ToBeOrNotToBe
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,110
- Reaction score
- 138
- Points
- 0
Do people just ignore facts when it doesn’t suit them? How can people be downplaying examples like the ginger chalcolithic Armenians?! They didn’t spring out of the ground...
Where did the Anatolian branch of Indo-European originate?
- Thread starter berun
- Start date
Ygorcs
Active member
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 812
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Multiracial Brazilian
But that's exactly why I said that, if the linguistic evidences point out to a pre-Maykop Chalcolithic PIE (not Late PIE minus Anatolian, which is almost certainly a Pontic-Caspian language), then we should find an archaeological and genetic trail from the South Caucasus before Maykop. That is, in Shulaveri-Shomu, in Leyla Tepe, whatever, but before Maykop, because by that time around 3700-3500 BCE it is very likely that PIE didn't even exist any longer as one common language, there were already at least 2 distinct languages diverging increasingly. Also, I'm in doubt that the gene flow from Maykop, considering the really minor increase in ANF (and that's already considering that at least some of that ANF came within EEF, not directly from the Caucasus), was significant enough to be presumed to have changed (not just influenced) the whole culture and language of the entire long range of the Pontic-Caspian cultures, especially without any noticeable (until now) impact in the Y-DNA makeup of the steppe people. Was Sredny Stog II or Repin (pre-Yamnaya) even advanced enough to be offshoots of Maykop? I'm not sure... Another point is that Yamnaya does not look like the first culture where Late PIE was spoken. By the early stages of Yamnaya Afanasievo was already in the Altai mountains, possibly bringing a pre-Tocharian LPIE to Central-Eastern Asia.
Last edited:
Ygorcs
Active member
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 812
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Multiracial Brazilian
Still that? I would really like to know where on earth did you find this definite information that the expansion of Early Bronze Age Indo-Europeans is particularly associated with red hair, or even that red hair was particularly more common in the Pontic-Caspian and Anatolian early IEs than in other populations. Indo-Europeans weren't the only people moving around, expanding and mixing with others in the Copper Age and Bronze Age. It all sounds like speculation, as if it was simply a given that Indo-Europeans were very pale and ginger. None of that is indicated by the data we have until now, approximated though as they are (definitely not for red hair, but in fact not even the pale skin thing; light, yes, really very pale like modern North Europeans? No way). But it's better to have approximated, imperfect evidences than hypothetical assumptions, apparently based on what you think they should've looked like.
epoch
Elite member
- Messages
- 781
- Reaction score
- 187
- Points
- 0
A candidate would be: Sredny Stog -> Uzorovo -> Ezero. Considering that there are two Chalcolithic samples in Mathiesons South-Eastern paper are in the area where Uzorovo was situated, and both others are confirmed to have steppe ancestry, there you have your pre-Yamnaya steppe trail. But as ffoucart on AG keeps pointing out: Bulgarian Yamnaya isn't too young to be an ancestor for Anatolian.
Another thing is this. You completely misinterpret the lack of steppe in the Anatolian samples up to date. I will make a bold statement: If all the Bronze Age Anatolian samples were packed with steppe the Kurgan hypothesis was in trouble. It would mean that people of whom we know that they spoke a non-IE language, people that preceded the introduction of Anatolian languages, would have steppe ancestry. What would then be the reason to refute a hypothetical claim Yamnaya spoke a Hattic language?
Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
The problem is that unless you have access to papers of which I'm not aware, other than a few pots there is no archaeological trail from Ezero to Anatolia. The archaeological trail goes in the other direction, from Anatolia to the Balkans. There's an upcoming paper that makes that case even stronger than it was before if the abstract is correct.
Also, you need the steppe on both ends.
I don't understand the relevance of your second point. No one is "demanding" samples packed with steppe. It would be impossible given how little is in the Balkans at the appropriate time. Something like the Mycenaeans would do very nicely.
IronSide
Elite member
- Messages
- 883
- Reaction score
- 279
- Points
- 0
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- I2c2
- mtDNA haplogroup
- T2e1
This wouldn't have carried a lot of sensitivity if it was another language family.
