Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe

[Angela]

I am just going to wait for more samples instead of taking the mascism from them, just like the nonsense some of them were spreading about Yamna genes. At the end of the day when it turns out like I am saying the same people will act like : "OH we didn't see that coming "

Mark my words. R1a* came either through the South_central Asia route or directly through the Caucasus and they had already picked up various female lineages such as H, U and T it's not like this mixture does not exist in this region already.

I don't know where it came from, Alan, and honestly it won't matter to me personally either way, but at the end of the day some of the people who have been determined to associate the "R" lineage more with "Europe" and to remove any hint of an origin elsewhere will just move the goalpost to a later clade if it's proven that R1 did indeed move out of Iran. It's already happening. Not every "Kurganist" is like that however. Jean Manco, for one, had R1 in that area for years, and of course, Maciamo's views on the origin of R1b are well known.

Similarly, I don't really know how all that "Near Eastern" got into Yamna, and through them into Europe, but time and more adna should make it a little clearer. My problem is that I don't see a clearly archaeologically attested farmer population on the steppe that can be reliably tied to a specifically Caucasus population. I'm starting to think we should be looking perhaps at the Stans?

My point in referring to this other Blog was that once again an attempt was being made to explain away the significance of that component, or to make it somehow less "Near Eastern", and RK's in my opinion excellent analysis of the statistics in the Haak paper put an end to it, and also explained the confusing Gedrosia signals in Europe. I didn't know if it was kosher to lift whole long quotes from another blog, or I would have posted them here.

 

[Angela]

It's pointless, in my opinion, to try to deny the influence of the Caucasus and the European Neolithic civilizations on the steppe. Just review your Anthony book, for goodness sakes. Agriculture was definitely a very late entry and not very significant.* The early people on the Pontic Caspian steppe had no domesticated animals**, their metallurgy was primitive and derivative of Balkan types to their west. The wheel came either from south of them through the Caucasus or from European Neolithic civilizations. War chariots*** definitely are first attested south of them. Pastoralism is a question mark in my mind. Their particular version of it may have been an adaptation once they got domesticated animals, but it could also have filtered through from the Stan countries. As to Kurgans, there is a dispute as to dating methods used, but the dates for Kurgans south of the steppe are so close to those of the ones on the steppe that to say the Kurgan style burial definitely came from the Steppe to the Caucasus is unwarranted, in my opinion.

What is most likely true is that they domesticated the horse. However, the earliest attested date for anything resembling the domestication of horses is 3600 BC although way over in the Botai. For long stretches of time their primary use was as food. They couldn't have been using them to herd animals because those people didn't have any domesticated animals.The earliest record of a bridle is much later, as is the two wheeled chariot, which dates to 2,000 BC and all the way east in Sintashta. So, in the critical 4,000BC to 3,000 BC crucial period on the Pontic Caspic Steppe I don't know of any evidence for horse riding or two wheeled war chariots. In fact, if Anthony is correct, there weren't even any carts until at the earliest 3600 BC so the earliest migrations wouldn't have included them. If someone knows of any, it would of course change my point of view.

You can find discussions of these matters, and links to relevant papers here:
David Anthony and metallurgy on the steppes:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30625-David-Anthony-on-Metallurgy?highlight=Metallurgy+steppes
(Other things are discussed besides metallurgy)

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...i-Trypillian-culture?highlight=Kurgans+steppe
I don't endorse each and every post here but the discussions are interesting.

Kurgans in the south Caucasus:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...-Caucasus-in-Georgia?highlight=Kurgans+steppe

There are many more, just use the search engine.

Ed.
* Anthony's explanation is that it filtered through from the "Old Europe" Neolithic cultures.
** According to Anthony, the earliest domesticated animals on the steppe were acquired from the Neolithic communities to their west. I'm still investigating whether there was also input in the eastern steppe from communities to their south or west.
***Perhaps more properly called war wagons.

 

[Silesian]

Let's make sure we are talking about R1a1a or even M417, the ones implicated in IE culture, and not any 20 ky old R1a who went up and down central Asia couple of times before neolithic.

Some experimental date ranges TMRCA of R1a and R1b and I.

