among female.

There could have been an advantage to take a local wife (linked to local knowledge I would guess, but maybe something genetic too), which translated as more kids early in the game. So when the population expanded, these herder man + farmer woman couples had a much greater number of descendants than the average herder man + herder women couples.

DNA combined from a male and a female from 2 different tribes is better suited for natural selection than DNA from inbreeding in the same tribe.
And I suppose subsequent generations of CW males took neolithic women to breed.

The same happened in paleolithic Europe causing the Magdalenian 'El Miron' cluster 19-14 ka : all known Y-DNA of this cluster is the Gravettian I, while autosomally it resembled 35 ka Aurignacian C1a2 GoyetQ116-1.
Gravettian males must have bred with Aurignacian females during successive generations to acomplish this.

Most HG tribes were exogamous if they had the chance.

berun
05-10-16, 11:06
Off topic: if there were soooo many migrations of Yamnayans to the Corded Ware area why none was R1b???? Curious pattern.

Possible Yamnayist answer: surely the R1b herders prefered brunettes instead to blondes. Laughing time off.

rafc
05-10-16, 12:44
Off topic: if there were soooo many migrations of Yamnayans to the Corded Ware area why none was R1b???? Curious pattern.

Possible Yamnayist answer: surely the R1b herders prefered brunettes instead to blondes. Laughing time off.

Interesting question, because the situation seems to mirror that of R1b-L51, but just a little earlier. It seems Yamnaya was mostly R1b(xL51). Somehow their language gets passed on to the R1a people who boom enormously in NE-Europe and carry the language as far west as Germany. Then there are the R1b-L51 people who seem to take over the baton and carry the language further west from Germany, booming in turn. It's safe to assume the language itself was no advantage so something else played. It's possible the same effect is at work each time.

berun
05-10-16, 14:17
The most simple is to turn off the Yamnayist theory and simply suppose that a R1a culture carried genes and IE language to Central Europe. If the problem was climatic, much more harsh would be the problem in European Russia, pushing them to the west, the unique escapatory way. Now even wouldn't be necessarily that such migration would be of herders or farmers taking into account what happened with the nahuan languages in Mexico.

rafc
05-10-16, 15:03
Why are the two mutually exclusive? It seems logical to me R1a, Corded Ware and a number of IE-languages are connected and came from the northeast. At the same time there's no denying Yamnaya came from the southeast as far as Hungary and the lower Danube valley, it seems from adna these would have been mostly R1b(xL51). It seem logical to me that whatever languages they spoke were also IE but already split from the language(s) carried by R1a, so proto-versions of Greek and/or other Paleo-Balkan languages. The R1a group got spread further over Western Europe by R1b-L51 and some others, while R1b(xL51) and some others spread their languages over the Balkan. In the end they both come from the same source, wheter that's early Yamnaye or something before (Sredny Stog comes to mind).

MOESAN
07-10-16, 13:22
DNA combined from a male and a female from 2 different tribes is better suited for natural selection than DNA from inbreeding in the same tribe.
And I suppose subsequent generations of CW males took neolithic women to breed.

The same happened in paleolithic Europe causing the Magdalenian 'El Miron' cluster 19-14 ka : all known Y-DNA of this cluster is the Gravettian I, while autosomally it resembled 35 ka Aurignacian C1a2 GoyetQ116-1.
Gravettian males must have bred with Aurignacian females during successive generations to acomplish this.

Most HG tribes were exogamous if they had the chance.


I agree it could have had a input and OKpossible too for Aurignacian/Gravettian

MOESAN
07-10-16, 13:48
"Ongoing male migration from the steppe over multiple generations is therefore required to explain observed patterns of X and autosomal ancestry"

And why the Yamnayans needed several migrations to Central Europe?

"Males from the steppe and central European females show substantial ongoing migration, with continuing admixture rates of almost ½. That is, almost half of the male parents in each generation of BA individuals are new migrants from the SP population."

After all the Yamnayans were gentlemen and were not forcing the 100% of the local women... what a kidding

"This result corresponds to approximately 14 male migrants for every female migrant from the steppe contributing to the ancestry of the BA population."

Tomenable you have the mean harem of a mean Yamnayan cacique: 13 women... but the worst is that after such migration the caciques were left alone in the steppes with their harems isn't?
;)

but the best is that the cacique's sons were the responsible for the successive migratory waves? oh I think it's a good joke start...

