PDA

View Full Version : More Neolithic Y-DNA and mtDNA from Hungary, Germany and Spain (Lipson et al. 2017)



Maciamo
07-03-17, 17:04
It's been raining ancient DNA samples lately! 127 new ancient DNA samples, including 82 Y-DNA, from various Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultures in Europe.

Parallel ancient genomic transects reveal complexpopulation history of early European farmers (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/03/06/114488.full.pdf+html)

Abstract

Ancient DNA studies have established that European Neolithic populations were descended from Anatolian migrants who received a limited amount of admixture from resident hunter-gatherers. Many open questions remain, however,about the spatial and temporal dynamics of population interactions and admixture during the Neolithic period. Using the highest-resolution genome wide ancient DNA data set assembled to date—a total of 177 samples, 127 newly reported here, from the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of Hungary (6000–2900 BCE, n = 98), Germany (5500–3000 BCE, n = 42), and Spain (5500–2200 BCE, n = 37)—we investigate the population dynamics of Neolithization across Europe. We find that genetic diversity was shaped predominantly by local processes, with varied sources and proportions of hunter-gatherer ancestry among the three regions and through time. Admixture between groups with different ancestry profiles was pervasive and resulted in observable population transformation across almost all cultural transitions. Our results shed new light on the ways that gene flow reshaped European populations throughout the Neolithic period and demonstrate the potential of time-series-based sampling and modeling approaches to elucidate multiple dimensions of historical population interactions.


You will find a summary of the samples on pages 27-28 of the main article, and another list including only the new Y-DNA samples on pages 45-47 of the supplementary information (http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2017/03/06/114488.DC1/114488-1.pdf). I only had a quick look, but so far most of the samples are what one would have expected to find. The Y-DNA haplogroups are the same as those reported before in Neolithic Europe: G2a, H2, I2a1, I2a2, I2c + a few I*, CT, C1a2 and even R1* and R1b1*. There are just a few interesting samples.

- One E1b1b1a1b1 (L618, just upstream of V13) in Lengyel, meaning that V13 could really have developed in Central Europe during the Early Bronze Age from remnants of Neolithic E-L618. This E1b1b sample and the J2a in Lengyel are probably the same as the E1b1b and J2 reported in Anna Szécsényi-Nagy's 2015 thesis (http://ubm.opus.hbz-nrw.de/volltexte/2015/4075/pdf/doc.pdf), so not new to us, but at least we have a little bit more details about the subclade (the E-M78 is E-L618 and the J2 is in fact a J2a).

- One H1b1 in Lengyel. That one is odder. Haplogroup H1 is mostly South Asian and associated with Gypsies in Europe. However that is mostly H1a. H1b1 is such a rare haplogroup that I couldn't even find where it is found today.


P.S.: I am not sure that there are actually 127 new samples in this study. It looks like many of them came from other studies.

MarkoZ
07-03-17, 17:21
Interesting, Mesolithic/Neolithic Blätterhöhle from Western Germany has Y-DNA R1 at 66%. The site yielded something like 400 skeletons or so I've heard.

Angela
07-03-17, 18:43
Interesting, Mesolithic/Neolithic Blätterhöhle from Western Germany has Y-DNA R1 at 66%. The site yielded something like 400 skeletons or so I've heard.

I think it's R1b1, isn't it? So, it's WHG?

When you have admixed people like this it's hard to know to whom to attribute the autosomal ancestry.

MarkoZ
07-03-17, 19:46
I think it's R1b1, isn't it? So, it's WHG?

When you have admixed people like this it's hard to know to whom to attribute the autosomal ancestry.

Yes, it's R1 and R1b1 (there's also another R at Mesolithic Quedlinburg in Eastern Germany). They're the most HG admixed samples (54%) in this paper, and their HG input is modelled as Loschbour + Villabruna/KO1, so less eastern-shifted than your usual WHG. The third guy belongs to I2a1.

berun
07-03-17, 20:57
Two wandering Yamnayans so (two fish-eaters buried in an extended kurgan known in English language as "mountain", no surprises so).

The Iberian samples are pre-BB.

Angela
07-03-17, 21:09
I wonder then if the R1b is the "WHG" part of "EHG" if that makes any sense? Could there be a reservoir of them in some as yet unsampled corner of the Balkans or the Carpathians? Or did they move down from the far north into both Central Europe and the steppes?

The autosomal admixtures of these Blatterhole samples from a burial cave are very interesting. (These are the samples which Bollingino et al sampled.) The whole set up is rather odd. There was admixture going both ways, contrary to the speculation in that paper, i.e. the "farmers", so delineated through analysis of what they consumed in terms of food, are about 40-50% WHG, and one (?) of the fisher/foragers is 25% EEF, and yet despite using the same burial cave the two groups led very separate and distinct lives.

See our discussions of Bollongino et al:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29148-Two-major-new-papers-on-Early-Neolithic-to-Early-Bronze-Age-mtDNA-in-Central-Europe?highlight=Bollongino

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31738-WHGs-and-EEFs-lived-side-by-side-for-2000-years-long-preserving-genetic-distinctness?highlight=Bollongino

As I noted above, the conclusions were incorrect. They were not genetically distinct and had admixed extensively.

Maybe this was one very admixed family? I have to check if they did an IBD analysis. Or perhaps, as I think Jean Manco speculated at the time that Bollongino et al came out, this was admixture with a recently arrived group from further north? That might make sense given the Baltic region R1b?

It seems, too, that fishing was the way that these foragers found to maintain their lifestyle and resist farming, given that the game would either have fled or been severely depleted by the more numerous farmers.

I think it's pretty clear that it's indeed difficult for hunter-gatherers to adopt the farming lifestyle: they just don't like it, period. This is 2,000 years after the arrival of farming, correct?

This might also explain why there are in some Neolithic settlements so few marine remains. Maybe it was a sort of split of the resources leading to relative peace between the two groups.

I have to read the paper more carefully when I get a chance. Does anyone know if the pre or para E-V13 sample and the J2a are the same samples from Lengyel which were already published, or are they new?

Nice to know it's J2a anyway. Is it resolved enough to know where it appears as far as modern distribution?

What about ATP3?

arvistro
07-03-17, 21:58
In Latvia 1000s of years later in Curonia coast..
"In Curonia, the Livonian language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livonian_language) and culture also came under heavy pressure, but here it retained a last foothold on the outermost tip of the Curonian Peninsula. Several factors made sure that in this area, known as Līvõd rānda, the Livonian Coast, Latvian culture was too weak to assimilate the Livonians. For one thing, the society of the Livonians living in this area was exclusively sea-oriented and based on fishing, while that of the Latvians in the interior was exclusively land-oriented and mostly agricultural. This meant there was not a lot of interaction between the two groups."

Jason Neuharth
07-03-17, 23:14
I2375 TISO_1b ALPc_MN I2a2a1b1 Tiszadob-´Oken´ez 5300–4900 bc
I2377 TISO_13a ALPc_MN I2a2a Tiszadob-´Oken´ez 5208–4942 bc
I2379 HELI_11a ALPc_MN Hejokurt-Lidl 5209–4912 bc
I2a2a1b (x I2a2a1b1)
I4188 POPI_5a ALPc_MN I2a2a Polgar-Piocas 5300–4900 bc ...
I2793 GEN_67 Tiszapolgar_ECA 4444–4257bc
I2a2a1b (xI2a2a1b1)
I2467 Inventario 0/4 Iberia_CA I2a2a El Sotillo 2481–2212bc
I2473 ES-6G-110 Iberia_CA I2a2a El Sotillo 2916–2714 bc
I3269 LY.II.A.10.15066 Iberia_CA I2a2a Las Yurdinas II 3350–2750 bc
https://sway.com/Af7wxNjs1ZCdAZsi

berun
07-03-17, 23:15
A good example; just imagine how many fish-eaters R1b could be in Atlantic Europe living side to side with EEF.

bicicleur
07-03-17, 23:49
A good example; just imagine how many fish-eaters R1b could be in Atlantic Europe living side to side with EEF.

why would they have been R1b?

either these Atlantic fish-eaters became extinct or they integrated in the neolithic, most likely in the megalithic
that is where R1b should have been observed then, I guess

bicicleur
08-03-17, 00:18
Yes, it's R1 and R1b1 (there's also another R at Mesolithic Quedlinburg in Eastern Germany). They're the most HG admixed samples (54%) in this paper, and their HG input is modelled as Loschbour + Villabruna/KO1, so less eastern-shifted than your usual WHG. The third guy belongs to I2a1.

the one with the HG lifestyle is the I2a1
the R1 and R1b1 + the 4th one all had farmer lifestyle
but admixture here was much higher than elsewhere

berun
08-03-17, 00:57
There were in Europe R1b WHG, if they spread to the Baltic they were capable to do the travel NW also. For their integration with farmers it could be similar as that done with I2, but I can't deny that some could copy their lifestyle and spread a culture more suitable for harsh areas.

bicicleur
08-03-17, 09:55
the one with the HG lifestyle is the I2a1
the R1 and R1b1 + the 4th one all had farmer lifestyle
but admixture here was much higher than elsewhere

when I think about it, these R1 and R1b1 probably came from SW Asia, just like the R1b-V88 in Els Trocs
in Eastern Europe they all were R1b-P297, and these here probably were not

bicicleur
08-03-17, 10:20
I think G and H2 arrived in SW Asia from India during LGM, bringing geometric microliths to Kebaran and Zarzian.
Geometric microliths were invented in India 35 ka.
Already before LGM monsoon winds shifted and desertification started, with the Thar desert expanding all over northwest India & Pakistan.

https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00439-017-1773-z/MediaObjects/439_2017_1773_Fig5_HTML.gif

in this scheme, H4 = H2
other H started to expand in India before LGM, but G1, G2 and H2 (H4 in the pic) expanded only after LGM
also F1, F2 and F3 are Indian or in Indochina or SW China now

Maciamo
08-03-17, 10:59
Two wandering Yamnayans so (two fish-eaters buried in an extended kurgan known in English language as "mountain", no surprises so).

The Iberian samples are pre-BB.

Since when did Yamnayans belong to R1* and R1b1*? These are lineages that date back to the Palaeolithic and formed respectively 23,000 and 20,000 years ago according to Yfull, at the time of the LGM. Over 15,000 years separate them from the lineages found in Yamna!

Maciamo
08-03-17, 11:01
when I think about it, these R1 and R1b1 probably came from SW Asia, just like the R1b-V88 in Els Trocs
in Eastern Europe they all were R1b-P297, and these here probably were not

No, I think they are just Palaeolithic remnants, otherwise they would have been reported as R1b-V88.

bicicleur
08-03-17, 11:35
No, I think they are just Palaeolithic remnants, otherwise they would have been reported as R1b-V88.

I'm not saying they were R1b-V88, but IMO they were moving along the same migration routes as R1b-V88.

