The big bubble: Indoeuropean Yamnayans

[berun]

Also the CW culture must be IE, but nobody has found clear proofs about an origin in the steppes:

Considerable controversy exists over the origins of the
Corded Ware culture and its associations with other cultural
groups. The distribution of the Neolithic TRB culture
coincides considerably with the later range of Corded Ware
sites and the physical type of Corded Ware burials tends to
reflect that of earlier populations of the same region. There is
little doubt that, at least in some regions, the earlier TRB
culture should be associated with the origins of the Corded
Ware horizon, e.g., in the Netherlands a Corded Ware house
has been discovered which parallels the form of earlier TRB
structures. In other areas, however, the appearance of Corded
Ware burials does appear to herald a new culture and physical
type, e.g., in Lithuania, although even here the numbers seem
to have been few and did not Significantly alter the genetic
pool of the native population. A case study from southeast
Poland suggests that Corded Ware populations may have
taken advantage of local environmental and agricultural
collapse to occupy previously depopulated regions.
Supporters of the Kurgan theory have argued that the
immigrants from the steppe lands were a prime stimulus in
the development of the Corded Ware culture. They argue that
the Black Sea-Caspian region sees the earlier development of
tumulus burial, cord decorated pottery, a mobile pastoral
economy, domestication of the horse, use of wheeled vehicles,
.and the supposedly warlike society suggested by the presence
of battle-axes. Opponents of such interpretations emphasize
that such similarities are not genetic, e.g., tumuli and cord
decoration are widely found through the world and do not
require a uniquely Kurgan origin; the specific burial rite,
including posture and sexual dimorphism, are not found in
the Pontic-Caspian but can be found among late Neolithic
cultures in central Europe, e.g., the Tiszapolgar culture; local
environmental change can explain the shift towards more
mobile economies; the wild horse was regularly hunted in
the TRB culture and wheeled vehicles also appear in the TRB
culture and do not require a Ukrainian or Russian origin.
From a purely archaeological standpoint, the origins and
dispersal of the Corded Ware culture is one of the pivotal
(and still unresolved) issues of the IE homeland problem.

from the Encyclopaedia of IE Culture.

Looking at ADMIXTURE, the TRB samples are displaying a 10% of "steppe" aDNA, but this is shocking as it predates Yamnaya. For the area of the TRB culture i would guess that their genetic origins are WHG, SHG, EHG but above all EEF as ADMIXTURE points, but the "Yamnaya" aDNA might have another history.

 

[Angela]

We've gone over the relationship between Corded Ware and Yamnaya numerous times.

This is a whole thread dedicated to it. Perhaps newer posters could read it; a lot of their confusion could be cleared up.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...Son-or-Step-Son-of-Yamna?highlight=Metallurgy
For anyone who wants to read about the source of the various elements in the Indo-European "package", Le Brok started a thread about it.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31383-Indo-European-package?highlight=Metallurgy
@Tomenable,
As to metallurgy, this is probably the tenth time we've discussed it. It's by no means clear that it began in the Balkans. I've pointed out again and again that there is no consensus about that, and the pendulum swings back and forth from the Balkans to the Middle East.

To refresh everyone's recollection, this is a thread on "David Anthony on Metallurgy", which also contains cites for other papers.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30625-David-Anthony-on-Metallurgy?highlight=Metallurgy

Bottom line, he believes that it either developed first in the Near East and then spread to the Balkans, or it developed simultaneously in both places.

As I said, other papers are also discussed. I don't think anything has contradicted this:

"This researcher believes that it was furnace smelting, which was developed in the southern Levant, which was the driver for the real developments in metallurgy. The article isn't long, and I think it's pretty persuasive. He claims there are no developmental steps from melting to full blown furnace smelting at other copper working sites. The technology seems to appear as a complete package. He also has interesting things to say about the fact that these craftsmen, as is still the case in tribal Africa, had great status as shamans of a sort, bringing new substances into existence through what would have looked like "magic".