I have been accused of political and ethnic bias or agenda because I'm saying Anatolians may not have come from the Steppe, due to many samples now lacking EHG from different periods and locations where Anatolian should have been spoken, but at the beginning I did believe in the usual notion of Steppe migration (I even believed the ideas of eurogenes, of EHG abducting CHG women at some point), if I had anything against the good old EHG folks I would have argued against it before.
I mean, the least is to express doubt that they come from the Steppe, to think that it's really peculiar that they don't have EHG ancestry, but what I saw was complete faith and belief in elite ghosts, against evidence, amazing.
I have been accused of political and ethnic bias or agenda because I'm saying Anatolians may not have come from the Steppe, due to many samples now lacking EHG from different periods and locations where Anatolian should have been spoken, but at the beginning I did believe in the usual notion of Steppe migration (I even believed the ideas of eurogenes, of EHG abducting CHG women at some point), if I had anything against the good old EHG folks I would have argued against it before.
I mean, the least is to express doubt that they come from the Steppe, to think that it's really peculiar that they don't have EHG ancestry, but what I saw was complete faith and belief in elite ghosts, against evidence, amazing.
halfalp
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,499
- Reaction score
- 222
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Swiss
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R-L2
- mtDNA haplogroup
- J1c5a
Bronze Age Anatolia doesn't have EHG, but Bronze Age Eastern Europe doesn't have ANF. The only link in the Bronze Age of both Anatolia and Eastern Europe is CHG, wich predate Bronze Age. Maikop and related north caucasus chalcolithic cultures have some ANF, but their paternal lineages are absent of steppe. Now we have an interesting conclusion, both Anatolia wich we would assume are natively ANF and Eastern Europe wich we would assume are natively EHG are both Indo-European speakers at some point in history. But there's more, both Eastern Europe and Indian Sub-continent and Iran are in Iron Age - Early Antiquity, Indo-Iranian speakers without Eastern Europe having ANI/ASI or Iran/Indian having EHG. Those pattern can only have one conclusion ( apart of the conclusion that I-E languages have been transmitted with mothers ). The conclusion is that I-E languages had both a demic and cultural diffusion, some people in western europe have becomed I-E speakers with direct ancestors of Yamnaya, some others like India-Iran and Anatolia have become I-E speakers with cultural diffusion and male lineage founder effects. Everything contradicte everything in I-E studies, even the researchers in the papers they feel something is fishy with only steppe hypothesis but at the same time the others hypothesis cant explain everything. But just imagine whats the actual consensus from anti-steppist people. Maikop bring PIE to steppe and because they were culturally superior they imposed language and bring female lineage but not male lineage in the pontic steppe. So a semi cultural-demic diffusion. Now we can apply the same pattern to Anatolia and Iran-India. India have gotten a gigantic founder effect with R1a-Z93 wich is clearly a northern lineage related with Iron Age eurasian steppe, but they dont have EHG properly, so they are still autosomally ASI/Iran_Neolithic = ANI? Iran but Anatolia are different stories, Iran didn't have the founder effect of Indians with R1a and are near the middle east, so they constantly had mashing with other populations. For Anatolia its way more complicate, I-E languages disappear 3'200BC of that place, apart from a big scale sampling of those ancient times, we cannot make a conclusion whatsoever. But lets take back to the genetic link between Bronze Age Anatolia and Bronze Age Pontic Steppe. BA Anatolia is mostly 50/50 ANF and Iran_Chalcolithic, while BA Pontic Steppe is mostly 50/50 EHG and CHG. Now what differentiate CHG/Iran_Neolithic/Iran_Chalcolithic? There is any genetic link between all this that i'm pretty sure Harvard gonna change the terminology of CHG in the Pontic Steppe for Iran_Chalcolithic to fit their hypothesis, maybe in future samples, maybe even in a simple revision of terminology.
epoch
Elite member
- Messages
- 781
- Reaction score
- 187
- Points
- 0
The problem is that unless you have access to papers of which I'm not aware, other than a few pots there is no archaeological trail from Ezero to Anatolia. The archaeological trail goes in the other direction, from Anatolia to the Balkans. There's an upcoming paper that makes that case even stronger than it was before if the abstract is correct.
Also, you need the steppe on both ends.
I don't understand the relevance of your second point. No one is "demanding" samples packed with steppe. It would be impossible given how little is in the Balkans at the appropriate time. Something like the Mycenaeans would do very nicely.