They seem to have been acting slightly different from other LBK arrivals though, hence the high level of integration with local HG.

bicicleur
08-03-17, 11:41
both Barcin Neo and first European farmers were FEF
FEF is modelled as an admixture of WHG, Iran Neo and Levant Neo.
So WHG was also present in Anatolia.
I think the admixture started with obsidian trade from Cappadocia, which started 16 ka, about the TMRCA of G2a, and with fishermen moving along the south Anatolian shores and into the Aegean. That is witnessed by the first exploration of Cyprus 12.5 ka and arrival of Melos obsidian in the Peleponesos 13 ka.

8548

Hasan Dag in Cappadocia
I have been there once
it's a magic place

MarkoZ
08-03-17, 11:44
Since when did Yamnayans belong to R1* and R1b1*? These are lineages that date back to the Palaeolithic and formed respectively 23,000 and 20,000 years ago according to Yfull, at the time of the LGM. Over 15,000 years separate them from the lineages found in Yamna!

I doubt they are R1* and R1b1* and R* (in the case of Quedlinburg) - looks like they haven't been further defined due to coverage issues.


I wonder then if the R1b is the "WHG" part of "EHG" if that makes any sense? Could there be a reservoir of them in some as yet unsampled corner of the Balkans or the Carpathians? Or did they move down from the far north into both Central Europe and the steppes?

The autosomal admixtures of these Blatterhole samples from a burial cave are very interesting. (These are the samples which Bollingino et al sampled.) The whole set up is rather odd. There was admixture going both ways, contrary to the speculation in that paper, i.e. the "farmers", so delineated through analysis of what they consumed in terms of food, are about 40-50% WHG, and one (?) of the fisher/foragers is 25% EEF, and yet despite using the same burial cave the two groups led very separate and distinct lives.

As I noted above, the conclusions were incorrect. They were not genetically distinct and had admixed extensively.

Maybe this was one very admixed family? I have to check if they did an IBD analysis. Or perhaps, as I think Jean Manco speculated at the time that Bollongino et al came out, this was admixture with a recently arrived group from further north? That might make sense given the Baltic region R1b?

Yes, I think that R1b looks like it came from the 'WHG' portion. Though I don't understand why you'd see it as coming from the north, when there's R1b1 in Italy 2000-5000 years before the first great apes set foot in the Baltics and Fennoscandia. Those northern hunters came from the south with the Epipaleolithic Azillian-Federmesser complex centered in France & Spain.

I'd think that the route many already inferred from the structure of R1b will hold true after all: West Asia -> Kosovo (M269) -> Southern Italy -> Spain/France.

bicicleur
08-03-17, 18:38
I'd think that the route many already inferred from the structure of R1b will hold true after all: West Asia -> Kosovo (M269) -> Southern Italy -> Spain/France.

Kosovo (M269)
which one is this ?

berun
08-03-17, 19:09
Since when did Yamnayans belong to R1* and R1b1*? These are lineages that date back to the Palaeolithic and formed respectively 23,000 and 20,000 years ago according to Yfull, at the time of the LGM. Over 15,000 years separate them from the lineages found in Yamna!

It was an ironic comment, not realy scientific.

But what it is true is that from "R1b came from the steppes as only was found there", now I'm eating a lot of pop corn seeing the steppe fans and fanatics of other forums in a denial state about the possibility that L51 appeared where it is now. I need to go to buy extra kilos of pop corn for the next weeks.

MOESAN
09-03-17, 21:50
It was an ironic comment, not realy scientific.

But what it is true is that from "R1b came from the steppes as only was found there", now I'm eating a lot of pop corn seeing the steppe fans and fanatics of other forums in a denial state about the possibility that L51 appeared where it is now. I need to go to buy extra kilos of pop corn for the next weeks.

Possible; to date I think (without too much personal investment) that Y-L51 was born around Eastern Balkans (not Western I suppose) or a bit more northern, and took two routes: a mediterranean one, isles and Cy until Valencia through S-Italy, and a Danube one towards Alps... But who knows? if at clannic times, an Y lineage can keep on pure (Y-haplo speaking) a long time spite crossing alot of lands, it can pass unseen during sometimes before new archeology discoverings sing an other song...

IronSide
11-03-17, 19:58
The I2c is I2c a+ am I right ? isn't it the oldest one found ?

Sparkey would like this

holderlin
11-03-17, 20:51
Two wandering Yamnayans so (two fish-eaters buried in an extended kurgan known in English language as "mountain", no surprises so).

The Iberian samples are pre-BB.

First mountains were found in Leyla-Tepe

berun
11-03-17, 22:41
With that about kurgans it's a very tricky matter. To do a mound is a quite usual solution to reuse the earth of a burial, per example in some Mississipi cultures, and I doubt they have any relation with Yamnayans. Other case is megalithism itself, many dolmens were in fact buried in earth so their shape was identical of that of a kurgan. Sometimes I go to think if many kurgans are a would-be dolmen in a region with lack of big rocks.

MOESAN
17-03-17, 00:25
I agree for a part - differences between geographically close cultures sepultures have sone meaning, vague ressemblances between cultures neatly geographically separated have less meaning... details are needed.

patrician
08-04-17, 23:47
Experimentation with agriculture dates to 22,000 YBP at the site of Ohalo in the Galilee region of Israel. This period of time was characterized by the Kebaran culture in the Levant region of West Asia, on the eastern mediterranean coast, sites sprung up such as Nahal Oren some 16,000 years ago. The succeeding culture (Natufian, roughly 14,000 YBP) was composed of semi-sedentary hunter gatherers living across the southern Levant that probably are the ancestors of the neolithic revolution`s first farmers. By the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (roughly 11,000 YBP) the advent of farming had arrived with the arrival of the world`s first cities. Sites like Jericho sprang up across the Jordan Valley towards Syria`s Golan heights. By the later PPNB (9,000-10,000 YBP), the neolithic package would have spread to nearby Cyprus and Anatolia from an origin point further within the Fertile Crescent. By roughly 8,500 years ago the Neolithic package would have reached westernmost Anatolia and the fringes of the Aegean world. Sites first began to appear in south-eastern Europe (Greece and the Balkans) particularly at Knossos (Crete) and on peninsular Greece at Franchthi cave and Thessaly. by 5,000 YBP farming had spread across mediterranean and central Europe reaching the British Isles. The mtdna haplogroups most closely associated with the neolithic revolution and it`s spread are Mtdna`s K1a, X1/X2 and N1a/N1b. On the y-dna side haplogroups F, G2a, H2, T1a and E-m123 subclades are associated with the neolithic revolution's spread from it's original origin point around Palestine/Israel in the southern Levant and it's subsequent expansion from the Jordan river valley to the Tagus river of Spain/Portugal via both mainland and maritime routes.

Angela
09-04-17, 16:37
Experimentation with agriculture dates to 22,000 YBP at the site of Ohalo in the Galilee region of Israel. This period of time was characterized by the Kebaran culture in the Levant region of West Asia, on the eastern mediterranean coast. the succeeding culture (Natufian, roughly 14,000 YBP) was composed of semi-sedentary hunter gatherers living across the southern Levant that probably are the ancestors of the neolithic revolution`s first farmers. By the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (roughly 11,000 YBP) the advent of farming had arrived with the arrival of the world`s first cities. Sites like Jericho sprang up across the Jordan Valley towards Syria`s Golan heights. By the later PPNB (9,000-10,000 YBP), the neolithic package would have spread to nearby Cyprus and Anatolia from an origin point further within the Fertile Crescent. By roughly 8,500 years ago the Neolithic package would have reached westernmost Anatolia and the fringes of the Aegean world. Sites first began to appear in south-eastern Europe (Greece and the Balkans) particularly at Knossos (Crete) and on peninsular Greece at Franchthi cave and Thessaly. by 5,000 YBP farming had spread across mediterranean and central Europe reaching the British Isles. The mtdna haplogroups most closely associated with the neolithic revolution and it`s spread are Mtdna`s K, X and N. On the y-dna side haplogroups G2a, H2, T1a and E-m123 subclades are associated with the neolithic revolution.

If a lot of this post was a quote from another source, it should have been enclosed in quotes and you should have provided a link to that source.

Also, we've already posted a lot here about the agricultural revolution which might interest you. Please avail yourself of the search engine to find them.

stevenarmstrong
09-04-17, 19:13
Hello, everyone. Please forgive my ignorance--I'm relatively new to all this. But it was my understanding that R1b lineages in Europe arose from bronze-age incursions from the steppe peoples. Am I then misreading some of your posts when you appear to write that it is instead associated with "indigenous" WHG populations?

Sile
09-04-17, 20:56
Experimentation with agriculture dates to 22,000 YBP at the site of Ohalo in the Galilee region of Israel. This period of time was characterized by the Kebaran culture in the Levant region of West Asia, on the eastern mediterranean coast. the succeeding culture (Natufian, roughly 14,000 YBP) was composed of semi-sedentary hunter gatherers living across the southern Levant that probably are the ancestors of the neolithic revolution`s first farmers. By the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (roughly 11,000 YBP) the advent of farming had arrived with the arrival of the world`s first cities. Sites like Jericho sprang up across the Jordan Valley towards Syria`s Golan heights. By the later PPNB (9,000-10,000 YBP), the neolithic package would have spread to nearby Cyprus and Anatolia from an origin point further within the Fertile Crescent. By roughly 8,500 years ago the Neolithic package would have reached westernmost Anatolia and the fringes of the Aegean world. Sites first began to appear in south-eastern Europe (Greece and the Balkans) particularly at Knossos (Crete) and on peninsular Greece at Franchthi cave and Thessaly. by 5,000 YBP farming had spread across mediterranean and central Europe reaching the British Isles. The mtdna haplogroups most closely associated with the neolithic revolution and it`s spread are Mtdna`s K, X and N. On the y-dna side haplogroups G2a, H2, T1a and E-m123 subclades are associated with the neolithic revolution.

Your dates are out
Y-dna side haplogroups G2a, H2, T1a1 where already settled and farming and potting in central Germany 7100ybp ............part of LBK culture

Fire Haired14
10-04-17, 02:13
Hello, everyone. Please forgive my ignorance--I'm relatively new to all this. But it was my understanding that R1b lineages in Europe arose from bronze-age incursions from the steppe peoples. Am I then misreading some of your posts when you appear to write that it is instead associated with "indigenous" WHG populations?

R1b existed throughout Mesolithic Europe and probably Asia. R1b-L151 specifically, the type 50%+ of men in France and Iberia and the British Isles belong to, derives from Bronze age Steppe incursions. The R1b Mesolithic Europeans belonged to, besides R1b-L151 which is ultimatly from Mesolithic Europe, basically went extinct.