I have not the study at hand.
I think these questions of sex biased matings are real but uneasy to weight because of the numerous factors in cause in the subsequent generations.
The fact is that even males biased colonization with strong polygamy cannot explain the remanence of Steppes auDNA in descendants. So we are obliged to imagine subsequent new waves of Steppes males - not mixed - to explain the "yamna" autosomes in N, E and NW Europe. These SIMILAR Steppic men are not the first ones sons, otherwise they would not have the same input for auDNA, being already mixed.
In this kind of sex biased, we have always the same results, in pure theory and in more "mixed" reality: too much Y-DNA of intruders, too much mt-DNA of local people, and a mean of X-DNA between autosomes (more or less local) and mt-DNA, the most local drifted;but the proportions in autosomes and X depend on one wave as opposed to new waves.
The study seems, for the little I know of it, perhaps a bit simplistic and as others I'm sure a lot of Steppic people females came with their males; and they had since a long time "neolithical" mt-DNA and X-DNA uneasy sometimes to tell from local DNA - only a peer study of SUBclades can help here -;what seems to me is that the discrepancy between the diverse aspects of the DNA has been exagerated in the study in question. And the sample can explain somethings too, as said by forumers here; Steppes intrusionS have not been always the same thing everytime evrywhere.
Just some thoughts, without sound ground by lack of details.

Huitzilopochtli
26-10-16, 20:10
thx, here it is

and I've read it.

this graph says it all



there is the initial expansion of farmers into Eruope some 8 ka, then an additional TRB expansion some 6 ka on top of that and then a big bust ca 5.5 ka, some 6-700 years before the arrival of the CW and Bell Beaker people

the neolithic societies were simply unstable by themselves, it wasn't the IE that caused their decline, they merely came in and filled up the empty spaces

but why then would neolithic females have survived while males didn't ?


I suspect the same thing happened in SW Asia, a big bust of the neolithic societies followed by the expansion of the Semitic tribes. They even replaced the Summerians.

Maybe the wheel did it. Europe doesn't seem to have experienced a population collapse for thousands of years before 3500 B.C. so it doesn't seem to have been a regular occurrence like it would have been if climate change were to blame. Once the wheel was invented bands of warriors could rove around much more effectively sacking villages. Diseases could also spread more effectively. The increase in warfare caused the population to collapse and the Yamniks were the ones who ultimately benefitted the most from the wheel because they already were pastoralists and had stronger traditions of cattle raiding and warfare.

Brennos
27-10-16, 18:25
The most simple is to turn off the Yamnayist theory and simply suppose that a R1a culture carried genes and IE language to Central Europe. If the problem was climatic, much more harsh would be the problem in European Russia, pushing them to the west, the unique escapatory way. Now even wouldn't be necessarily that such migration would be of herders or farmers taking into account what happened with the nahuan languages in Mexico.

And, for curiosity, which language did the Yamnayans speak according to your view?

MOESAN
28-10-16, 10:24
Why are the two mutually exclusive? It seems logical to me R1a, Corded Ware and a number of IE-languages are connected and came from the northeast. At the same time there's no denying Yamnaya came from the southeast as far as Hungary and the lower Danube valley, it seems from adna these would have been mostly R1b(xL51). It seem logical to me that whatever languages they spoke were also IE but already split from the language(s) carried by R1a, so proto-versions of Greek and/or other Paleo-Balkan languages. The R1a group got spread further over Western Europe by R1b-L51 and some others, while R1b(xL51) and some others spread their languages over the Balkan. In the end they both come from the same source, wheter that's early Yamnaye or something before (Sredny Stog comes to mind).

not stupid

berun
28-10-16, 10:38
And, for curiosity, which language did the Yamnayans speak according to your view?

Only DNA will say, but my bets are in supporting order: north Caucasian (they dwelt in the steppes before the Russian genocide and they used kurgans till Islamization), Altaic (not kidding with that, Afanasievo was a true Yamnayan offshot that developed just where there was the Altaic urheimat), a language related to IE but nowadays lost.

MarkoZ
28-10-16, 11:19
Only DNA will say, but my bets are in supporting order: north Caucasian (they dwelt in the steppes before the Russian genocide and they used kurgans till Islamization), Altaic (not kidding with that, Afanasievo was a true Yamnayan offshot that developed just where there was the Altaic urheimat), a language related to IE but nowadays lost.

That's also Anna Dybo's view, though you might disagree with her on the ultimate location of IE:

http://www.jolr.ru/files/(108)jlr2013-9(69-92).pdf

Northener
02-12-16, 16:03
"Significant", I doubt it was very significant. Even if it was I think it's impossible for Steppe men to had been genetically significantly physically superior to Neo/Meso Men. I think this because the variation in physique among Europeans today is small. The variation among most of humanity is small.