Oh, and I remember you have an interest in the rather intrusive looking metal working sites in Spain. There's a bit in here about them, as well.
http://www.ajaonline.org/sites/defau...Amzallag_0.pdf"

"As for bronze metallurgy, what Anthony says about Bronze and the Pontic Caspian Steppe in his book is not precisely the way it has been presented by other people. (I have found that parts of the book are available for free at the following link: http://books.google.com/books?id=0FD...steppe&f=false)

In the google book, Anthony says that the first bronze in Europe can be dated to 3700-3500 B.C. in the northern Caucasus in the form of arsenical bronze. What he doesn't say is that apparently it first appeared in Asia Minor in 4200 BC., so the flow of technology would most probably have been south to north.
See: Hami Ozbal, Ancient Anatolian Metallurgy
http://www.transanatolie.com/english...lurg-Ozbal.pdf
(Off-topic, but can the derivation of his name be from "Baal"? How cool if that's true!)"

At any rate, Bronze on the steppe is very late, as is explained in the paper.

Regardless, it's invention has nothing to do with the Indo-Europeans, so I don't see the point of posting in this thread that it was first invented in the Balkans even if that were true. If you want to post more about the invention of metallurgy perhaps it makes sense to post on that metallurgy thread.

@Berun,
We know the genetics of the Yamnaya and a lot of other early Indo-Europeans. We no longer have to speculate. Please use the search engine to find the relevant threads.

 

[Alan]

IMO Corded Ware was probably not derived directly from Yamnaya, but rather they are both of them were descended from a common earlier ancestral population, which is why they shared in 75% similar autosomal DNA. Here is the chronological sequence of major cultural horizons in the Steppe:

- Khvalynsk (ca. 5200-4200 BC)
- Sredni Stog (ca. 4200-3300 BC)
- Yamnaya A (ca. 3300-2900 BC)
- Yamnaya B (ca. 2900-2600 BC)

Corded Ware culture appeared at least around 3200 BC (the oldest branch of CW was probably the Middle Dnieper culture) so it is almost as old as Yamnaya and therefore it is probably descended from Late Sredni Stog (as is Yamnaya - but from another part of Sredni Stog horizon), not directly from Yamnaya. Also the Anatolian branch of Indo-European languages is not descended from Yamnaya, because Proto-Anatolian is associated with Cernavodă culture, which emerged around 4000 BC - so it had to be descended from Sredni Stog (as Yamnaya had not yet existed). Therefore Yamnaya cannot be considered a PIE culture because PIE languages started to differentiate long before Yamnaya emerged (with Proto-Anatolian speakers splitting away from the rest of PIE-speakers first, around 4000 BC). Yamnaya could be IE-speakers, but not PIE - rather just one of several IE branches existing at that time.

Thats what I have been saying for some time. We are dealing here raher with a network of Indo European cultures than one PIE "Yamnaya one". However I believe Kura_Araxes or even Maykop make more sense for the origin of Hitittes, because their appearance fits with the collapse of these cultures.

 

[bicicleur 2]

"As for bronze metallurgy, what Anthony says about Bronze and the Pontic Caspian Steppe in his book is not precisely the way it has been presented by other people. (I have found that parts of the book are available for free at the following link: http://books.google.com/books?id=0FD...steppe&f=false)

In the google book, Anthony says that the first bronze in Europe can be dated to 3700-3500 B.C. in the northern Caucasus in the form of arsenical bronze. What he doesn't say is that apparently it first appeared in Asia Minor in 4200 BC., so the flow of technology would most probably have been south to north.
See: Hami Ozbal, Ancient Anatolian Metallurgy
http://www.transanatolie.com/english...lurg-Ozbal.pdf
(Off-topic, but can the derivation of his name be from "Baal"? How cool if that's true!)"

At any rate, Bronze on the steppe is very late, as is explained in the paper.

Regardless, it's invention has nothing to do with the Indo-Europeans, so I don't see the point of posting in this thread that it was first invented in the Balkans even if that were true. If you want to post more about the invention of metallurgy perhaps it makes sense to post on that metallurgy thread.

@Berun,
We know the genetics of the Yamnaya and a lot of other early Indo-Europeans. We no longer have to speculate. Please use the search engine to find the relevant threads.