Some people here might argue R1b L151 is from Mesolithic Western Europeans but they're wrong. There's already sneak peaks from an upcoming ancient DNA paper confirming R1b and Steppe ancestry were introduced to Western Europe together. Papers to be published sometime this summer will bring an end to any debate about the origins of R1b L151.

MarkoZ
10-04-17, 06:03
Some people here might argue R1b L151 is from Mesolithic Western Europeans but they're wrong. There's already sneak peaks from an upcoming ancient DNA paper confirming R1b and Steppe ancestry were introduced to Western Europe together. Papers to be published sometime this summer will bring an end to any debate about the origins of R1b L151.

What do you make of the absence of Western European R-GG400 in the phylogenetic analysis by Balanovsky et al. then? I think this makes Yamnaya a rather unlikely source of L51 and the later Western branches. One would expect to see at least some of the Yamnaya Y-DNA retained in West Europe vis-à-vis Neolithic-Mesolithic lineages despite founder effects in S116/U106, but it appears to be absent. Granted with the starlike pattern of M269 it's near impossible to be completely certain where the specific branches ultimately originated, but the general pattern doesn't really indicate a Russian origin.

LeBrok
10-04-17, 06:37
What do you make of the absence of Western European R-GG400 in the phylogenetic analysis by Balanovsky et al. then? I think this makes Yamnaya a rather unlikely source of L51 and the later Western branches. One would expect to see at least some of the Yamnaya Y-DNA retained in West Europe vis-à-vis Neolithic-Mesolithic lineages despite founder effects in S116/U106, but it appears to be absent. Granted with the starlike pattern of M269 it's near impossible to be completely certain where the specific branches ultimately originated, but the general pattern doesn't really indicate a Russian origin.Yamnaya was huge. Let's see what can be find in all its corners.

Fire Haired14
10-04-17, 08:15
Granted with the starlike pattern of M269 it's near impossible to be completely certain where the specific branches ultimately originated, but the general pattern doesn't really indicate a Russian origin.

That's because often modern Y DNA can tell us very little about the origins of haplogroups. This summer we'll probably get ancient DNA from Western Erope confirming that R1b-L151 exapnded with people heavy in Steppe ancestry. We might even get a R1b-L151 or even R1b-P312 straight from a Steppe sample. I would not be surprised at all.

MarkoZ
10-04-17, 15:08
That's because often modern Y DNA can tell us very little about the origins of haplogroups. This summer we'll probably get ancient DNA from Western Erope confirming that R1b-L151 exapnded with people heavy in Steppe ancestry. We might even get a R1b-L151 or even R1b-P312 straight from a Steppe sample. I would not be surprised at all.

But in this case it can. Have you read the paper?

We already know that Bell Beaker had affinity to Corded Ware. However, its strongest affinity judging by the Rathlin samples appears to be to KO1.


Yamnaya was huge. Let's see what can be find in all its corners.

Perhaps so, but it's already by far the best studied archaeological culture in the corresponding timeframe, bar none. It would be slightly baffling if the main lineage stays put and survives in Mordvins, Kalmyks, Tatars, Ukrainians and so forth, while an elusive oddball goes on to make an epic conquest thousands of kilometers further west. Not impossible, but rather unlikely.

Fire Haired14
10-04-17, 21:28
I'm going to start collecting posts which dispute R1b-L151's Steppe origin. Then, in maybe a few months, when ancient DNA proves its Steppe origin I'll show all the naysayers their posts.

stevenarmstrong
11-04-17, 04:58
R1b existed throughout Mesolithic Europe and probably Asia. R1b-L151 specifically, the type 50%+ of men in France and Iberia and the British Isles belong to, derives from Bronze age Steppe incursions. The R1b Mesolithic Europeans belonged to, besides R1b-L151 which is ultimatly from Mesolithic Europe, basically went extinct.

Some people here might argue R1b L151 is from Mesolithic Western Europeans but they're wrong. There's already sneak peaks from an upcoming ancient DNA paper confirming R1b and Steppe ancestry were introduced to Western Europe together. Papers to be published sometime this summer will bring an end to any debate about the origins of R1b L151.

Thank you!

holderlin
11-04-17, 05:13
But in this case it can. Have you read the paper?

We already know that Bell Beaker had affinity to Corded Ware. However, its strongest affinity judging by the Rathlin samples appears to be to KO1.


A steppe originating male line would be significantly admixed by the time it gets to Scotland, just like Rathlin. I don't think a "stronger affinity" to KO1 really says anything, if I even buy it. Rathlin clearly has steppe ancestry which is the only thing that really matters.



Perhaps so, but it's already by far the best studied archaeological culture in the corresponding timeframe, bar none. It would be slightly baffling if the main lineage stays put and survives in Mordvins, Kalmyks, Tatars, Ukrainians and so forth, while an elusive oddball goes on to make an epic conquest thousands of kilometers further west. Not impossible, but rather unlikely.


How is this unlikely? We have historical records of steppe cultures doing exactly this, repeatedly. These were the original horse Nomads, which is why they were such a vast culture and why their language is spoken from India to Ireland. How is L151 an "elusive oddball"? It's a descendant of lines we've found in ancient samples on the steppe. Just because we haven't found an ancient L151 or something closer doesn't make it a special mystery that undermines the notion of a steppe origin.

holderlin
11-04-17, 05:30
I'm going to start collecting posts which dispute R1b-L151's Steppe origin. Then, in maybe a few months, when ancient DNA proves its Steppe origin I'll show all the naysayers their posts.It won't matter. We could unfreeze a frozen R1b-L151 Samara HG back to life and even if he was speaking Hittite some people would still deny steppe PIE or L151 origin.

berun
11-04-17, 07:17
deleted post

berun
11-04-17, 07:23
Oh yes, and there are so many dumb people as me that don't believe very much that Earth is flat, in fact we might have some mental unpairment to recognise easily plain facts as you bros.

By the way neither you nor Firehaired have found out that in the last CWC and BB papers the archaeologists admit the lack of material proofs linking the steppe with such cultures?

MarkoZ
11-04-17, 07:56
I'm going to start collecting posts which dispute R1b-L151's Steppe origin. Then, in maybe a few months, when ancient DNA proves its Steppe origin I'll show all the naysayers their posts.

It's quite immaterial to me where R1b-L151 originated - I'm perfectly happy with an origin on the steppe.

However, Balanovsky et al. raise some good points which no one really addressed. Prophecies about future publications are boring.

stevenarmstrong
11-04-17, 08:03
However, Balanovsky et al. raise some good points which no one really addressed.

Such as? (genuinely curious)

Fire Haired14
11-04-17, 08:04
It won't matter. We could unfreeze a frozen R1b-L151 Samara HG back to life and even if he was speaking Hittite some people would still deny steppe PIE or L151 origin.
http://cdn28.us1.fansshare.com/photograph/rayliotta/ray-liotta-laughing-in-goodfellas-laugh-828190630.jpg

MarkoZ
11-04-17, 08:23
Such as? (genuinely curious)

The main lineage found in Yamnaya (R1b-GG400) appears to have a rather local distribution within Europe, being mostly confined to eastern groups like Tatars, Mordvins, Ukrainians. It's summarized in Fig. 4:

https://images.readcube-cdn.com/publishers/springer/figures/448e4a65bb00019cc0e2392f1fa3b71e6de04cd072f6d664c2 5fc4b9f3f64778/4.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/6NTJ1kY.png

For their method/discussion you'll have to delve into the paper yourself (they essentially compared equal representative samples of various Eastern and Western European populations).

berun
11-04-17, 15:44
MarkoZ, that is not problematic as Yamnayists have as a matter of faith that they will find R1b-L51 and R1a in the Pontic steppe. If there are not material proofs about an expansion from the steppes to Europe DNA proofs don't matter also. I like this way to do science, it's possible to do everything possible!

holderlin
11-04-17, 16:19
Oh yes, and there are so many dumb people as me that don't believe very much that Earth is flat, in fact we might have some mental unpairment to recognise easily plain facts as you bros.

By the way neither you nor Firehaired have found out that in the last CWC and BB papers the archaeologists admit the lack of material proofs linking the steppe with such cultures?I didn't call anyone dumb. We are of course ignoring the fact that alot of Bell Beakers are just bell shaped corded ware.

holderlin
11-04-17, 16:29
MarkoZ, that is not problematic as Yamnayists have as a matter of faith that they will find R1b-L51 and R1a in the Pontic steppe. If there are not material proofs about an expansion from the steppes to Europe DNA proofs don't matter also. I like this way to do science, it's possible to do everything possible!

I think PIE was pre-yamnaya.

I don't believe "have as a matter of fact" is really fair. There is now inexhaustible data indicating a steppe/NE European origin of IE. No one who buys this is ignoring anything.

If you take all of the data: Archaeological, linguists, historical, and genetic, it's all supportive of this.

In my opinion, the only other alternative that has SOME chance is Caucuses, but you bump into alot of problems. Next would be Zagros, which is even less likely. Remember we have historical records begining in 3000BC very close to some of these proposed West Asian homelands. Where are the Indoeuropeans? They're no where to be found, until Hittite of course, which is plainly obvious as are Iranians when they come on the historical scene 500 years later.

berun
11-04-17, 22:28
I didn't call anyone dumb. We are of course ignoring the fact that alot of Bell Beakers are just bell shaped corded ware.
Your reasoning can fall easily in a trap: Bell Beaker people didn't married local CWC people? why BB has a lesser "steppe" component if they came from there?? Just simple questions.

berun
11-04-17, 22:35
I think PIE was pre-yamnaya.

I don't believe "have as a matter of fact" is really fair. There is now inexhaustible data indicating a steppe/NE European origin of IE. No one who buys this is ignoring anything.

If you take all of the data: Archaeological, linguists, historical, and genetic, it's all supportive of this.

In my opinion, the only other alternative that has SOME chance is Caucuses, but you bump into alot of problems. Next would be Zagros, which is even less likely. Remember we have historical records begining in 3000BC very close to some of these proposed West Asian homelands. Where are the Indoeuropeans? They're no where to be found, until Hittite of course, which is plainly obvious as are Iranians when they come on the historical scene 500 years later.
Obviously is a matter of faith, nor fact, to believe that R1a and L51 was in Ukraine.

But you are buying a car without motor: from archaeology there are not evidences, from linguistics there are a lot of animal and vegetal therms not found in the steppes, from the historical data you might quote which classic is pointing to the steppe, and from genetics all it is said, even by the labs, that CW came from a Yamnaya like pop. All this about the steppe is a big bluff that has survived so much as it was the theory that make some sense and by being feed by holy cows that can't see other things that fantastic green prairies. For the indoeuropean Urheimat I don't think it could be sought more south.