Corded Ware arrived in NorthEastern Europe before any R1b did. "hot farmer girls", this is fantasy talk. Farmer girls shouldn't have been any hotter than Steppe girls. You guys are trying to make history a Hollywood movie. I don't know about you but for other Northern Europeans I've seen post here there's a dose of racial-centrism. That's why I started this thread. They're ok with the idea Steppe people were superior because they have more Steppe than anyone. You guys are also half or more from the Meso/Neo Europeans who you apparently think were weaklings but also had super hot women who Steppe men stole.

I think it's very possible Steppe groups or heavily admixed Steppe groups in Europe were aggressive raiding tribes like the Huns or Slavs were in early European history. However, I don't think it is possible that they simply man handled their way to dominate Europe and native European women. Biologically speaking that sounds impossible. The difference between them and Native European men would have been tiny. That explanation is too simple.

Tiny differences can give after dozens of generations significant outcomes Fire Haired. I'am more and more convinced that Maciamo has got the right direction when he stated (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#S21-U106)that R1b/S21 was popularized by the Unetice culture, the first Bronze Age warriors entering Northwestern Europe. According to their burials they not only where probably beter military better equipped than the descendants of the TRB/Beaker cultures of that time. But most of all they introduced an aristocratic element, which was on to that unknown in these area's. Ok they weren't all Khan the second...but I think those 'aristocratic' chieftains where not unfamiliar with claiming of women.....(a kind of presidential privilege avant la lettre ;)

Huitzilopochtli
02-12-16, 21:13
"Significant", I doubt it was very significant. Even if it was I think it's impossible for Steppe men to had been genetically significantly physically superior to Neo/Meso Men. I think this because the variation in physique among Europeans today is small. The variation among most of humanity is small.



Corded Ware arrived in NorthEastern Europe before any R1b did. "hot farmer girls", this is fantasy talk. Farmer girls shouldn't have been any hotter than Steppe girls. You guys are trying to make history a Hollywood movie. I don't know about you but for other Northern Europeans I've seen post here there's a dose of racial-centrism. That's why I started this thread. They're ok with the idea Steppe people were superior because they have more Steppe than anyone. You guys are also half or more from the Meso/Neo Europeans who you apparently think were weaklings but also had super hot women who Steppe men stole.

I think it's very possible Steppe groups or heavily admixed Steppe groups in Europe were aggressive raiding tribes like the Huns or Slavs were in early European history. However, I don't think it is possible that they simply man handled their way to dominate Europe and native European women. Biologically speaking that sounds impossible. The difference between them and Native European men would have been tiny. That explanation is too simple.

I don't think farmer girls were hotter. What I meant was that when invading IEs initially conquered the farmers and wiped out a large portion of their population, the more attractive nubile farmer girls were the most likely to survive and reproduce. There's no assumption of superiority except military superiority. The conquered Native Americans were also known for their bravery, resistance to pain, and skills at oratory. They were still conquered. Conquest doesn't really carry assumptions about superiority.

There’s probably a lot of material for a PIE movie, but the unimpressive technology of the time and the lack of interest in similar period movies make it better suited for tv. Perhaps the History Channel could pick it up after Vikings is over or maybe it could go to HBO or Netflix. Seriously, the source of nearly half the world’s languages and culture should be a movie. It feels like the breakthroughs in ancient DNA are being ignored and we should already have had an episode of NOVA and a few documentaries. Neanderthals and Denisovans are getting all the attention even though we don’t have any cultural connection to them.

Fire Haired14
02-12-16, 22:23
I don't think farmer girls were hotter. What I meant was that when invading IEs initially conquered the farmers and wiped out a large portion of their population, the more attractive nubile farmer girls were the most likely to survive and reproduce. There's no assumption of superiority except military superiority.

This is realistic.


It feels like the breakthroughs in ancient DNA are being ignored and we should already have had an episode of NOVA and a few documentaries. Neanderthals and Denisovans are getting all the attention even though we don’t have any cultural connection to them.

It is strange how there's been hardly any attention given to it.

Angela
02-12-16, 22:53
What is being ignored, AGAIN, despite all the papers and all the threads and the reams of posts is that there isn't a one size fits all "invasion".