I don't remember exactly what I read, but in my mind I've allways remembered that the catlle in the Pontic Steppe came from the Balkans, not Transcaucasia, and that Maykop was the consequence of the Uruk expansion, the demand for copper and other metals in Mesopotamia. I allways understood this as the Maykop being a small group of people coming from the south attracted by the Caucasus ores.
However Maykop people didn't expand, the R1b-M269 and R1b-M73 IE people who were on the steppe allready befroe Maykop did expand. And later they were replaced by R1a Sintashta from the forest-steppe.
That leaves the question, where did the Maykop people go after demand from Mesopotamia dropped? Did they just dissapear? IMO there could be a link with the Indus civilisation.

 

[berun]

@Angela, after reading the posts you refered my "confusion" is the same or even worsened, sorry to don't see the bright Yamnaya / Steppe religion so pure. Even worse as I have recanted more after reading the paper "Corded Ware in the Central and Southern Balkans: A Consequence of Cultural Interaction or an Indication of Ethnic Change?", as now under the CW label could be included Iranic, Indic, Slavic, Baltic, Germanic, Celtic, Illyrian, Greek, Thracian, and Armenian... it seems that by now only is left Tocharian and Anatolian.

I'm waiting yet the evidence about "Corded Ware adopted all the "IE" innovations from Yamnaya.", what a book or a paper? nothing? and even the post you have refered about such package is not giving evidences... what about horses? the first ones in Botai N. Kazakhstan (the other evidence in BB...), what about kurgans? the first ones in Azerbadjan... what about wagons? the first ones in Mesopotamia... chariots? it was Sintashta (from Abasehvo, from Fatyonovo, from CW)... etc etc And how is that CW got such pack from Yamna if both cultures popped up almost at the same time?

We know the genetics of the Yamnaya and a lot of other early Indo-Europeans. We no longer have to speculate

Fine, I can't speculate as everything is known but you can speculate about the R1b of western Yamnayans?:

I'd also be wary of all these "Yamnaya is a dead end" statements. We know very little of the western steppe as of yet.

You try to stop my complains and alerts very kindly, but it's a kind of censorship, as when you try that i apply autocensorphip:

It might also help you come up with specific examples of where Anthony is wrong and you are right. Until then, this is getting us nowhere.

Realy do you think that science is like boxing or wining a prize? very human attitude but when someone is not having a correct methodology (in fact is more an essay) I don't need to recall that 6+2 aren't 10. But ok, if yamnayists love more old known tales instead than science is up to them, better to don't waste time.

 

[MOESAN]

If accepting that the origin source for CW and Yamna would be the Sredni Stog, how could be done that an steppic population of let say 100000 would replace some 5000000 inhabitants in Central Europe as to provide the aDNA that CW displays? I can't figure out mass killings of such level. I have not ancient historical records about a similar butchering. Even the Eurasian diseases were not able to erase the Quechuan and Aymaran population of South America.

Even so it would be good to have some archaeological facts about this possible origin.

To me it would make more sense if pionner Caucasian migrants (maybe like the American trappers in the Pacific NW) settled somewhere in the forest-steppe or forest among PIE EHG and mixed half/half, increasing population enough there as to populate thereafter Central Europe and overwhelming the native people.

I have yet to weight your reasoning. As a first reaction concerning demography, why Caucasian migrants at first sight inadapted to Steppes life could do as better than "steppes natives" and increased dramatically the population size? Or you think all the Steppes typical economic elements went there only when Caucasians arrived, making it easier to live on Steppes and creating an overwhelming baby boom?
Have we serious basis to evaluate the Steppes populations of the time preceding the arrival of new Caucasians (because surely there had been a beginning of mixing before the metals ages)? Nomadic pops leave less traces than sedentar ones. Except for elite buryings, what traces have we of Mongols tents of the past? Mongols have been numerous at some stage of History, but are the archeologic traces we have of them of the same level?
Finally, you reverse the famous question of mating: it's no more the Steppic males who "rapted" southern females but southern males who "rapted" Steppes females? (I know the term "rapt" is a bit simplistic, let's call it an "unbalanced osmosis")

 

[berun]

For demographics for the steppe area to me it's not realy important who mated who or when arrived southerners, the case is that in the best case a pure herding economy will never reach the demographic levels as a farmer economy. By memory i think the difference is 1:10, so even with the best profit of the steppe's resources its population will be allways lower than farmers in a similar farming area.