Fire Haired14
12-04-17, 12:58
But you are buying a car without motor: from archaeology there are not evidences, from linguistics there are a lot of animal and vegetal therms not found in the steppes, from the historical data you might quote which classic is pointing to the steppe

Archaeology, lingustics, and history aren't as good at detecting ancient migrations as ancient DNA. If ancient DNA says one thing and archeaology says another, ancient DNA wins.

Dov
12-04-17, 19:04
Well, now to deny the Indo-European and Eastern European origin of R1b-L151 does not make much sense anymore. But the issue of their localization is still open, in my opinion. At the same time, there are some facts:

1. There are no archaeological witnesses of the influence of Yamnaya on the bell beakers.
2. But there is an archaeological evidence of the influence of Corded Ware on Bell Beakers. Some archaeologists see cultural influence, and someone sees even a direct cultural-genetic relationship between them.
3. These genetic maps from Balanovsky generally support this version.
http://s019.radikal.ru/i637/1704/ee/b9650431aa7f.jpg

http://s020.radikal.ru/i701/1704/b2/132d273b0511.jpg
CW have relationship with all Europeans, while the eastern yamnaya is quite far.

Perhaps some Western European R1b were also in some CW branches? Although this does not exclude finding them in the western Yamnaya. For now it makes sense, but it's better to wait for the test results.

But to talk about the entire Yamaya as ancestral for IE and the Europen people in particular is impossible.
Berun once led a good counterargument, note of the pigmentation gene. At least the eastern part of Yamnaya is physically impossible to be ancestral for a fair modern european population, unlike Corded Ware.

berun
12-04-17, 19:17
@Firehaired, I would expect that the three sisters would go together, if none is going to the place then the theory is wrong; for DNA you have R1b in Yamna, R1a in Corded Ware, do you think you win with that? now a touchdown in your own end zone scores for you?

Why the way I have some funny animated gifs ready.

berun
12-04-17, 19:25
@ Dov, these maps are taking actual populations right? if they would test also actual Americans they would be also included in such CWC area right? CWC-related people was in America? no? yes? If the answer is no you can reconsider the answer for when arrived such CWC-like in each European region, taking into account Germanics, Celts, and a lot of people moving on.


2. But there is an archaeological evidence of the influence of Corded Ware on Bell Beakers. Some archaeologists see cultural influence, and someone sees even a direct cultural-genetic relationship between them.

Can you give the details? when going to the details is when we can distinguish good investigation from refined crackpottery.

Dov
12-04-17, 19:45
@ Dov, these maps are taking actual populations right?
Yes, as I understand it.

Can you give the details? when going to the details is when we can distinguish good investigation from refined crackpottery.
http://генофонд.рф/?page_id=24226
It seems, it was in this discussion, whose members, including archaeologists. You can try Google translate. Maybe later I will find it more specific.
By the way, there noticed that the inclusion cattle breeding, agriculture, military affairs and transport in the PIE language was unjustified. The original vocabulary was reduced to wild animals and plants, to hunting and gathering and their tools.

holderlin
12-04-17, 22:32
Srendny Stog will be the link we need.

Archaeology shows undoubtable mixing with the balkans, so I expect to see the first steppe/EEF mixing here. Sredny Stog is also where we find the first proto-corded ware type of pottery. It all makes sense. This is a great candidate for CW origins. We already see an R1a in Dneiper Donets right below Sredny Stog.

I see this as the most likely origin of Western European R1b lines as well for much the same reasoning.

If all of this turns out to be true, then we would also be compelled to back date the PIE time period to just before Yamnaya, which also makes sense because this is right when we see undoubtable influx of farming material culture.

Fire Haired14
12-04-17, 22:43
for DNA you have R1b in Yamna, R1a in Corded Ware, do you think you win with that? now a touchdown in your own end zone scores for you?

No, there's a lot more evidence(essentially proof) than that. But I won't waste my time presenting it because you'll ignore it like you have for the last 2 years.


Why the way I have some funny animated gifs ready.

You won't be able to use them. The Steppe genetic-R1a/b thing was proven years ago. It's still a "debate" because some people, who for whatever reasons don't like it, refuse to accept it.

Fire Haired14
12-04-17, 23:08
Well, now to deny the Indo-European and Eastern European origin of R1b-L151 does not make much sense anymore. .....

1. There are no archaeological witnesses of the influence of Yamnaya on the bell beakers.
2. But there is an archaeological evidence of the influence of Corded Ware on Bell Beakers. Some archaeologists see cultural influence, and someone sees even a direct cultural-genetic relationship between them.

If Bell Beaker received Steppe ancestry from Corded Ware(100% R1a) who did they receive R1b L23 from? Over 100 Y DNA samples from Neolithic Western and Central Europe have been sequenced. Not a single sample has R1b L23. But some 90% of Yamnaya indviduals do. Plus there's documentation of R1b in Mesolithic Russia.

Because of how culture can change, especially when it mixes with other peoples, a lack of cultural similarities between Yamnaya and Bell Beaker isn't good evidence Bell Beaker didn't partially decended from an R1b L23 Yamnaya group.

When populations migrate and mix with other populations their culture changes. German Bell Beaker was genetically as much Steppe as it was Neolithic European. Maybe their Steppe ancestry is from Yamnaya-like groups who lost their Steppe culture or even Western Yamnaya.


3. These genetic maps from Balanovsky generally support this version.
...(Maps)...


Those are Y DNA maps. Eastern Yamnaya was a relative of Bell Beaker not an ancestor, which is Yamnaya carried differnt Y DNA. Yamnaya's R1b is a brother to Bell Beaker's R1b not an ancestor.

CW have relationship with all Europeans, while the eastern yamnaya is quite far.

CW had R1a, which is only popular in Eastern Europe and Scandinavia(Corded Ware territory).


But to talk about the entire Yamaya as ancestral for IE and the Europen people in particular is impossible.

I, and I think most people who believe Bell Beaker R1b is from the Steppe, don't think necessarily Yamnaya contributed ancestry to Europeans. We think close relatives of Yamnaya or Yamnaya did.

Berun once led a good counterargument, note of the pigmentation gene. At least the eastern part of Yamnaya is physically impossible to be ancestral for a fair modern european population, unlike Corded Ware.

Natural selection can change pigmentation. Therefore, pigmentation isn't good evidence. A pigmentation change is documented in Baltic countries. Baltic Corded Ware was relatively dark, but their descendants 2,000 years later were as pale as modern Balts.

holderlin
13-04-17, 05:24
Archaeology, lingustics, and history aren't as good at detecting ancient migrations as ancient DNA. If ancient DNA says one thing and archeaology says another, ancient DNA wins.But remember that in many cases on here we're talking about a language in the first place, so there must be sanity checks with any one kind of evidence.

berun
13-04-17, 14:38
@Dov, I saw the map about such kurgans in Central Europe, but not knowing dates neither typology I just take it with caution (if dou you wish I can display you "kurgans" older than Yamnaya in West Europe); moreover when in the last CWC paper the authors need to travel back to the Globular amphora to justify a material relation with the steppes... not explaining if such relation was mutual, southern, or northerner.

@holderlin, Yamnyans were "free" of EEF DNA, so they couldn't trace their origin to Sredny Stog if that would be the case; moreover archeology can't find again expansion from there...


But I won't waste my time presenting it because you'll ignore it like you have for the last 2 years.

ha, it's you that don't take proofs, being such proofs lack of R1a in Yamnya or when you stick that U5a came from the steppes after showing U5a in Chalco Iberia.


Because of how culture can change, especially when it mixes with other peoples, a lack of cultural similarities between Yamnaya and Bell Beaker isn't good evidence Bell Beaker didn't partially decended from an R1b L23 Yamnaya group.

When populations migrate and mix with other populations their culture changes. German Bell Beaker was genetically as much Steppe as it was Neolithic European. Maybe their Steppe ancestry is from Yamnaya-like groups who lost their Steppe culture or even Western Yamnaya.

just a piece that can be used to demonstrate whichever supposition, but in science it's not a valid methodology, but it's good to create the history that fits better your wishes.

Dov
13-04-17, 18:59
Those are Y DNA maps. Eastern Yamnaya was a relative of Bell Beaker not an ancestor, which is Yamnaya carried differnt Y DNA. Yamnaya's R1b is a brother to Bell Beaker's R1b not an ancestor.
This is the genetic distance from the gene pool of the population of culture. Nothing written about the Y-Dna


CW had R1a, which is only popular in Eastern Europe and
.Scandinavia(Corded Ware territory).
I mean, that genetically modern Western Europeans are more like corded ware, and not to the eastern yamnaya, according by Balanovsky map. Although, culturally also. In the late BB there is a corded ornament, burial is dead body on its side.



I, and I think most people who believe Bell Beaker R1b is from the Steppe, don't think necessarily Yamnaya contributed ancestry to Europeans. We think close relatives of Yamnaya or Yamnaya did.
I do not argue with this and do not rule it out.


Natural selection can change pigmentation. Therefore, pigmentation isn't good evidence. A pigmentation change is documented in Baltic countries. Baltic Corded Ware was relatively dark, but their descendants 2,000 years later were as pale as modern Balts.

This is the result of sexual selection, according to anthropologist Peter Frost. This is a unique event that occurred in a short time in the late Paleolithic among mammoth hunters. With a shortage of men, lighter women, which more sexually attractive and preferred, and therefore give more offspring.
http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(05)00059-0/abstract

Hence the variety of colors among descendants of these populations. There are no other such cases. Therefore, there is no reason to think that a dark pigmentaion of the Yamnaya will suddenly turn out fair.

Dov
13-04-17, 19:04
berun
Returning to yesterday's issue I wanted to clarify. The black circles on the map are the tested populations. So the color of the map is largely extrapolation. It is necessary to look only at the tested populations.

Also about CW and BB:
Central European BBs are ultimately all influenced by corded, so they have a corded pattern and other attributes, like burial of the body on its side.


Srendny Stog will be the link we need.

Archaeology shows undoubtable mixing with the balkans, so I expect to see the first steppe/EEF mixing here. Sredny Stog is also where we find the first proto-corded ware type of pottery. It all makes sense. This is a great candidate for CW origins. We already see an R1a in Dneiper Donets right below Sredny Stog.

I see this as the most likely origin of Western European R1b lines as well for much the same reasoning.

If all of this turns out to be true, then we would also be compelled to back date the PIE time period to just before Yamnaya, which also makes sense because this is right when we see undoubtable influx of farming material culture.
Yes, it sounds interesting. Would be nice learn their DNA.

Dov
13-04-17, 19:29
I'll try to structure some thoughts at the moment:

1. 10 KYA, the surviving people from the final Upper Paleolthic sites follower to glacier up to the Ancilus (Baltic) Sea and the Upper Volga.
http://s011.radikal.ru/i316/1703/3a/378a62325910.png
http://s016.radikal.ru/i336/1704/32/4aa6e2f532e1.png

2. Mesolithic burials and cultures are known along the lines of Veret'e, Oleni Ostrov, Zveyneyki, Butovo and later Elshanka. Probably this can be taken as the reference point of proto-proto-IE. This is consistent with the common northern vocabulary of the flora and fauna of the primordial PIE vocabulary.