R1b-Z2103- Yamnaya cluster
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1b/

R-Z2103S20902 * Z2103/CTS1078 * Z2105... 5 SNPsformed 6300 ybp, TMRCA 6200 ybp

Polish/Russian cluster 9219+

R-Z2103*R-CTS1450CTS9219 * Y5594 * CTS1450... 6 SNPsformed 5600 ybp, TMRCA 4400 ybp

R1a-Z93
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1a

R-Z93Z93/F992/S202 * V3664/Z2479/M746/S4582formed 5000 ybp, TMRCA 4600 ybp

R1a-282

R-YP282YP287 * YP285 * YP283... 11 SNPsformed 3500 ybp, TMRCA 2000 ybp

/http://www.yfull.com/tree/I2/

 

[Expredel]

What is most likely true is that they domesticated the horse. However, the earliest attested date for anything resembling the domestication of horses is 3600 BC although way over in the Botai. For long stretches of time their primary use was as food. They couldn't have been using them to herd animals because those people didn't have any domesticated animals.

The Native Americans effectively used horses to hunt, made their lives much easier, don't think they had any herd animals. They also used horses to raid.

From Wikipedia:

When Suvorovo graves appeared in the Danube delta grasslands, horse-head maces also appeared in some of the indigenous farming towns of the

Tripolye and Gumelnitsa cultures in present-day Romania and Moldova, near the Suvorovo graves. These agricultural cultures had not previously used polished-stone maces, and horse bones were rare or absent in their settlement sites. Probably their horse-head maces came from the Suvorovo immigrants. The Suvorovo people in turn acquired many copper ornaments from the Tripolye and Gumelnitsa towns. After this episode of contact and trade, but still during the period 4200-4000 BCE, about 600 agricultural towns in the Balkans and the lower Danube valley, some of which had been occupied for 2000 years, were abandoned. Copper mining ceased in the Balkan copper mines,^[57] and the cultural traditions associated with the agricultural towns were terminated in the Balkans and the lower Danube valley. This collapse of "Old Europe" has been attributed to the immigration of mounted Indo-European warriors.^[58] The collapse could have been caused by intensified warfare, for which there is some evidence; and warfare could have been worsened by mounted raiding; and the horse-head maces have been interpreted as indicating the introduction of domesticated horses and riding just before the collapse.

By 4000 BC mounted steppe tribes would have been ready to move south.

 

[LeBrok]

The Native Americans effectively used horses to hunt, made their lives much easier, don't think they had any herd animals. They also used horses to raid.
.

We can assume that they herded horses, the native animals there.

 

[Aberdeen]

The Native Americans effectively used horses to hunt, made their lives much easier, don't think they had any herd animals. They also used horses to raid.

From Wikipedia:



By 4000 BC mounted steppe tribes would have been ready to move south.

The wild horse once existed in the Americas, but died out long before European contact, and no Native Americans used horses for riding until they acquired them from Europeans. Although historians assume that Native Americans captured and domesticated wild horses that escaped from settlers, it's actually far more likely that the Comanche and the Kiowa Apache acquired horses and the knowledge of how to use and care for them from the Spanish and that the use of horses by other Plains Indians was as a result of trade. Only the Plains Indians made extensive use of horses prior to coming under the control of settlers and they only began to do so after the Spanish moved into the American southwest in the 17th century.

As for Eurasia, where horses exist and are associated with humans but without wheeled vehicles in a prehistoric context, it's difficult to prove whether they were ridden or used for food. On the Eurasian steppe, the first association of horses with wheeled vehicles happened with the Sintasha and Petrovka cultures. And while the earliest historical records about the steppe people indicate their culture was built around riding, it wasn't that popular in Europe until the invention of the stirrup, which gave the rider much more control.

 

[Alan]

I don't know where it came from, Alan, and honestly it won't matter to me personally either way, but at the end of the day some of the people who have been determined to associate the "R" lineage more with "Europe" and to remove any hint of an origin elsewhere will just move the goalpost to a later clade if it's proven that R1 did indeed move out of Iran. It's already happening. Not every "Kurganist" is like that however. Jean Manco, for one, had R1 in that area for years, and of course, Maciamo's views on the origin of R1b are well known.