 

[bicicleur 2]

For demographics for the steppe area to me it's not realy important who mated who or when arrived southerners, the case is that in the best case a pure herding economy will never reach the demographic levels as a farmer economy. By memory i think the difference is 1:10, so even with the best profit of the steppe's resources its population will be allways lower than farmers in a similar farming area.

neolithic societies are very vulnerable, especially to climate changes, but also to intruders
the nomads were not pure herders, they were traders too and they picked the best from every culture (only a flying bird can catch something)
furthermore, afanasievo and yamnaya profited to the maximum from a new invention : the wheel
without the wheel the yamnaya lifestyle wouldn't have been possible

 

[berun]

Of course famers can suffer big climatic upheavals delivering hunger and deads, but such deads place a new "equilibrium" with the ecosystem, and once the climatotogy backs to normal the farmer societies can increase numbers very quickly.

For herders, Mongolia is quite similar in extension and ecosystem to Yamna and even they use horses and wagons, but this is the case:

During the 1920s, when the traditional economy was still in force, total gross size of herds in Mongolia was only ten per cent below the present; there has been little change in the internal composition of the herds, to judge by the fairly constant ratio of different kinds of stock. Thus, without improvement of the grass cover or water supply, the ecological system tends to continue, even in the face of radical political change.Some of the most favorable ecological conditions for pastoralism are met in the grassy upland steppe of central Mongolia, the Ara Khangai. This is homogeneous pastoralist country, where the population, with few exceptions, is directly or indirectly involved with stock raising. Here the human population density is one of the highest in rural Mongolia, 1.4 per sq. km. The gross herd density is 52 per sq. km.; the ratio of gross herd size to human population is 36:1. These, too, are exceptionally high figures, rare in traditional pastoralism. The mean average population density for Mongolia is 0.5 per sq. km.; the mean gross herd density is 14 per sq. km. (Krader 1955).

So if the Yamnayan steppe was one million square km they would reach some 500000 people. For comparision, the Amhara in Ethyopia, 90% living from traditional farming, have a density of 110 per kilometer, so if we would deliver to the Amharas the same extension of land suitable for their farming they could be 110 milions, but as in 3000 BC there were not vaccines the real population possible would be about a thrid.

With such simple numbers and the advice that Yamnaya autosomals are not realy the source of CW there are enough things as to doubt about the Yamnayans, moreover when no archaeological proof is provided.

 

[Cato]

IMO to solve the question we need neolithic samples from Poland. It would be interesting to see if ANE was already present there before the supposed Yamna expansion.

 

[berun]

It would be perfect to know till where the CHG or Iranian_Neolithic expanded into Europe in the Neolithic or Copper Age, even if I can't say that it couldn't be a Mesolithic expansion from the Caucasian refuge (a J1 man was found in Karelia and it would be good to test his possible ANE DNA). The case is that archeologists dealing with such region have not found such an important migration and the unique thing that it was addmited was a Maykop inflience in weapons and pots here and there. Also I doubt that if Caucasians were spreading northwards they would be happy to settle only the poorest land (steppes), leaving free the forest-steppes and the forests of the north, as if Yankees would have occupied Utah and Nevada but leaving free California.

 

[bicicleur 2]

according to anciant DNA published till today
mesolithic WHG were I2 with some minorities of I1 and C1a2
mesolithic EHG were R1a with some minorities of J1 and R1b
neolithic Europeans were about 60 % G2a2 and 40 % I2, C1a2, H2, T, I1 ..
the source of these G2a2 have been found very recently : http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...natolian-Neolithic?highlight=central+Anatolia

 

[berun]

From the Encyclopedia of the Indoeuropean culture:

Within the Kurgan theory, Maykop is used as a
covering term for not only the Maykop cultural remains of
the north Caucasus but also the Lower Mikhaylovka and Kemi
Oba cultures north of the Black Sea. Some archaeologists also
suggest that the Maykop culture had genetic links with the
TRB, Globular Amphora and Corded Ware cultures and thus
represented an extensive cultural region from the Baltic to
the Caucasus. Such a theory, it must be emphasized, is highly
speculative and controversial although there is a recognition
that this culture may be a product of at least two traditions:
the local steppe tradition embraced in the Novosvobodna
culture and foreign elements from south of the Caucasus
which can be charted through imports in both regions.

If such genetic links would be real we could close the circle.

 

[Cato]

From the Encyclopedia of the Indoeuropean culture:



If such genetic links would be real we could close the circle.