3. Indo-Europeans from Khvalynsk were the first to tame a horse,and spreading this innovation to all neighboring Indo-European cultures. They themselves were probably the ancestors of the eastern yamnaya, and therefore no modern Indo-European people, who comes from them. Probably it is an extinct branch, and also dissolved in other nations.

4. Almost all modern Indo-European populations, including Indo-Iranians, come from more Western cultures. Such as the Middle-Dniepr and others.

MOESAN
13-04-17, 19:59
With that about kurgans it's a very tricky matter. To do a mound is a quite usual solution to reuse the earth of a burial, per example in some Mississipi cultures, and I doubt they have any relation with Yamnayans. Other case is megalithism itself, many dolmens were in fact buried in earth so their shape was identical of that of a kurgan. Sometimes I go to think if many kurgans are a would-be dolmen in a region with lack of big rocks.

Agree - eastern tumuli could be seen as kind of Dolmens without big stone - that said, it doesn't put our question to go forwards;.at the social level, they are at the opposite, nevertheless; collective re-used burials against individual one-use burials -

berun
13-04-17, 20:25
@ Dov, the burial of a body in its side... it's what it's necessary when your interment hole is little. You can find this "solution" all over the world.

@ MOESAN, there are megalithic cultures burying only an individual, sometimes two (the spouse).

MarkoZ
13-04-17, 20:45
If Bell Beaker received Steppe ancestry from Corded Ware(100% R1a) who did they receive R1b L23 from? Over 100 Y DNA samples from Neolithic Western and Central Europe have been sequenced. Not a single sample has R1b L23. But some 90% of Yamnaya indviduals do. Plus there's documentation of R1b in Mesolithic Russia.

The sampling of western & central Europe has until now been confined to very specific regions, unfortunately. Now that R1 dominated cultures (66% R1 in Blätterhöhle!) are turning up where some of us long thought they'd turn up, I think these at least deserve further testing. Of course, West Germany as such cannot be the source, which should be sought in the as yet completely unsampled late French Mesolithic, perhaps ultimately via the Spanish Azillian.

If R-L151 is in Western Yamnaya and those West Germans are on extinct lines that's alright. Until then Balanovsky's reservations should be taken into consideration, IMHO. This wouldn't be controversial at all if the whole thing wasn't relevant to that odious Indo-European question.

RE Kurgans: I think the defining characteristic should be that the Kurgan is a single male burial, as opposed to the collective burial mounds of Europe which were also often round in shape. As such I think it's safe to say that the first Kurgans appear in Azerbaijan without obvious connections to earlier cultures.

MarkoZ
13-04-17, 21:20
A steppe originating male line would be significantly admixed by the time it gets to Scotland, just like Rathlin. I don't think a "stronger affinity" to KO1 really says anything, if I even buy it. Rathlin clearly has steppe ancestry which is the only thing that really matters.

You don't have to buy it, just look up Cassidy et al.:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TUMkimoUu3A/VojmPTmmHWI/AAAAAAAADTs/9-TElYUc1mM/s1600/F3.png

The affinity to KO1 is stronger even than the affinity the Rathlin individuals have to each other. Of course this doesn't tell us where their Y-DNA is from.

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.abstract

holderlin
14-04-17, 05:36
@Dov, I saw the map about such kurgans in Central Europe, but not knowing dates neither typology I just take it with caution (if dou you wish I can display you "kurgans" older than Yamnaya in West Europe); moreover when in the last CWC paper the authors need to travel back to the Globular amphora to justify a material relation with the steppes... not explaining if such relation was mutual, southern, or northerner.

@holderlin, Yamnyans were "free" of EEF DNA, so they couldn't trace their origin to Sredny Stog if that would be the case; moreover archeology can't find again expansion from there...



ha, it's you that don't take proofs, being such proofs lack of R1a in Yamnya or when you stick that U5a came from the steppes after showing U5a in Chalco Iberia.



just a piece that can be used to demonstrate whichever supposition, but in science it's not a valid methodology, but it's good to create the history that fits better your wishes.Bro, I'm saying that PIE was Eneolithic steppe/Forest Zone which probably extended into what we would call Europe, a thousand years before Yamnaya proper. Look at the sharing of male lines from Vistual to Urals from the Mesolithic to the Bronze age. I'm not a Yamnayist. I believe that Yamnaya was Indic/Indo-Iranian sounding already. You're absolutely right when you say that there is little evidence to exclude Europe from the PIEs possible homelands. I'm with you in so far as we don't include Western Europe, which would be highly unlikely.

holderlin
14-04-17, 06:13
I'll try to structure some thoughts at the moment:

1. 10 KYA, the surviving people from the final Upper Paleolthic sites follower to glacier up to the Ancilus (Baltic) Sea and the Upper Volga.
http://s011.radikal.ru/i316/1703/3a/378a62325910.png
http://s016.radikal.ru/i336/1704/32/4aa6e2f532e1.png

2. Mesolithic burials and cultures are known along the lines of Veret'e, Oleni Ostrov, Zveyneyki, Butovo and later Elshanka. Probably this can be taken as the reference point of proto-proto-IE. This is consistent with the common northern vocabulary of the flora and fauna of the primordial PIE vocabulary.

3. Indo-Europeans from Khvalynsk were the first to tame a horse,and spreading this innovation to all neighboring Indo-European cultures. They themselves were probably the ancestors of the eastern yamnaya, and therefore no modern Indo-European people, who comes from them. Probably it is an extinct branch, and also dissolved in other nations.

4. Almost all modern Indo-European populations, including Indo-Iranians, come from more Western cultures. Such as the Middle-Dniepr and others.

I agree with most of this. I don't know when exactly a language would be recognized as pPIE, but there has to be some mesolithic root of IE, unless it was a lingua franca between Caucasian and something else.

I do think Samara were the first horse riders. Sredny Stog/Novodanilovka/kemi Oba and KKhvalynsk were all likely horse riders, but these cultures seem to be radiating out of the Samara Valley/Volga. Dneiper Donets is very similar to Samara (essentially identical in most ways), as is Sredny Stog to Khvalynsk, and there was a smooth transition to Sredny Stog from Dneiper Donets, so you don't really need an external origin for Sredny Stog, but it seems to coexist alongside Dneiper Donets for sometime before they were finally enveloped. So it's fair to assume that the Samara region is the epicenter of this cultural advancement.

But, given the clear evidence of interrelations since the mesolithic you might imagine an early version of PIE being spoken across the entire region since a long time ago.

This is why IE languages in Europe are so hard to trace. It's because they were very close to being there all along.

holderlin
14-04-17, 16:45
You don't have to buy it, just look up Cassidy et al.:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TUMkimoUu3A/VojmPTmmHWI/AAAAAAAADTs/9-TElYUc1mM/s1600/F3.png

The affinity to KO1 is stronger even than the affinity the Rathlin individuals have to each other. Of course this doesn't tell us where their Y-DNA is from.

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.abstract

Thanks for the link. I don't know what science you're talking about but where I'm from there's always a narrative to go along.

I'm accepting of this comparison, but I don't think is really matters. As I posted above, I'm not a Yamnayist. I think PIE may have essentially been in Europe as much as it was on the steppe.

Dov
15-04-17, 12:50
@ Dov, the burial of a body in its side... it's what it's necessary when your interment hole is little. You can find this "solution" all over the world.

Yes, there are similarities like this, but here it is cultural borrowing and ritual-sacral context. Just as the CW before this borrowed this method of burial from the Balkan farmers, once.

CW
http://s019.radikal.ru/i628/1704/a3/83c7e7c2cf37.jpg

BB
http://s019.radikal.ru/i612/1704/2c/741d14dc54b5.jpg

Yamnaya
http://s020.radikal.ru/i707/1704/b2/35851c6ec634.jpg

Dov
15-04-17, 16:16
I agree with most of this. I don't know when exactly a language would be recognized as pPIE, but there has to be some mesolithic root of IE, unless it was a lingua franca between Caucasian and something else.

I do think Samara were the first horse riders. Sredny Stog/Novodanilovka/kemi Oba and KKhvalynsk were all likely horse riders, but these cultures seem to be radiating out of the Samara Valley/Volga. Dneiper Donets is very similar to Samara (essentially identical in most ways), as is Sredny Stog to Khvalynsk, and there was a smooth transition to Sredny Stog from Dneiper Donets, so you don't really need an external origin for Sredny Stog, but it seems to coexist alongside Dneiper Donets for sometime before they were finally enveloped. So it's fair to assume that the Samara region is the epicenter of this cultural advancement.

But, given the clear evidence of interrelations since the mesolithic you might imagine an early version of PIE being spoken across the entire region since a long time ago.

This is why IE languages in Europe are so hard to trace. It's because they were very close to being there all along.

Well, in general, there is no evidence of using a horse as a transport before Sintashta. Before that, Indo-Europeans used castrated bulls harnessed to the wagon. Probably originally horse was the food and may be pack animal. It is unlikely that they ride on horses, there is no evidence.

About Mesolithic.
It was very little studied in archeology previously time. Now the situation is changing.
In the Mesolithic Veret'e-Popovo there is already a burial of a child of 7-9 years with two dogs. Such burials with two dogs then found in the Corded Ware. Probably this is the birth of the Indo-European funeral cult and the myth about two dogs (now called "Hellhound") - guides and friends in the afterlife. Later transformed into:
-Two-headed Cerberus in Greek mythology (this variant oldest and more visually represented)
-Two dogs of Indian God of the dead Yama - Sarvara and Udumbala.
-Two dogs in the Avesta, guarding the Chinwad Bridge in the world of the dead.
-etc.
Also noteworthy is the funeral of Patroclus in the Iliad. Achiless killed two dogs, and threw them into the funeral pyre to Patroclus.

It is astoundingly, that the roots of this apparently from North Mesolithic.

LeBrok
15-04-17, 17:15
Well, in general, there is no evidence of using a horse as a transport before Sintashta. Before that, Indo-Europeans used castrated bulls harnessed to the wagon. Probably originally horse was the food and may be pack animal. It is unlikely that they ride on horses, there is no evidence.

About Mesolithic.
It was very little studied in archeology previously time. Now the situation is changing.
In the Mesolithic Veret'e-Popovo there is already a burial of a child of 7-9 years with two dogs. Such burials with two dogs then found in the Corded Ware. Probably this is the birth of the Indo-European funeral cult and the myth about two dogs (now called "Hellhound") - guides and friends in the afterlife. Later transformed into:
-Two-headed Cerberus in Greek mythology (this variant oldest and more visually represented)
-Two dogs of Indian God of the dead Yama - Sarvara and Udumbala.
-Two dogs in the Avesta, guarding the Chinwad Bridge in the world of the dead.
-etc.
Also noteworthy is the funeral of Patroclus in the Iliad. Achiless killed two dogs, and threw them into the funeral pyre to Potrokl.