What went on in parts of the northern border regions (and perhaps even Britain) that were barely populated was different from what went on in a Central Europe that had experienced population crashes and was perhaps weakened by malnutrition and the diseases (the plague) perhaps carried by the new arrivals, which was different again from what happened, perhaps, in southern Europe, or in Anatolia and Iran, etc. in the Near East.

There are also big differences by time period. I know some people in this hobby, particularly young men, love a sort of Conan the Barbarian or Viking kind of narrative, but it doesn't fit a lot of what went on. Corded Ware only got a little bronze at the very end. They barely had copper weapons. They did not have a big military superiority over the MN people they encountered. That's very different from the Mycenaeans, for example.

You can't make one story fit all.

What I do think is true as a rather global matter is that you often have a civilized "core" built up over generations and hundreds of years which starts to develop problems, perhaps because of climate change, or environmental damage, or class differences which result in mass conflict, and populations of the periphery, perhaps nomadic herders in some areas, swoop in and take over, sometimes with pretty significant genetic changes altogether, sometimes as an elite, sometimes with broad autosomal replacement, sometimes with autosomal admixture but a yDna sweep. You see it in China, in Africa, in the Near East. It has nothing to do with "superiority" whatever the racist "philosophers" and anthropologists of the late 19th century might have thought.

If you have never read or have forgotten about all of this, you can find detailed discussions about these matters if you use the search engine.

Huitzilopochtli
03-12-16, 00:17
What is being ignored, AGAIN, despite all the papers and all the threads and the reams of posts is that there isn't a one size fits all "invasion".

What went on in parts of the northern border regions (and perhaps even Britain) that were barely populated was different from what went on in a Central Europe that had experienced population crashes and was perhaps weakened by malnutrition and the diseases (the plague) perhaps carried by the new arrivals, which was different again from what happened, perhaps, in southern Europe, or in Anatolia and Iran, etc. in the Near East.

There are also big differences by time period. I know some people in this hobby, particularly young men, love a sort of Conan the Barbarian or Viking kind of narrative, but it doesn't fit a lot of what went on. Corded Ware only got a little bronze at the very end. They barely had copper weapons. They did not have a big military superiority over the MN people they encountered. That's very different from the Mycenaeans, for example.

You can't make one story fit all.

What I do think is true as a rather global matter is that you often have a civilized "core" built up over generations and hundreds of years which starts to develop problems, perhaps because of climate change, or environmental damage, or class differences which result in mass conflict, and populations of the periphery, perhaps nomadic herders in some areas, swoop in and take over, sometimes with pretty significant genetic changes altogether, sometimes as an elite, sometimes with broad autosomal replacement, sometimes with autosomal admixture but a yDna sweep. You see it in China, in Africa, in the Near East. It has nothing to do with "superiority" whatever the racist "philosophers" and anthropologists of the late 19th century might have thought.

If you have never read or have forgotten about all of this, you can find detailed discussions about these matters if you use the search engine.

Historically, successful barbarians invaders have at the very least been able to put a much larger percentage of their populations in the field and in the case of China, India, and the Middle East had a natural supply of horses which sedentary empires had to import from them.


Off the top of my head, I can’t think of a successful barbarian migration that wasn’t backed up with serious military prowess. Maybe the expansion of Semites into Mesopotamia is a counterexample.


Someone should point out that Conan and other Cimmerians often get captured or enslaved. He’s not always on top, except at the end of the story. The Vikings were the tail end of the migrations that occurred with the collapse of the Roman empire. Your internal weakness narrative probably a large part of the story (look what happened to lead production), but the growing military power of the Germani and the Sassanids likely became to much for the empire.


Does anyone dispute that IEs had a more martial culture than MN Europe?


My guess is that the IE expansion into Europe was triggered by the invention of the wheel rather than horses or bronze. It may have gone something like this:


The wheel is invented. Mobility increases drastically and individual family farms become more viable. This weakens traditional socio-political structures among farmers and strengthens new structures among IEs. It also become possible for herders to take everything they own and move to Siberia.
The costs of raiding long distances and taking loot decline drastically. This increases the level of warfare across Europe. Moreover, disease spreads much more quickly. This leads to devastating plagues across Europe.
The population declines. Remaining communities of hunter-gatherers expand at the expense of farmers because they are less affected by raiding.
A massive migration from the steppe begins as young steppe men seek grazing land, women, power, and everlasting renown in the West. Their martial culture and the inherent mobility of their economy give them a decisive advantage over the farmers. They destroy villages and towns, slaughter their people, destroy their agriculture, and run off with their women.
Surviving farmers flee into the mountains. Hunter-gatherer groups are gradually assimilated into the new IE order.