Similarly, I don't really know how all that "Near Eastern" got into Yamna, and through them into Europe, but time and more adna should make it a little clearer. My problem is that I don't see a clearly archaeologically attested farmer population on the steppe that can be reliably tied to a specifically Caucasus population. I'm starting to think we should be looking perhaps at the Stans?

My point in referring to this other Blog was that once again an attempt was being made to explain away the significance of that component, or to make it somehow less "Near Eastern", and RK's in my opinion excellent analysis of the statistics in the Haak paper put an end to it, and also explained the confusing Gedrosia signals in Europe. I didn't know if it was kosher to lift whole long quotes from another blog, or I would have posted them here.

Remember we also had no real evidence of genetic admixture into Europe during the Neolithic. Most scientist believed in neolithization through cultural contact. Until it turned out farmers were almost completely different from mesolithic H&G and had typical Near Eastern yDNA.

Who would have thought that Haplogroup C* is mesolithic/neolithic European? Who would have thought that Haplgoroup N didn't came with Uralic speakers but was also found in Indo_European Steppe Nomads? Who would have thought to find yDNA H among farmers but no J2? We will have to change our view completely.

 

[Alan]

Let's make sure we are talking about R1a1a or even M417, the ones implicated in IE culture, and not any 20 ky old R1a who went up and down central Asia couple of times before neolithic.

Maybe it was already m417, but maybe it was still R1a or R1a1 and evolved to R1a1a on the Steppes.

I don't know that. I am just saying that R1a at some point reached the Steppes with ANE H&G from South_Central Asia or from the Caucasus mountains as refugees who earlier reached the region from Iran. And they brought mtDNA H with them.

Either through the stan countries or caucasus. At least somewhere where they could have catched up a good chunk of neolithic lineages and genes because I simply don't by the bride exchange/kidnapping thing from "unrelated" cultures and even so far away. What I know about bride kidnapping is, since it was still pretty common decades ago, that the bride was always kidnapped from different communities or tribal groups in the same region. When the parents were not in agreement on a marriage (either not able to pay the price or other disputes). Kidnapping brides from communities you had disputes could even lead to wars. So people thinking of some EHG simply moving into the Caucasus kidnapping constantly brides for over thousand of years just out of fun have no idea.

It was not a game. This can work one time, two times. But the more it happened the more the people get cautious and when they saw a EHG dude come close they would have hunted him down.
That alone would not make it worth kidnapping brides you didn't even knew personally, because bride kidnapping 90% of the cases happens between couples who love each others but the parents don't agree on. How can two people completely unknown to each have loved each other? Why should a person risk his life for some unknown girl (maybe when she was very beautiful ok but these kind of things wouldn't happen between two different cultures). And even if it happened what I don't believe, I doubt the southern pastotalist didn't became more cautios. People are confusing the war like mountain herders with "democratic" farmers.

Than we have the bride exchange/buying. It was common among my people to exchange females (even if the parents agreed, it was just a cultural thing) for gold.

But the whole point is, this all was inner community/tribal thing. They didn't raid other far tribes let alone cultures to buy or kidnap brides. Means even if the Maykop and Yamna were related communities, it is unlikely that bride buying happened too often, because these kind of things are mostly inner community/tribal.

And this has all been common in Caucasus too and is all still very common in Dagestan. What makes me think that these two communities were related (we should not forget how close North Caucasians are to Yamna not only on their Caucasus_Gedrosia part, but there is also some heavy North European genes going on), but even if related as I said bride kidnapping was more of a local community, at max tribal thing. You don't kidnap a girl you don't know of, especially not from different cultures, which also knew all these tricks and hunt you down for it.

 

[Alan]

The Native Americans effectively used horses to hunt, made their lives much easier, don't think they had any herd animals. They also used horses to raid.

From Wikipedia:



By 4000 BC mounted steppe tribes would have been ready to move south.

But how does horses in native Americans proof horse domestication in Yamna prior to 2000 BC? It could have been even earlier maybe.

But horse domestication is also known at least as early as 3000 BC in the Near East.

I never thought of horse riding as an argument for PIE. I find horse riding a more typical Andronovo thing (Indo_Iranians).

 

[Alan]

Some People might have got the impression I am against a PC Steppe origin of Indo European. I am not, I am simply against the idea that all this 50%! "southern" impact on Yamna can be explained without a major migration.