It is astoundingly, that the roots of this apparently from North Mesolithic.D. Antony claims that he discovered a wear on horse teeth from wearing a bit, in Botai culture of 4th Millennium BC. Steppe horses were small and easy to mount and ride. I'm sure that once they were domesticated they were ridden too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botai_culture

Dov
15-04-17, 17:36
D. Antony claims that he discovered a wear on horse teeth from wearing a bit, in Botai culture of 4th Millennium BC. Steppe horses were small and easy to mount and ride. I'm sure that once they were domesticated they were ridden too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botai_culture
Yes I know. But apparently this is an erroneous interpretation of Anthony. In the Russian archeological science disagree with him, including Kuznetsov, who worked in the team of Anthony. Probably it's just a chipped tooth, and not a deformation from the bits. It looks different.

LeBrok
15-04-17, 18:01
Yes I know. But apparently this is an erroneous interpretation of Anthony. In the Russian archeological science disagree with him, including Kuznetsov, who worked in the team of Anthony. Probably it's just a chipped tooth, and not a deformation from the bits. It looks different. Put yourself in situation of horse herder. You are around horses all they to keep an eye on them, right. You are a young boy. Wouldn't you have an idea to sit on one just for fun? They were not big intimidating horses. They were small tarpan type horse, almost like ponies. Now multiply this by thousands of such boys through few generations. It would be a miracle if few of them didn't start riding them.
Heck, to domesticate horses, one need to be able to move with them to find fresh grass every day. How would you keep up with horses if you don't ride one? How could you find your herd on foot? Probably, they needed to rid horses first to domesticate them or both at same time.
It is very hard to find a proof of first horse riding, because they rode them without any specialized equipment, like Prairie Indians long time ago. Jump on them and hold on to horse mane. It took a long time to invent and improve horse riding with specialized horseware. This is very conceivable that they rode horses for at least one thousand years before we could find such equipment to prove horse riding.

Listen to D. Anthony:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29727-Favorite-Lectures-About-Ancient-Times-History-Lessons?p=429179&viewfull=1#post429179

Olympus Mons
15-04-17, 19:33
@Dov
You are making a narrative. Which is fine. Nothing against it. But you do leap a lot. Try to fill in the blanks a bit more.

MarkoZ
15-04-17, 19:44
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0018194.g001

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0018194

There's no reason to believe the horse was domesticated in the steppe. Iberia + Iran still looks like the best bet. Heyd mentions in his recent paper that horses were far more important in Neolithic Esperstedt than in either Bell Beaker or Corded Ware.

Angela
15-04-17, 20:01
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0018194.g001

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0018194

There's no reason to believe the horse was domesticated in the steppe. Iberia + Iran still looks like the best bet. Heyd mentions in his recent paper that horses were far more important in Neolithic Esperstedt than in either Bell Beaker or Corded Ware.

It doesn't matter. You can post all the archaeology findings, all the genetics, all the data out there that shows that Corded Ware people came with very few horses (and Bell Beaker as well), certainly weren't riding in on them bashing the Neolithic people about, whatever was going on in the steppe then or, more likely, later, but instead were walking alongside their cattle driven wagons, and it won't make a bit of difference. I've been saying all of this, and linking to the relevant research, since the time of dna forums, but it hasn't made a bit of difference.

This image of the horse riding warrior bringing Indo-European languages to Europe is so beloved by some people, has so captured the imagination of a lot of men, that they won't let go of it no matter the proof.

stevenarmstrong
15-04-17, 20:32
It doesn't matter. You can post all the archaeology findings, all the genetics, all the data out there that shows that Corded Ware people came with very few horses (and Bell Beaker as well), certainly weren't riding in on them bashing the Neolithic people about, whatever was going on in the steppe then or, more likely, later, but instead were walking alongside their cattle driven wagons, and it won't make a bit of difference. I've been saying all of this, and linking to the relevant research, since the time of dna forums, but it hasn't made a bit of difference.

This image of the horse riding warrior bringing Indo-European languages to Europe is so beloved by some people, has so captured the imagination of a lot of men, that they won't let go of it no matter the proof.

Besides, BBC was a maritime culture. But if they were bringing horses along with them on those boats, well then that's just pretty darn impressive.

Dov
15-04-17, 20:50
@Dov
You are making a narrative. Which is fine. Nothing against it. But you do leap a lot. Try to fill in the blanks a bit more.
I do not make "narrative". Not one word. It's just the transmission of the words of professional scientists.
Thanks.

holderlin
15-04-17, 20:50
Well, in general, there is no evidence of using a horse as a transport before Sintashta. Before that, Indo-Europeans used castrated bulls harnessed to the wagon. Probably originally horse was the food and may be pack animal. It is unlikely that they ride on horses...

No


there is no evidence.

There is a ton of evidence.

It's a hotly disputed topic that people like to dismiss because it supports the crucial role of the domestic horse in IE expansions. I'm pretty sold on it for these reasons:



They had domestic horses, which were definitely used as a meat source.
There are antler cheek pieces with holes to fix a bit, so we have to conclude that they were putting bridles on their horses. There's only one reason to bridle a horse and that's to steer it.
The role of the horse is central in these cultures. It's everywhere in their art and ritual. Horse headed sceptors and horse figurines are all over the place as are horse sacrifices.
Sredny Stog and Khvalynsk were predominantly stock breeders, which included horses, cattle, sheep and pigs. There are wheat grinders and other tools associated with grain processing but there's far more evidence for stock breeding. It would be very difficult to control herds of horses and cattle without riding horses. Most would actually say that it would be impossible with only Eneolithic technology to aid you otherwise. Knowing how useful horse riders would be in such a culture while knowing that they had domestic horses that were definitely being bridled, it's hard not to conclude that they were riding horses.


One thing that's sort of strange is that the copper items found in Sredny Stog and Khvalynsk come from the Balkans, and yet we see no EEF in Khvalynsk, which is why I'm expecting to see it in Sredny Stog. Based on proximity mostly and material culture.


About Mesolithic.
It was very little studied in archeology previously time. Now the situation is changing.
In the Mesolithic Veret'e-Popovo there is already a burial of a child of 7-9 years with two dogs. Such burials with two dogs then found in the Corded Ware. Probably this is the birth of the Indo-European funeral cult and the myth about two dogs (now called "Hellhound") - guides and friends in the afterlife. Later transformed into:
-Two-headed Cerberus in Greek mythology (this variant oldest and more visually represented)
-Two dogs of Indian God of the dead Yama - Sarvara and Udumbala.
-Two dogs in the Avesta, guarding the Chinwad Bridge in the world of the dead.
-etc.
Also noteworthy is the funeral of Patroclus in the Iliad. Achiless killed two dogs, and threw them into the funeral pyre to Patroclus.

It is astoundingly, that the roots of this apparently from North Mesolithic.

This is very interesting. Dogs are also known to Sredny Stog and Khvalynsk.

People forget how deliberate burial arrangements are. Two dogs are probably not coincidental.

MarkoZ
15-04-17, 21:23
There are antler cheek pieces with holes to fix a bit, so we have to conclude that they were putting bridles on their horses. There's only one reason to bridle a horse and that's to steer it.
I think the Dereivka cheekpiece was re-dated to the Scythian Iron Age.

holderlin
15-04-17, 22:02
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0018194.g001

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0018194

There's no reason to believe the horse was domesticated in the steppe. Iberia + Iran still looks like the best bet. Heyd mentions in his recent paper that horses were far more important in Neolithic Esperstedt than in either Bell Beaker or Corded Ware.

Good paper, but it in no way opposes horse domestication on the steppe 7000 years ago. The very act of domesticating animals creates homozygosity. The best interpretation of this data is probably that lines in Europe have undergone more selective breeding. Why would the thousands of square miles of dry grassland on the steppe not be considered as a good habitat?


There's no reason to believe the horse was domesticated in the steppe.

This is absurd.


It doesn't matter. You can post all the archaeology findings, all the genetics, all the data out there that shows that Corded Ware people came with very few horses (and Bell Beaker as well), certainly weren't riding in on them bashing the Neolithic people about, whatever was going on in the steppe then or, more likely, later, but instead were walking alongside their cattle driven wagons, and it won't make a bit of difference. I've been saying all of this, and linking to the relevant research, since the time of dna forums, but it hasn't made a bit of difference.

CWC and BB weren't steppe pastoralists. They were more settled, but they certainly rode horses.

holderlin
15-04-17, 22:14
I think the Dereivka cheekpiece was re-dated to the Scythian Iron Age.I know they found some conflicting spectral data, but the same bridle components are also found in Khvalysnk, so it doesn't change anything other than that Iranians have been utilizing the same technology for thousands of years.

MarkoZ
15-04-17, 22:39
I know they found some conflicting spectral data, but the same bridle components are also found in Khvalysnk, so it doesn't change anything other than that Iranians have been utilizing the same technology for thousands of years.

Dereivka = Khvalynsk (I've only encountered this name in Anthony's book)

It's quite unambiguous. The re-dating was done by Anthony.

holderlin
15-04-17, 22:52
Dereivka = Khvalynsk (I've only encountered this name in Anthony's book)

It's quite unambiguous. The re-dating was done by Anthony.No, Dereivka is a Sredny Stog site. Khvalynsk is much further east on the Volga. Of course, as I keep reiterating time and again, the material cultures are essentially identical.

holderlin
15-04-17, 22:53
So Sredny Stog = Khvalynsk would be more accurate

MarkoZ
15-04-17, 22:57
I looked it up and it seems to be a little further east, you're right. What evidence is there for cheek pieces?


So Sredny Stog = Khvalynsk would be more accurate

That's confusing.

holderlin
15-04-17, 23:28
I looked it up and it seems to be a little further east, you're right. What evidencEupedia : European Travel, Trivia, History & Population Genetics (http://www.eupedia.com/)e is there for cheek pieces?



That's confusing.

Sredy Stog is the same period as Khvalynsk and their artifacts are essentially identical.

Khvalynsk also had antler cheek pieces with holes that acted as bit fixtures.

Of course there's always the possibility that I'm smoking crack on this. Most of these papers are old. Widespread nomadic horse pastoralism isn't really known until much later, but these early steppe cultures look to be utilizing the domestic horse for transport as well as food. It's a central figure to their culture and it remains so until recorded history. Just read the Avestas and the Vedas.

holderlin
16-04-17, 00:01
It's funny too, the central role that cattle and horses played in Aryan culture is probably the most interesting part, and yet people who can't accept a steppe origin are forced to dismiss it, or down play it. It's sad.