I suspect that core-periphery interactions are important for developing the periphery. War and trade with the Romans built up the Germans, with the Chinese it built up the various Northern barbarians, and and the Cucuteni and Maykop presumably did the same for the Yamnaya.

Northener
03-12-16, 11:20
What is being ignored, AGAIN, despite all the papers and all the threads and the reams of posts is that there isn't a one size fits all "invasion".

What went on in parts of the northern border regions (and perhaps even Britain) that were barely populated was different from what went on in a Central Europe that had experienced population crashes and was perhaps weakened by malnutrition and the diseases (the plague) perhaps carried by the new arrivals, which was different again from what happened, perhaps, in southern Europe, or in Anatolia and Iran, etc. in the Near East.

There are also big differences by time period. I know some people in this hobby, particularly young men, love a sort of Conan the Barbarian or Viking kind of narrative, but it doesn't fit a lot of what went on. Corded Ware only got a little bronze at the very end. They barely had copper weapons. They did not have a big military superiority over the MN people they encountered. That's very different from the Mycenaeans, for example.

You can't make one story fit all.

What I do think is true as a rather global matter is that you often have a civilized "core" built up over generations and hundreds of years which starts to develop problems, perhaps because of climate change, or environmental damage, or class differences which result in mass conflict, and populations of the periphery, perhaps nomadic herders in some areas, swoop in and take over, sometimes with pretty significant genetic changes altogether, sometimes as an elite, sometimes with broad autosomal replacement, sometimes with autosomal admixture but a yDna sweep. You see it in China, in Africa, in the Near East. It has nothing to do with "superiority" whatever the racist "philosophers" and anthropologists of the late 19th century might have thought.

If you have never read or have forgotten about all of this, you can find detailed discussions about these matters if you use the search engine.

I think that in the case upcoming R1b in Northwestern Europe due to the Unetice culture I have a clear example where archeology and DNA research come together.

Maciamo:
"The principal Proto-Germanic branch of the Indo-European family tree is R1b-S21 (a.k.a. U106). This haplogroup is found at high concentrations in the Netherlands and north-west Germany. It is likely that R1b-S21 lineages expanded in this region through a founder effect during the Unetice period, then penetrated into Scandinavia around 1700 BCE, thus creating a new culture, that of the Noridc Bronze Age."

The Unetice culture in Northwestern Germany and Northern Netherlands is called the Sögel Kreis (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sögel-Wohlde-Kreis).

Prof Harry Fokkens (1998):
''The northern Netherlands is part of the northern group (NW Germany and Denmark) especially of the Sögeler Kreis characterized by a number of distinctive men's graves. The Drouwen grave is the best known Dutch example.It's remarkable that the Elp culture has never been presented as the immigration of a new group of people. Because clearly this period was a time when a number of new elements made their entry while others disappeared. The disappearance of beakers, the appearance of the Sögel men's graves with the first 'swords', among other things, the fully extended burial posture, under barrows; all the factors have been reason enough in the past to conclude that the Elp culture represented an immigration of Sögel warriors."

Clear example!

Angela
03-12-16, 16:41
My point, which I don’t see that you have addressed, is that the arrival of the Indo-European speakers took a different form depending on the place and the time period of the intrusion. What has happened, especially on internet forums, is that cultural norms and patterns from much later periods of pre-history and involving different groups have been transplanted into time periods when those weapons, norms, patterns, etc. didn't exist.

As I tried to explain, Corded Ware does not, imo, have anything to do with the whole concept of mounted, “cowboys of the steppe”, wielding bronze swords, whose chieftans had dozens of local women in their harems.

Yes, cultures like Corded Ware made use of the wheel, not that they invented it, it having been invented either in MN Europe or the Near East or both. (Please use the search engine to find the papers.) They made use of it in carts, carts which in the early periods were most often pulled by oxen. (Again, use the search engine for the papers.) Yes, that gave them more mobility. Yes, given their heavier reliance on herding, they probably were better positioned, given the climate changes, to provide food for their families. If it's true that they brought plague with them, a plague to which they might have had some immunity, that would have been a huge advantage. In those cases, yes, the native women who survived might have been absorbed.

This has nothing to do with the horse riding, raiding, fighting "cowboys" of the steppe who so fire the imagination of some men. That is part of much later cultural developments and much more emblematic of the Iranian tribes than of what was going on in Europe in the early days of the incursions.