That's my thought too. If TRB from Poland were ANE (perhaps through Swiderian heritage?) then an influx from Maykop (CHG) would produce a "Yamna-like" population.

 

[A. Papadimitriou]

neolithic societies are very vulnerable, especially to climate changes, but also to intruders
the nomads were not pure herders, they were traders too and they picked the best from every culture (only a flying bird can catch something)
furthermore, afanasievo and yamnaya profited to the maximum from a new invention : the wheel
without the wheel the yamnaya lifestyle wouldn't have been possible

Can you write something more about it? Are you talking about the 'Yamnayans' or other groups of nomads?

About nomads picking the best from every culture. It is possible, I guess. There is at least one more way: maritime trade.

 

[berun]

More data pointing "Carpato-Caucasian" relations:

"SHEPSI, THE OLDEST DOLMEN WITH PORT-HOLE SLAB IN THE WESTERN CAUCASUS"

A Spitsyn (1903) proposed that the origins of the
ceramics found in 1898 in the megalithic tomb near Tsarskaya/Novosvobodnaya are linked to the
Globular Amphora culture of western Europe. This concept was worked out further by Nikolaeva and
Safronov (1974), who argued that the practice of burials in the Novosvobodnaya-type tombs was introduced
in the Caucasus together with other features like Globular Amphora, Funnel Beaker, Corded
Ware, and even the Baden-Boleraz cultural complex. This then spawned the local development of
“two-chambered” tombs into “true” dolmens (Nikolaeva and Safronov 1974; Safronov 1989).

actual DNA evidence and dating is pointing just the opposite.

"Long Report Excavations of Soyugbulaq Kurgans"

The roots of the Leylatepe Archaeological Culture to which the Soyugbulaq kurgans belong to,
stemmed from the Ubaid Culture of Central Asia. Although burial grounds located outside the
boundaries of Ubaid Culture settlement sites had been found thus far, these did not have earth
mounds. The earliest kurgans found in the South Caucasus before the discovery of the
Soyugbulaq site were dated to the early Bronze Age, i. e. third millennium, B.C. The Soyugbulaq
kurgans have provided substantial evidence that the earliest kurgans in the South Caucasus
belonged to the tribes of the Leylatepe Culture.
The Leylatepe Culture tribes migrated to the north in the mid-fourth millennium, B.C. and played
an important part in the rise of the Maikop Culture of the North Caucasus. A number of Maikop
Culture kurgans and Soyugbulaq kurgans display the same northwest to southeast grave
alignment. More than that, Soyugbulaq kurgans yielded pottery forms identical to those recovered
from the Maikop kurgans. These are the major factors attesting to the existence of a genetic link
between the two cultures.
So, the Soyugbulaq kurgans provide vital information that can be used in the study of the history
of migrations from Mesopotamia into the South Caucasus and from there to the North Caucasus
in the fourth millennium, B.C. and Eneolithic burial practices in the South Caucasus.

BETWEEN WEST AND EAST PEOPLE OF THE GLOBULAR AMPHORA CULTURE IN EASTERN EUROPE: 2950-2350 BC

The parts of cultural groups from the southern limits of eastern Europe which
are listed in the title above: Kemi-Oba, Mikhailivka I, Maikop (more precisely, its
Novosvobodnaya stage/type) and—in accordance with the terminology proposed by
M.B. Rysin [1997:85] — the dolmen-building cultures of the western and Northern
Caucasus (mainly the northern Caucasus culture, according to Markovin [1994b] or
the Kuban-Terek culture, according to Nikolayeva [1981]), besides many differences,
possess the common characteristic feature of ‘megalithic’ structures constructed for
the funeral rite30. In all of the above-mentioned groups, we can find stone cist graves
(or graves of similar form) and other stone structures (e.g. cromlechs, stelae), which
is often interpreted as being an element convergent with the GAC.

The second position [Nikolayeva, Safronov 1974;
Rezepkin 1987] is the antithesis of the first: here, the central European groups (the
GAC, Corded Ware culture and Funnel Beaker culture) are considered to be at the
origin of processes leading to the formation of Black Sea-Caucasus structures (Kemi-
-Oba, Mikhailivka I, Novosvobodnaya, and Caucasus ‘dolmen’ cultures).