The archaeological trail goes both ways IIRC [1]. If you look at the burial types jar burials enter the Balkan from Anatolia, it goes from Anatolia to the Balkans. However, the only real possible predecessor to the cremation ritual of the Hittites seems to be in.. You guessed it: Ezero or Bulgarian Yamnaya, where it occurs alongside burials, sometimes in the same barrow.
[1] http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1478344/43/Massa_Thesis_combined.pdf
epoch
Elite member
- Messages
- 781
- Reaction score
- 187
- Points
- 0
I am going to repeat this: The history of the Hittites is very clear. We are *bound* to find a lot of non-steppe people among Hittites. To refute a theory that goes against linguistic evidence on the basis of a few non-steppe Hittite samples is not only acceptable, it is common sense. We *know* that large parts of Anatolia weren't IE speaking, let alone of steppe ancestry.
PS: In the Hittite empire there were many vassal kings. Considering the history of the Hittites, which explicitly describes the conquering of a Hattic kingdom and consequently making the Hattic king a vassal, we are even *bound* to find 100% non-steppe elite burials.
IronSide
Elite member
- Messages
- 883
- Reaction score
- 279
- Points
- 0
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- I2c2
- mtDNA haplogroup
- T2e1
@epoch
People with Steppe ancestry can have sex with people who do not, because Steppe people like to have sex, resulting in the mixed child to have some amount of that ancestry, there is a non-zero probability of that happening. You don't need to bring "Vassal kings" into it, it's just Biology.
Trololololololol
Unless the Hittites were like the Unsullied in Game of Thrones ?
People with Steppe ancestry can have sex with people who do not, because Steppe people like to have sex, resulting in the mixed child to have some amount of that ancestry, there is a non-zero probability of that happening. You don't need to bring "Vassal kings" into it, it's just Biology.
Trololololololol
Unless the Hittites were like the Unsullied in Game of Thrones ?
epoch
Elite member
- Messages
- 781
- Reaction score
- 187
- Points
- 0
@epoch
People with Steppe ancestry can have sex with people who do not, because Steppe people like to have sex, resulting in the mixed child to have some amount of that ancestry, there is a non-zero probability of that happening. You don't need to bring "Vassal kings" into it, it's just Biology.
Trololololololol
Unless the Hittites were like the Unsullied in Game of Thrones ?
Shall we remain serious? Would be greatly appreciated.
Mind you, there is a Hittite text available regarding early kings disallowing their own offspring to become their heirs but *adopting* [1] or choosing nephews as heirs. This was during times of great internal feuds.
[1] Cf. Telipinu.
IronSide
Elite member
- Messages
- 883
- Reaction score
- 279
- Points
- 0
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- I2c2
- mtDNA haplogroup
- T2e1
I am dead serious, its the called the argument of how many samples do you need to know if people of different ethnicities had sex?
take the Minoans and Mycenaeans for example, how many samples from the Myceneans did not have EHG ? not a single one.
How many samples from the Minoans did not have CHG ? not a single one.
In the damgaard et al paper, all BA Anatolian samples, were similar to the 3700BC Chalcolithic individual, the first in Anatolia to have CHG. all didn't have EHG.
There is no conspiracy, the first Anatolian sample from the Iron Age immediately had EHG ancestry, I think we have two, both had it. notice a pattern?
seriously if there is Steppe ancestry undiscovered in BA Anatolia then God is a joker.
epoch
Elite member
- Messages
- 781
- Reaction score
- 187
- Points
- 0
Take the Abusir mummies. How many samples had Greek admixture? None. So, according to your logic the Ptolemeids cannot have been of Greek origin.
IronSide
Elite member
- Messages
- 883
- Reaction score
- 279
- Points
- 0
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- I2c2
- mtDNA haplogroup
- T2e1
Therefore Anatolians must have come from the Steppe. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
It is known, when Greek pastoralists, led by their chief Alexander the Great, invaded Egypt and settled the land, stayed strong for millennia until their language diversified and was spoken by a large portion of Lower Egypt, and half of Upper Egypt, the two main subfamilies of the Graeco-Egyptian language family.
Persian pastoralists invaded Egypt before them and the whole Middle East, diversified their languages, the Indo-Iranian branch of Egyptian-Aryan, Levantine-Aryan, and Anatolian-Aryan developed, sustained by the long presence of a Persian population that Iranianized the native Egyptians.