As far as much of northern, northwestern, and northeastern Europe, it's not much of a military invasion when there's almost nobody around to be invaded and you're going into almost uninhabited territory, which may be the case in the British Isles and parts of Northern and Northwestern Europe. Whatever admixture with people of MN Europe took place occurred in Central Europe in an earlier time period.

In southern Europe, the Indo-European speakers were apparently not very steppe like by the time they reached the area, because although in the place where I was born perhaps 50% of the men are R1b, and it’s well over 60% where my father was born, with some yDna I thrown in on top of that, the "Yamnaya" percentage is about 25%, and in addition includes, no doubt, what was contributed by the Celtic migrations of the first millennium BC and the Lombards after the fall of the Empire. So, there doesn't seem to have been such a "massive" invasion at the time the Indo-Europeans entered the peninsula. I also doubt the initial incursions could have been "massive" anywhere given that the steppe lands can't carry "massive" populations. The exponential growth in population must have taken place after they had spent some time further west

I'm not going to bother finding all the studies in my files again because no matter how often I post them they're just ignored by people who prefer the one size fits all narrative. If you're interested you can find them.

Just as an aside, and since you raised the issue, you might also want to go back and look at the narratives written at the time about the Germani and other barbarians who were streaming into the Empire. Many if not most of them were desperate, poor, starving, farmers fleeing in terror from the new steppe populations, who were indeed horse mounted warriors. In many instances it was more like the current mass immigration of refugees from the Middle East into Europe than a highly organized military invasion. That was particularly true for the Lombards. You might want to look up a recent paper on ancient Lombard remains. They were malnourished and sick and altogether in terrible condition when they arrived in Italy.

The "Germani" and other invaders who constituted an actual military force, as in the case with some of the Visigoths, were most often Roman trained, equipped and originally led troops who had accepted Roman pay for their services and then turned around to rend to pieces the weakened host.

With the following I agree:

"I suspect that core-periphery interactions are important for developing the periphery. War and trade with the Romans built up the Germans, with the Chinese it built up the various Northern barbarians, and and the Cucuteni and Maykop presumably did the same for the Yamnaya."

Northener
03-12-16, 17:22
My point, which I don’t see that you have addressed, is that the arrival of the Indo-European speakers took a different form depending on the place and the time period of the intrusion. What has happened, especially on internet forums, is that cultural norms and patterns from much later periods of pre-history and involving different groups have been transplanted into time periods when those weapons, norms, patterns, etc. didn't exist.

As I tried to explain, Corded Ware does not, imo, have anything to do with the whole concept of mounted, “cowboys of the steppe”, wielding bronze swords, whose chieftans had dozens of local women in their harems.

Yes, cultures like Corded Ware made use of the wheel, not that they invented it, it having been invented either in MN Europe or the Near East or both. (Please use the search engine to find the papers.) They made use of it in carts, carts which in the early periods were most often pulled by oxen. (Again, use the search engine for the papers.) Yes, that gave them more mobility. Yes, given their heavier reliance on herding, they probably were better positioned, given the climate changes, to provide food for their families. If it's true that they brought plague with them, a plague to which they might have had some immunity, that would have been a huge advantage. In those cases, yes, the native women who survived might have been absorbed.

This has nothing to do with the horse riding, raiding, fighting "cowboys" of the steppe who so fire the imagination of some men. That is part of much later cultural developments and much more emblematic of the Iranian tribes than of what was going on in Europe in the early days of the incursions.


As far as much of northern, northwestern, and northeastern Europe, it's not much of a military invasion when there's almost nobody around to be invaded and you're going into almost uninhabited territory, which may be the case in the British Isles and parts of Northern and Northwestern Europe. Whatever admixture with people of MN Europe took place occurred in Central Europe in an earlier time period.

In southern Europe, the Indo-European speakers were apparently not very steppe like by the time they reached the area, because although in the place where I was born perhaps 50% of the men are R1b, and it’s well over 60% where my father was born, with some yDna I thrown in on top of that, the "Yamnaya" percentage is about 25%, and in addition includes, no doubt, what was contributed by the Celtic migrations of the first millennium BC and the Lombards after the fall of the Empire. So, there doesn't seem to have been such a "massive" invasion at the time the Indo-Europeans entered the peninsula. I also doubt the initial incursions could have been "massive" anywhere given that the steppe lands can't carry "massive" populations. The exponential growth in population must have taken place after they had spent some time further west

I'm not going to bother finding all the studies in my files again because no matter how often I post them they're just ignored by people who prefer the one size fits all narrative. If you're interested you can find them.