In the opinion of Gimbutas: “There
is a complete congruence between the burial rites of the Globular Amphora people
and those of the Kurgans of the Mikhailivka I stage of the Maikop culture in
the North Pontic region: mortuary houses built of stone slabs, cromlechs, and
stone stelae, engravings on stone slabs, ritual burial of horses, cattle and dogs;
also human sacrifice in connection with funeral rites honoring high-ranking males”
[Gimbutas 1997b:283]. A particularly strong similarity is also said to characterise
ceramics of the GAC and Mikhailivka I (globular vessel bellies, shell, sand and
plant admixtures) as well as settlement types (small, briefly-settled encampments)
[Gimbutas 1997b:285; 1997c:363-365].

The second of the standpoints related above, actually more of a group of hypotheses,
supposes the participation of European models (and even groups of people),
deriving from the circle of the GAC or of the Funnel Beaker culture, in the
origins of Black Sea and Caucasus groups. This discussion was initiated with the
suggestion by A. Äyräpää [1933:121] of possible links between the GAC population,
erecting megalithic tombs in Volhynia and Podolia, and the builders of the so-called
‘northern Caucasus dolmens’. These views were revived in the 1970s and are still
presented in a range of versions today. The most extreme viewpoint pertaining to
this issue assumed a direct link between Novosvobodnaya (Tsarskaya) type tombs
in the Caucasus and the GAC, and was represented by Nikolayeva and Safronov
[1974]. The starting point for them was the discussion concerning the origin of
the grave type under consideration, which was most often thought at the time to
be the late phase of the Maikop culture [Yessen 1950; Popova 1963]. Nikolayeva
and Safronov emphasised the lack of any genetic link between Novosvobodnaya and
Maikop. Judging the most important feature of the Novosvobodnaya type (which
they linked with the ‘Dolmen culture’ of the northern Caucasus) to be the megalithic
graves, they saw the closest analogy to these in the Kemi-Oba and Usatovo cultures.
However, since even these elements were, in the opinion of the authors, alien to
earlier local traditions, the ultimate source of megalithic ceremony was deemed to
be the Volhynia-Podolia GAC. From here, a migrational movement was assumed to
have taken place which, contributing to the creation of new groups on the Black Sea
(Usatovo) and the Crimea (Kemi-Oba), eventually reached the Caucasus, where they
left their mark in the form of Novosvobodnaya type tombs and northern Caucasus
dolmens [Kuban-Terek culture in Nikolayeva 1981].

"Bioarchaeological Analysis Mutual Relations of Populations
Armenian Highlands and Eurasia Using Craniological and Dental
Nonmetric Traits"

Affinities are closest between the Armenian highland sample from Shengavit (3, Kura-Araks culture), and
sample from Volga region (Late Fatianovo). The Armenian highlands sample (4, Kura-Araks culture: 0.446) and
the Late Fatianovo sample from Volga region exhibit very close affinities to one another. The results, however,
fail to demonstrate even a low-level phenetic affinity between Fatyanovo and either of the Western Europe
samples. The sample from Georgia (Tkviavi) match the sample from the Volga region (Abashevskaya culture)
(figure 1).

The samples from the Georgia (Samtavro /Late Bronze
Age - II period) and Iran (Tepe Gissar III), Uzbekistan (Sapallitepe) are identified as the samples with closest
affinities samples from Ukraine (Shirochanski) and Poland, Germany (Corded Ware culture) in particular (figure
3). This suggests that some of the European genes do actually stem from this area.

 

[Cato]

Analysis of the Mitochondrial Genome of a Novosvobodnaya Culture Representative using Next-Generation Sequencing and Its Relation to the Funnel Beaker Culture

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4115223/

Six complete mitochondrial genomes from Early Bronze Age humans in the North Caucasus

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440316301091

Both studies found mtDNA Hg V7 in the North Caucasus area. The first study (2014) concluded that it reached the Caucasus from Central Europe while the second study (2016) shown that it was already present in the Maykop culture

 

[bicicleur 2]

Analysis of the Mitochondrial Genome of a Novosvobodnaya Culture Representative using Next-Generation Sequencing and Its Relation to the Funnel Beaker Culture

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4115223/

Six complete mitochondrial genomes from Early Bronze Age humans in the North Caucasus