Italians today speak a Germanic language, it's called Lombardic, and they have a substantial proportion of ancestry from them.
Yetos
Regular Member
- Messages
- 5,959
- Reaction score
- 519
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Makedonia
- Ethnic group
- Makedonian original
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- G2a3a
- mtDNA haplogroup
- X2b
I copy paste,
I declare I have no rights,
''Geneticist Iosif Lazaridis of Harvard Medical School in Boston, who studies how and when ancient populations mixed, calls the new results “a big accomplishment.” But he wonders how representative Abusir el-Meleq is of ancient Egypt as a whole. “Egypt is a big place,” he says. Other regions may have experienced its conquests in different ways, some perhaps with more genetic mixing. But Lazaridis hopes for more revelations to come. “Now that it’s been proven that it’s possible to sample from mummies—well, there are literally thousands of mummies.”''
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017...mies-didn-t-have-any-dna-left-they-were-wrong
What Krause found, possibly is the Hyksos people,
Fayum is the area of Greek and Roman settlements,
Abusir although grew the Ptolemaic era, might been due to movement of Hyksos there.
Ygorcs
Active member
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 812
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Multiracial Brazilian
Yes, it can't be explained by European admixture, but it can easily be explained by a combination of genetic bottleneck, genetic drift and high endogamy. Ashkenazi Jews notoriously have a very low genetic diversity. A relative abundance of many genetic traits, in comparison with more admixed populations descending from a larger effective population size, is to be expected in any group similar to them, like many Indian castes.
Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
On the contrary, the largest parts of Anatolia were IE speaking. They were also not the parts anywhere near the Balkans. You people just ignore everything that doesn't fit on your side of the ledger. There's nothing scholarly about your approach whatsoever.
Why focus only on the Hittites?
I'm sorry, but only people with an agenda are going to believe this if not one sample in this whole area ever shows EHG. There's still time for the samples to show up, of course, but as I said, if none show up it's a real problem.
As for the mummies, come on. If you want Egyptian mummies with some "Greek" ancestry in them this is not the place to look. Look in Alexandria, for goodness' sakes, or at least somewhere near the Delta. That's where the vast majority of the Greek citizens lived. It's like looking for Lombard ancestry not in Lombardia or the Veneto but in Calabria.
Also, what about the chronology here? When did this supposed movement take place? How does that fit with the development of the language? How could the Anatolian languages, with no word for wheel, have entered Anatolia for the first time at such late dates?
Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
On the contrary, the largest parts of Anatolia were IE speaking. They were also not the parts anywhere near the Balkans. You people just ignore everything that doesn't fit on your side of the ledger. There's nothing scholarly about your approach whatsoever.
Why focus only on the Hittites?
I'm sorry, but only people with an agenda are going to believe this if not one sample in this whole area shows EHG. There's still time for the samples to show up, of course, but as I said, if none show up it's a real problem.
As for the mummies, come on. If you want Egyptian mummies with some "Greek" ancestry in them this is not the place to look. Look in Alexandria, for goodness' sakes. That's where the vast majority of the Greek citizens lived. It's like looking for Lombard ancestry not in Lombardia or the Veneto, but in Calabria.
Also, what about the chronology here? When did this supposed movement take place? How does that fit with the development of the language? How could the Anatolian languages, with no word for wheel, have entered Anatolia for the first time at such late dates?
@ToBeOrNotToBe:
Does no one remember prior papers? Please for goodness' sakes read the Sandra Wilde et al and the Mathiesen et al papers. The Yamnaya people were DARK, darker than most Europeans today. As for light hair, and eyes for that matter, it already existed in NEOLITHIC ANATOLIA. It didn't need to get introduced by the steppe people. It's just that over the years, since these are recessive traits, they don't pop up as much.
Sandra Wilde et al:
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/13/4832
http://www.uni-mainz.de/presse/17148_ENG_HTML.php
Iain Mathiesen et al
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4918750/
Pigmentation in ancient Anatolians is in numerous papers, but Hofmanova et al is one of them.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4922144/
It should also be kept in mind, of course, that predictions for color of hair don't have very high reliability.
This thread has been viewed 157205 times.