Just as an aside, and since you raised the issue, you might also want to go back and look at the narratives written at the time about the Germani and other barbarians who were streaming into the Empire. Many if not most of them were desperate, poor, starving, farmers fleeing in terror from the new steppe populations, who were indeed horse mounted warriors. In many instances it was more like the current mass immigration of refugees from the Middle East into Europe than a highly organized military invasion. That was particularly true for the Lombards. You might want to look up a recent paper on ancient Lombard remains. They were malnourished and sick and altogether in terrible condition when they arrived in Italy.

The "Germani" and other invaders who constituted an actual military force, as in the case with some of the Visigoths, were most often Roman trained, equipped and originally led troops who had accepted Roman pay for their services and then turned around to rend to pieces the weakened host.

With the following I agree:

"I suspect that core-periphery interactions are important for developing the periphery. War and trade with the Romans built up the Germans, with the Chinese it built up the various Northern barbarians, and and the Cucuteni and Maykop presumably did the same for the Yamnaya."


Angela, I agree with you that much of this matter is seen through a kind of frame. So the wild Steppe Warriors raiding to Northern Europe etc.
But even you see things with a kind of "Latin frame" as old as the way to Rome ;)
In the North "almost nobody around to be invaded" that's a classic Latin frame.

And I think I'am in a sort of way biased too. But what I try to do is in the reconstruction of the past by comparing archeological findings with DNA research.

The last few days I've read a lot of the ethnogenesis of the German. Simply because the family finder the results of Gedmatch some analysis of Tomenable "stickered" me as classical Northwest European as German.

The result of this research. Germanic is a invention of the Romans, of Julius Caesar c.s. Nothing more nothing less. Some studies like that of Lillian Keller (and early on in het nineteenth century) tried to to make a reconstruction of a "volk". Clearly nineteenth and twentieth century nationalism. I guess this was besides reality, there was never one Germanic story, like that of the Roman and Latin one. The story of Germans is much more divers.

But still, how about my DNA which has striking simmilarities with that of the Danes!? And the Germanic languages, don't they have some same roots!?

So a kind of puzzle. On the one hand we see Germanic diversity, mingling on the other hand some things DNA, language, building of farmhouses and so, show some similarities!

One of these similarities in Northwestern or Germanic Europe could be the influence of the Unetice culture. My picture is not that of hordes but DNA and archeological evidence show more than acculturalization it shows clearly a immigration and a take over!

Huitzilopochtli
05-12-16, 02:06
My point, which I don’t see that you have addressed, is that the arrival of the Indo-European speakers took a different form depending on the place and the time period of the intrusion. What has happened, especially on internet forums, is that cultural norms and patterns from much later periods of pre-history and involving different groups have been transplanted into time periods when those weapons, norms, patterns, etc. didn't exist.

As I tried to explain, Corded Ware does not, imo, have anything to do with the whole concept of mounted, “cowboys of the steppe”, wielding bronze swords, whose chieftans had dozens of local women in their harems.


How many women could a chieftain keep in his harem?



Yes, cultures like Corded Ware made use of the wheel, not that they invented it, it having been invented either in MN Europe or the Near East or both. (Please use the search engine to find the papers.) They made use of it in carts, carts which in the early periods were most often pulled by oxen. (Again, use the search engine for the papers.) Yes, that gave them more mobility. Yes, given their heavier reliance on herding, they probably were better positioned, given the climate changes, to provide food for their families. If it's true that they brought plague with them, a plague to which they might have had some immunity, that would have been a huge advantage. In those cases, yes, the native women who survived might have been absorbed.


If there was a plague, the IEs may have escaped it by being healthier. As I recall, Corded Ware people were healthier than their predecessors. The IEs had won and expanded their territory for food production and the farmers had been defeated and had lost theirs.



This has nothing to do with the horse riding, raiding, fighting "cowboys" of the steppe who so fire the imagination of some men. That is part of much later cultural developments and much more emblematic of the Iranian tribes than of what was going on in Europe in the early days of the incursions.


I went back and checked Anthony. The "horse riding, raiding, fighting "cowboys" of the steppe” is a near-perfect description of what he concludes Indo-Europeans were like from 4300 B.C. onward.