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440316301091

Both studies found mtDNA Hg V7 in the North Caucasus area. The first study (2014) concluded that it reached the Caucasus from Central Europe while the second study (2016) shown that it was already present in the Maykop culture

look here

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32631-MtDna-from-the-Bronze-Age-Caucasus-including-Maykop

 

[MarkoZ]

I have yet to weight your reasoning. As a first reaction concerning demography, why Caucasian migrants at first sight inadapted to Steppes life could do as better than "steppes natives" and increased dramatically the population size? Or you think all the Steppes typical economic elements went there only when Caucasians arrived, making it easier to live on Steppes and creating an overwhelming baby boom?
Have we serious basis to evaluate the Steppes populations of the time preceding the arrival of new Caucasians (because surely there had been a beginning of mixing before the metals ages)? Nomadic pops leave less traces than sedentar ones. Except for elite buryings, what traces have we of Mongols tents of the past? Mongols have been numerous at some stage of History, but are the archeologic traces we have of them of the same level?
Finally, you reverse the famous question of mating: it's no more the Steppic males who "rapted" southern females but southern males who "rapted" Steppes females? (I know the term "rapt" is a bit simplistic, let's call it an "unbalanced osmosis")

I think what lead to some of the more twisted pet theories surrounding purported pugnacious hordes leaving the Siberian ice and conquering large swaths of culturally developed lands despite their comparatively primitive technology is the ignorance of the processes taking place to the immediate south of Central Asia. One need only look at some of the more clearly derivative steppe economies like the transhumant herders at Afanasiev - quite clearly a continuation of the herder cultures of eastern Iran and the Turkmen deserts - to make an inference about the general vector of demic spread around the Chalcolithic. Herding, as it seems, was an invention that became yet more useful as its originators migrated northwards out of pastoralism's West Asian cradle. So of course these 'southerners' would be more succesful than the local hunters and fishers that inhabited the steppe biome.

What the original herders brought with them as they spread in various directions is of course up for debate. Intuitively I would think that they were at least intrumental to the complex jumble of linguistic strata ensuing the population implosion in the chalcolithic and the bronze age which eventually gave rise to a language that was perhaps similar to what we know as Proto-Indo-European. The hypotheses of Ivanov, Gramkelidze, Grigoriev, Nichols et. al. ultimately provide a better explanation of the dynamic oberved in the Caucasus and West Asia. I also feel that these researchers are less invested in their particular narratives - I am aware of several crucial cases where Anthony outright distorts the conclusions of the Russian archeologists he's apparently worked with. The type of creative writing & speculation that Anthony's popular treatment abounds with I've become wary of; it's unfortunate that this takes up such a large part of his book.

This is not to say that the northern Pontic need to be removed from the debate about Indo-European origins - a question that I'm really agnostic about. But the focus should probably shift away from the austere and egalitarian Yamnaya culture to the much more remarkable Maykop and Catacomb cultures, the latter of which evinces the high degree of stratification that would have been required to effect the language changes that eventually lead to the emergence of the European linguistic landscape by elite domination.

 

[MOESAN]

Of course famers can suffer big climatic upheavals delivering hunger and deads, but such deads place a new "equilibrium" with the ecosystem, and once the climatotogy backs to normal the farmer societies can increase numbers very quickly.

For herders, Mongolia is quite similar in extension and ecosystem to Yamna and even they use horses and wagons, but this is the case:



So if the Yamnayan steppe was one million square km they would reach some 500000 people. For comparision, the Amhara in Ethyopia, 90% living from traditional farming, have a density of 110 per kilometer, so if we would deliver to the Amharas the same extension of land suitable for their farming they could be 110 milions, but as in 3000 BC there were not vaccines the real population possible would be about a thrid.

With such simple numbers and the advice that Yamnaya autosomals are not realy the source of CW there are enough things as to doubt about the Yamnayans, moreover when no archaeological proof is provided.

Some evidences are contradicted by facts: Steppes delivered a number of tribes and their numbers were not of the smallest, seemingly: Sarmatians, Scythians, Huns, Mongols, Turcs/Tatars, Hungarians: apparently, for regions unable to provide support for life, these Steppes and their nomadic or partly nomadic way of life doesn't seem having prevented human reproduction.