MarkoZ
16-04-17, 00:07
Khvalynsk also had antler cheek pieces with holes that acted as bit fixtures.

Are you sure? I thought Anthony now sees the earliest evidence of cheek pieces in Kazakh Botai culture.

Though I'm not sure why horse bits were rare or absent for another 1500 years if these had been invented at such an early date. Masha Levine thinks that these people were merely hunters and didn't ride horses, so it's probably not that clear-cut.

As for cattle, cows were important in many cultures I believe. Auroch domestication in Anatolia much predates any development related to PIE.

holderlin
16-04-17, 00:30
Are you sure? I thought Anthony now sees the earliest evidence of cheek pieces in Kazakh Botai culture.

Though I'm not sure why horse bits were rare or absent for another 1500 years if these had been invented at such an early date. Masha Levine thinks that these people were merely hunters and didn't ride horses, so it's probably not that clear-cut.

Botai are early adopters as well.

I'm sure Sredny Stog/Khvalynsk hunted and fished, but they were surely stock breeders. There's domestic pig, sheep, cattle, dogs, and horses.

It's not the actual bit, but the bit fixture that I'm talking about. Not 1500 years. Yamnaya were undoubtedly horse riders with definite cheek pieces found in at least 2 burials that I know of. So it's not that long until we see it for sure. The horse thing is always a hot button. Perhaps people doubt that they were cheek pieces in the earlier layers, but there is definitely evidence of a move towards horse transportation seen in Yamnaya with the same sort of cheek pieces.

When I say "nomadic pastoralism" I'm talking about advanced nomadic pastoralism with field rotation schedules and what not, which aren't definitely known until historical Iranians, but it's not unlikely that Yamnaya was doing this as well. Yamnaya is mostly burials. There's hardly any settlements to speak of, which implies an advanced mobile economy.

holderlin
16-04-17, 00:41
Yes, I'm not attributing cattle domestication to PIE, but you can't utilize the full potential of cattle without horses. It's the combination that is so powerful. It's still utilized today in the most advanced industrialized societies, think about that one.

MarkoZ
16-04-17, 00:56
Botai are early adopters as well.

I'm sure Sredny Stog/Khvalynsk hunted and fished, but they were surely stock breeders. There's domestic pig, sheep, cattle, dogs, and horses.

It's not the actual bit, but the bit fixture that I'm talking about. Not 1500 years. Yamnaya were undoubtedly horse riders with definite cheek pieces found in at least 2 burials that I know of.

You'd think if there were cheekpieces in Yamnaya, Anthony would be very eager to point it out. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, but I think most of the early evidence of bone cheekpieces (i. e. the usually disc-shaped bone plates) are close to 2000 B.C. .

Perhaps cattle-herding on horseback is much more effective on horseback for commerical purposes, but I think that traditional South Asian and African herders still do it mostly by foot.

holderlin
16-04-17, 02:20
Check out the Vinogradovka kurgan for Yamnaya cheekpieces

holderlin
16-04-17, 05:38
You'd think if there were cheekpieces in Yamnaya, Anthony would be very eager to point it out. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, but I think most of the early evidence of bone cheekpieces (i. e. the usually disc-shaped bone plates) are close to 2000 B.C.

2000BC is just after IEs exploded and just before their first languages are attested. Of course that will be in the range of when widespread horse riding is seen, but there are earlier examples for sure.


Perhaps cattle-herding on horseback is much more effective on horseback for commerical purposes

Exactly


Look, we're only considering things in the dirt in this discussion, but if you combine it with the linguistic it would take a very stubborn person to reject the role of horse domestication in PIE speakers. Then add the genetics to everything.

holderlin
16-04-17, 05:55
So just to make things clear, Sredny Stog/Khvalynsk and Lower Mikhaylovka were the undoubted cultures that became Yamnaya. So at the very least, they domesticated the horses that Yamnaya rode.

Dov
16-04-17, 16:39
It's a hotly disputed topic that people like to dismiss because it supports the crucial role of the domestic horse in IE expansions. I'm pretty sold on it for these reasons:



They had domestic horses, which were definitely used as a meat source.
There are antler cheek pieces with holes to fix a bit, so we have to conclude that they were putting bridles on their horses. There's only one reason to bridle a horse and that's to steer it.
The role of the horse is central in these cultures. It's everywhere in their art and ritual. Horse headed sceptors and horse figurines are all over the place as are horse sacrifices.
Sredny Stog and Khvalynsk were predominantly stock breeders, which included horses, cattle, sheep and pigs. There are wheat grinders and other tools associated with grain processing but there's far more evidence for stock breeding. It would be very difficult to control herds of horses and cattle without riding horses. Most would actually say that it would be impossible with only Eneolithic technology to aid you otherwise. Knowing how useful horse riders would be in such a culture while knowing that they had domestic horses that were definitely being bridled, it's hard not to conclude that they were riding horses.


Yes, I know about this dispute.
Yes, in the Sredny Stog was the cult of a horse. In the 1970th it was believed that there were riders. But then arheologists came to the conclusion that the horses there were for the most part wild. And the horse-headed scepters are not horse-headed and not scepters. These are probably mythical unicorns and a priestly instrument. (Klein 2007)
Probably there was originally a cult of a wild horse.

Also, as far as I understand, there are not even any drawings of riders.
Therefore, I belong to the skeptics. The evidence base is currently weak and more speculative.

johen
16-04-17, 17:15
[/LIST]

Yes, I know about this dispute.
Yes, in the Sredny Stog was the cult of a horse. In the 1970th it was believed that there were riders. But then arheologists came to the conclusion that the horses there were for the most part wild. And the horse-headed scepters are not horse-headed and not scepters. These are probably mythical unicorns and a priestly instrument. (Klein 2007)
Probably there was originally a cult of a wild horse.

Also, as far as I understand, there are not even any drawings of riders.
Therefore, I belong to the skeptics. The evidence base is currently weak and more speculative.


The nature of early horse exploitation:

The occurrence of butchered horse bones testify that these animals were exploited for food. This was the initial stage of domestication, according to Bökönyi (1994). The hypothesis that the secondary use of the horse was for riding fighters in the Chalcolithic is not acceptable. Kozshin (1970) interpreted perforated horn objects recovered from Afanasevo Culture sites in Siberia as riding bits, but a number of scholars, including Gryaznov disagree with this interpretation. Danilenko and Shmaglii (1972) and Telegin (1973) have interpreted similar artifacts from Dereivka (Srednii Stog), and declared that the steppe horsebreeder warrior-riders had launched distant military raids. Gimbutas (1990), who received her internship in Germany, and in turn became anti-Soviet (Häusler 1996), wrote about aggressive warriors invading European farmers with fire and a sword, thus attaching a political character to the study. Recently, Anthony (1986), Anthony and Brown (1991), and Liehardus (1984) have revived the hypothesis of militant riders. The riding of horses by warriors of the Chalcolithic period has been already contended (Kuzmina 1977; 1994). Some European cultures, including those that were not familiar with the horse (Dietz 1992) as well as those in China (Komissarov 1980), have produced a number of bone objects that were similar, and according to ethnographic analogies, they may be compared with tools for uniting knots or weaving nets. This interpretation corresponds to the information obtained for fishing in Dereivka and Switzerland.

The Eurasian Steppes The Transition from Early Urbanism to Nomadism
Elena Kuzmina
Russian Institute for Cultural Research

johen
16-04-17, 17:16
edit.............

Dov
16-04-17, 17:32
Danilenko and Shmaglii (1972) and Telegin (1973) have interpreted similar artifacts from Dereivka (Srednii Stog), and declared that the steppe horsebreeder warrior-riders had launched distant military raids.
Yes, this. Now it is believed that a large part of bones found in the Sredny Stog belong to the wild horse. It was an object of hunting.

holderlin
16-04-17, 17:55
I derailed this pretty bad, sorry. Anyway, I think we'll surely find L51 in West Yamnaya or in layers that gave rise to it such as Sredny Stog/Khvalynsk/Lower Mikhaylovka.



[/LIST]

Yes, I know about this dispute.
Yes, in the Sredny Stog was the cult of a horse. In the 1970th it was believed that there were riders. But then arheologists came to the conclusion that the horses there were for the most part wild. And the horse-headed scepters are not horse-headed and not scepters. These are probably mythical unicorns and a priestly instrument. (Klein 2007)
Probably there was originally a cult of a wild horse.

There's horse figurines all over the place going way back, so I'm not buying the unicorn thing. They go back to when they were predominantly hunters and fisherman in the region, so it certainly began with wild horses, but it evolved into something more as we see in historic Aryans who were riding horses. And of course now we know that historic Aryans/Iranians are directly descended from Yamnaya and latter steppe cultures. (Scythian Genomes). So the question is where it began.


Also, as far as I understand, there are not even any drawings of riders.
Therefore, I belong to the skeptics. The evidence base is currently weak and more speculative.

It's certainly open to debate. Whenever you're looking for the origin of something you're dealing with sparse evidence, so there will be skeptics, but now we have genetics.

I believe the first undisputed domestic horse in Europe proper is in Bell Beaker, and what I started off saying, before derailment, was that these BB male lines will be found in West Yamnaya or in layers that gave rise to it such as Sredny Stog/Khvalynsk/Lower Mikhaylovka. So all of this did circle back to my on-topic point.

holderlin
17-04-17, 16:53
Yes, this. Now it is believed that a large part of bones found in the Sredny Stog belong to the wild horse. It was an object of hunting.

I don't buy it.

It's most lilkely that these culture were in the process of domesticating horses because we see definite horse domestication for transport in Yamnaya just after this, and, Sredny Stog/Khvalynsk/Lower Mikhaylovka were definitely stock breeders of several other kinds of domestic animals including cattle, sheep, and pig, so these horses were almost certainly being herded, in which case they wouldn't exhibit the physical changes of horses that had already undergone generations of selective breeding for transport.

They probably herded horses for meat and milk very early on, similar to what we see with Reindeers among the Sami, and at some point realized they could ride them with Yamnaya being the point at which the training and the skill/technology reached a certain maturity. Considering what we see in Yamnaya, even if people doubt that we have actually found bridle components in earlier layers, it would be silly to propose that they didn't initiate and develop the technology leading to Yamnaya.

MarkoZ
17-04-17, 18:45
Check out the Vinogradovka kurgan for Yamnaya cheekpieces

I honestly couldn't find anything googling "Vinogradovka Kurgan".

By the way, wasn't Yamnaya mostly reliant on woolly sheep.

berun
17-04-17, 21:19
Yes, there are similarities like this, but here it is cultural borrowing and ritual-sacral context. Just as the CW before this borrowed this method of burial from the Balkan farmers, once.