For instance, he writes (pg 239)


Cattle raiding was encouraged by Indo-European beliefs and rituals. The myth of Trito, the warrior, rationalized cattle theft as the recovery of cattle that the gods had intended for the people who sacrificed properly. Proto-Indo-European initiation rituals included a requirement that boys initiated into manhood had to go out and become like a band of dogs or wolves—to raid their enemies.28 Proto-Indo-European also had a word for bride-price, *uedmo-.29 Cattle, sheep, and probably horses would have been used to pay bride-prices, since they generally are valued higher than other currencies for bride-price payments in pastoral societies without formal money.30 Already in the preceding centuries domesticated ani- mals had become the proper gifts for gods at funerals (e.g., at Khvalynsk). A relatively small elite already competed across very large regions, adopting the same symbols of status—maces with polished stone heads, boar's tusk plaques, copper rings and pendants, shell disc beads, and bird-bone tubes. When bride-prices escalated as one aspect of this competition, the result would be increased cattle raiding by unmarried men. Combined with the justification provided by the Trito myth and the institution of male-initiation-group raiding, rising bride-prices calculated in animals would have made cross-border raiding almost inevitable. If they were on foot, Eneolithic steppe cattle raiders might have attacked one another or attacked neighboring Tripolye settlements. But, if they were mounted, they could pick a distant target that did not threaten valued gift partnerships. Raiding parties of a dozen riders could move fifty to seventyfive head of cattle or horses fairly quickly over hundreds of kilometers. 31 Thieving raids would have led to deaths, and then to more serious killing and revenge raids. A cycle of warfare evolving from thieving to revenge raids probably contributed to the collapse of the tell towns of the Danube valley. What kinds of societies lived on the steppe side of the frontier? Is there good archaeological evidence that they were indeed deeply engaged with Old Europe and the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture in quite different ways?


To my knowledge, the distinctly Indo-Iranian innovations were violent war between chiefdoms (as opposed to just raiding) and the chariot. Is there any reason to rule out an Indo-European invention of the wheel? My understanding of the consensus is that it could have been invented anywhere between Germany and Iran. Was the steppe lacking prerequisite technologies to invent it?





As far as much of northern, northwestern, and northeastern Europe, it's not much of a military invasion when there's almost nobody around to be invaded and you're going into almost uninhabited territory, which may be the case in the British Isles and parts of Northern and Northwestern Europe. Whatever admixture with people of MN Europe took place occurred in Central Europe in an earlier time period.

In southern Europe, the Indo-European speakers were apparently not very steppe like by the time they reached the area, because although in the place where I was born perhaps 50% of the men are R1b, and it’s well over 60% where my father was born, with some yDna I thrown in on top of that, the "Yamnaya" percentage is about 25%, and in addition includes, no doubt, what was contributed by the Celtic migrations of the first millennium BC and the Lombards after the fall of the Empire. So, there doesn't seem to have been such a "massive" invasion at the time the Indo-Europeans entered the peninsula. I also doubt the initial incursions could have been "massive" anywhere given that the steppe lands can't carry "massive" populations. The exponential growth in population must have taken place after they had spent some time further west


I never thought of it, but if someone had asked me before Haak et al. what the genetic impact of the Indo-Europeans was on Modern Europe I probably would have guessed 10-20% at the most. The sheer scale of the turnover is what got me interested in ancient DNA. Even people like Anthony, expected that IEs would have constituted a small percentage of the population. The IEs reshaped Europe's gene pool on a scale equal to or approaching that of the Conquistadors on Latin America. And since the invasion was serial, these figures underestimate the total turnover in any particular location. The genetic turnover in Italy may well have been over 50% if the newcomers were like the Bell Beaker sample in Haak. In the North, it appears to have been like Argentina or even North America.

Goga
05-12-16, 02:23
How many women could a chieftain keep in his harem?
True story: My Aryan (Ezdi Kurdish) great, great, great, grandfather (from whom I got my Y-DNA) was the only doctor / medicine man (known as 'hakim' in the Middle East) in a region as big as Luxemburg. He had everything. So sometimes when he healed wealthy (Ezdi Kurdish) merchants they gave to him their daughters as a sign of respect & gratitude. At the end he had 7 wifes (all Ezdi Kurds, since Ezdi Kurds marry only Ezdi Kurds and don't mix with outsiders. Children from mixed marriages are not Ezdi anymore). Only from 1 wife he got a son. And I'm a descedant of his only son. To my current knowledge he was the only ancestor who had more than 1 wife though...

Angela
15-03-17, 16:32
The findings of this paper have been refuted by Reich, Lazardis et al.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33749-Failure-to-replicate-sex-bias-in-steppe-migrations?p=503715#post503715

See also:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33749-Failure-to-replicate-sex-bias-in-steppe-migrations?p=503715#post503715