CW
http://s019.radikal.ru/i628/1704/a3/83c7e7c2cf37.jpg

BB
http://s019.radikal.ru/i612/1704/2c/741d14dc54b5.jpg

Yamnaya
http://s020.radikal.ru/i707/1704/b2/35851c6ec634.jpg

Dov, you need to clarify if it's casual typology or a real transmission (with other cultural proofs), otherwise I could make funny arguments as that Yamnayans came from France...:

https://rae.revues.org/259

holderlin
18-04-17, 18:00
I honestly couldn't find anything googling "Vinogradovka Kurgan".

By the way, wasn't Yamnaya mostly reliant on woolly sheep.

Yes, I see that it's only mentioned by Mallory. I'll see what I can dig up.

Of course, they were stock breeders and sheep would have played an important role, but if you look at the linguists the horse is a central figure. Being stockbreeder we're going to see all types of animal sacrifices, but the horse looks to be higher status owning to it being in the highest status graves, being more rare in general than sheep/cattle, and all of the horse figurines that are found all the way back to Samara/Dneiper Donets.

In the riches burials we see horse sacrifices, and in the language we see deep rooted myth and religion revolving around horses, the divine twins being the most commonly referred to example. Among the richest burials we see what might be something attributable to the divine twins with dual horses or horse skulls interred with Yamnaya remains along with two headed (doubled) horse figurines.

In the myths of most historic IE speakers there is a Divine twins myth involving two horses, or two horsemen, or some permutation in some cases involving drunkeness. This is in Greek, German, Hittite, Latin, and Indic, so it's surely a PIE thing. If you ask me, it sounds like the oral history of horse domestication. In some cases a member of the royal family mates with a horse that gives birth to the divine twins, which also have associations with what would be dual draft horses. How is this not the oral history of horse domestication for transport?

You can't just focus on one kind of evidence to draw these conclusions. Seriously everyone on this site has Asperger's and loses the forest in the trees. I'm not saying you, but it's common on here. It acts like blinders. Tunnel vision, if you will.

Dov
18-04-17, 19:55
holderlin
The remains of the domesticated horses of Khvalynsk were discovered for the first time is a fact.
The presence of riders in the steppe cultures is not a fact.
But this does not abolish: migrations, domestication of horses, ravaging raids on neighbors (the Sredny Stog on a Tripolye) etc. I just do not see any problems in the presence or absence of riders. They were not, but, apparently, nothing has changed.

berun
Yes, this is a cultural conversion, as a corded ornament in BB.

MarkoZ
18-04-17, 20:14
The remains of the domesticated horses of Khvalynsk were discovered for the first time is a fact.
The presence of riders in the steppe cultures is not a fact.


The problem is that you can't really tell a domesticated horse from a wild horse only by their skeletal morphology. That's why zoologists are looking for premolar wear as an indicator of bit use. Four teeth have been retrieved from Botai sites that show the characteristic premolar degradation, however similar teeth can be found in Chalcolithic Jordan, as well as what appear to be mule skeletons dating to the Bronze Age.


The realisation that some of the bones from the Negev siteswere of horses (Grigson, 1991 and 1993) came as a completesurprise, no one would have expected them at such an earlydate in this area. It has even been suggested that they must beintrusive. However the presence of horse bones in all the siteswith large sample size—Gilat, Shiqmim and Grar, plus thosenewly recognized from the 1993 excavations at Shiqmim andin the smaller assemblage of Abu Matar, is incontrovertible.As we shall see horses of similar size are also present in someearly Bronze sites in the northern Negev.

Figure 3 compares the sizes of the equid bones from theNegev sites and Ghassul with those of the domestic donkeysfrom Maadi (Boessneck, von den Driesch and Ziegler,1989), the wild asses from Kom Ombo in Egypt (Churcher,1972) and the other sites noted above, and with the equidsfrom Shams-ed Dinn, almost all of which Uerpmann (1982and 1986) considered to be onagers. The graph shows a verywide range of variation for the sizes of bones from the Negevsites, and that many of the bones are much larger that thoseof donkeys or onagers; the only explanation is that they are ofhorses, or mules.As stated above the assumption that these Negev horseswere domestic, has been questioned by Wapnish (1997), Levine(1999) and Olsen (2006).

One of the equid teeth at Gilat, Fig. 3, tentatively identified as horse because of its great length, wasa lower second premolar. The crown was worn down past theinternal enamel patterns, the mesial face was so worn that itsloped distally and was polished all over. It is possible that thisis not merely the result of old age, but also of bit-wear, or ratherwear against a rope, signifying that the animal was under closehuman control (Grigson, 2006: 286, pl. 6.1b). The bevel on themesial face is much like that described by Anthony and Brown(1991; 2000), as indicating bit-wear. However Olsen (2006)has observed similar wear on a few of the second premolars ofhorses from the Pleistocene in North America.

http://www.persee.fr/docAsPDF/paleo_0153-9345_2012_num_38_1_5468.pdf

The problem is that neither experimentation with crossing nor premolar wear are reliable indicators of domestication. As the author of the paper mentions, similar patterns of wear have also been found on wild horse skeletons in the Americas. So all we can say is that definitive evidence of horse domestication appears more or less simultaneously in Mesopotamia and Kazakhstan around 2000 B.C..

johen
18-04-17, 20:19
The remains of the domesticated horses of Khvalynsk were discovered for the first time is a fact.
The presence of riders in the steppe cultures is not a fact.
But this does not abolish: migrations, domestication of horses, ravaging raids on neighbors (the Sredny Stog on a Tripolye) etc. I just do not see any problems in the presence or absence of riders. They were not, but, apparently, nothing has changed.


Do you think the Khvalynsk culture or Sredny Stog were culturally and anthropologically connected to EHG as Kein said in the site you quoted?


Mesolithic roots of kinship
According to the real gradient turns out that the source of the genetic complex lies somewhere in the north. This is consistent with long observations L. L. Zaliznyaka of promoting Baltic Mesolithic and postmezoliticheskih cultures from the north to the south-east towards the steppes (Figure 7.), Which is traced by the archeological and anthropological materials (Zaliznyak 1980; 1984; 2016; Zaliznyak 1994; 2005). This agrees with the observation of long-standing archeology and anthropology of similarity kromanoidnogo massive physical type northern mesolit with yamnym anthropological type

http://xn--c1acc6aafa1c.xn--p1ai/wp-content/uploads/karta-dlya-LSK_007_Rus.jpg

Dov
18-04-17, 20:30
The problem is that you can't really tell a domesticated horse from a wild horse only by their skeletal morphology. That's why zoologists are looking for premolar wear as an indicator of bit use. Four teeth have been retrieved from Botai sites that show the characteristic premolar degradation, however similar teeth can be found in Chalcolithic Jordan, as well as what appear to be mule skeletons dating to the Bronze Age.

I already wrote that, the opinion in the Russian archaeologists opinion Botai is error. There it was about bits.

johen
Yes, I think they are related. Both culturally and genetically.

holderlin
18-04-17, 20:55
I believe the first domesticated horse as measured by skeletal morphology is Bell Beaker in Hungary, for reference.

holderlin
18-04-17, 20:59
Do you think the Khvalynsk culture or Sredny Stog were culturally and anthropologically connected to EHG as Kein said in the site you quoted?



http://xn--c1acc6aafa1c.xn--p1ai/wp-content/uploads/karta-dlya-LSK_007_Rus.jpg

Samara HG, Khvalynsk, and Yamnaya Samara are successive layers in the same spot, and we have samples from all three.

EHG->EHG+more CHG->EHG+even more CHG

Mesolithic Steppe (pottery Neolithic)->Eneolithic Steppe->Early Bronze Age Steppe

All related with a clear increasing relation to Caucasians to the South, no doubt Maykop.

MarkoZ
18-04-17, 23:25
I believe the first domesticated horse as measured by skeletal morphology is Bell Beaker in Hungary, for reference.

Marsha Levine believes you really can't tell domesticated & wild apart at such an early date, especially not when we're talking about a single skeleton. Late Neolithic sites in Europe frequently yield horse bones, sometimes with significant variance:


We collected and evaluated, by the ‘logarithmic size index’ (LSI) method, all available postcranial equid bones found in the Czech Republic from the Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age. Material from the Upper Paleolithic (Magdalenien) and Bohemian Late Bronze Age (Knovíz culture) was also included. Two different species of equids were documented: Equus hydruntinus Regalia, 1907 and Equus ferus Boddaert, 1785. The variation in the size of true horses was compared with data published for neighbouring countries. In most periods, the horses are found to be larger in the eastern part of Central Europe than in the western part.

The Czech lands appear to span the border of two worlds: the Pannonian plains and the western, geomorphologically diverse regions. The status of horses in the Neolithic Lengyel period from Moravia remains disputable. However, a high size variability in Eneolithic Funnel Beaker culture (TRB, 3800-3350 BC) together with a non-homogeneous distribution in Řivnáč culture (3100-2800 BC) and a significant increase in size between Lengyel and Baden-Řivnáč horizons (probably already in TRB) combined with the occasional occurrence of unexpectedly large individuals probably indicate the importation of tamed or even domesticated horses as early as the times of TRB culture, which is earlier than claimed in other recent studies, and possibly reflect multiple origins of the horse population. The large variability and repeated diminution in size of horses in the Early Bronze Age (Únětice culture, 2200-1700 BC) could indicate advanced domestication or multiple origins of the populations (or both). The persistence of wild horses in the Early Bronze Age cannot be proved osteometrically, but the presence of domesticated horses is considered certain.

http://sciencepress.mnhn.fr/sites/default/files/articles/pdf/az2016n1a2.pdf

However if you accept that these were domesticated, then so were the horses of Botai and the Chalcolithic Levant. I guess it comes down to what you want to believe.

holderlin
19-04-17, 02:52
I'm not unaccepting of the Botai evidence, although the historical record would rule out horse domestication in West Asia. Horses were clearly intrusive.



However if you accept that these were domesticated, then so were the horses of Botai and the Chalcolithic Levant. I guess it comes down to what you want to believe.

I would say rather that it comes down to why you would be more accepting of one theory vs another. I think I have plenty of reasons in this case.

I1a3_Young
15-06-17, 17:44
It's too bad the supplemental info didn't list all the SNP calls. They gave a few in the descriptions relating to their determination, such as a few derived and a few ancestral. I'm looking to collecting I* and I1 data.

As for horses, it is ridiculous to me to even entertain the idea of a culture domesticating horses for thousands of years and NOT riding them. Heh.

Azzurro
12-11-17, 00:29
There is some Y DNA updates done by Genetiker

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2017/11/08/y-snp-calls-from-neolithic-europe/

Pretty big finds as the second E-L618 was found, its really starting to look like E-V13 was born in the Carpathian Basin also the J2a is J2a1-Z6055, it seems that J2a-Z6055 and J2a-Z6048 (Barcin) expanded differently than the rest of J2a. J2a-Z6055 has downclades found in South Asia was probably part of the farmer community than expanded to South Asia as well.