I have only three theories remaining for PIE.
1. Some pastoralist from Zagros_Taurus mountains moved either through the Caucasus or South_Central Asia into the Steppes, mixed with the local H&G and the Yamna-PIE were born there out of this fusion.

2. PIE were the pastoralists from Zagros_Taurus mountains moved into every direction West, East and North and mixed with the communities there giving birth to local Indo European cultures, for example through the Caucasus one wave giving birth to Yamna and another to Corded Ware (this wouldn't necessary have to meanthat CW was descend of Yamna) , a wave through Iran giving birth to Tocharians+Andronovo and into Anatolia giving birth to Hittites and explaining why such an archaic IE language could reach Anatolia so early.

3. Pastoralists who moved very early into South_Central Asia mixed with the local H&G and gave birth to the first PIE and from there some branches moved into the PC Steppes and further, from the Eastern Caspian route, to give birth to Yamna, Andronovo and CW. Some other waves moved directly through Iran into Asia Minor giving birth to groups such as Hittites.

 

[arvistro]

Hmm, this makes me thinking. Bride swapping - if Latvians got part of wives from raids in Lithuania (and vice versa), and Estonians in raids in Latvia. And Karelians in raids in Estonia. Then in say century Lithuanian adna and mtdna gets into Karelia through chain of wife swaps. With y-dna same Karelian.
Add more scale to geography and compensate by increased time...

This should work in both/all directions. That is as long as both/all cultures approve such actions (as in approve doing it themselves).

 

[Alan]

Hmm, this makes me thinking. Bride swapping - if Latvians got part of wives from raids in Lithuania (and vice versa), and Estonians in raids in Latvia. And Karelians in raids in Estonia. Then in say century Lithuanian adna and mtdna gets into Karelia through chain of wife swaps. With y-dna same Karelian.
Add more scale to geography and compensate by increased time...

This should work in both/all directions. That is as long as both/all cultures approve such actions (as in approve doing it themselves).

I have explained why bride swapping would not work between two different cultures in large scale just that you claim exactly this did happen. You seem to not have much knowledge about how bride swapping or kidnapping really works. But I do because it isn't so long ago for my culture that it was part of it. Bride swapping doesn't work in that romantic way as you think. especially not in that extents that it could change 50% of the genetics of a population.

If people do not want to accept a migration from South into the Steppes. Than the only explanation remaining is, we need to imagine that this Caucasus_Gedrosia genes are native to the Steppes since 43000 year old Kostenki was already closer to Caucasians genetically. If that makes people more happy than fine.

 

[Aberdeen]

But how does horses in native Americans proof horse domestication in Yamna prior to 2000 BC? It could have been even earlier maybe.

But horse domestication is also known at least as early as 3000 BC in the Near East.

I never thought of horse riding as an argument for PIE. I find horse riding a more typical Andronovo thing (Indo_Iranians).

As I said in post #483, the use of horses by Native Americans began in the post Columbian period. And it's very difficult to figure out on the basis of archeology whether people are keeping horses for eating or riding, and only the use of horses for pulling vehicles can easily be identified archeology, so it's hard to know when riding started on the Eurasian steppe. Since Andronov culture seems to have come out of Sintasha culture, which is an offshoot of Yamnaya, it wouldn't be surprising if riding was part of the original Yamnaya culture, but it's difficult to know for certain.

 

[Aberdeen]

Some People might have got the impression I am against a PC Steppe origin of Indo European. I am not, I am simply against the idea that all this 50%! "southern" impact on Yamna can be explained without a major migration.

I have only three theories remaining for PIE.
1. Some pastoralist from Zagros_Taurus mountains moved either through the Caucasus or South_Central Asia into the Steppes, mixed with the local H&G and the Yamna-PIE were born there out of this fusion.

2. PIE were the pastoralists from Zagros_Taurus mountains moved into every direction West, East and North and mixed with the communities there giving birth to local Indo European cultures, for example through the Caucasus one wave giving birth to Yamna and another to Corded Ware (this wouldn't necessary have to meanthat CW was descend of Yamna) , a wave through Iran giving birth to Tocharians+Andronovo and into Anatolia giving birth to Hittites and explaining why such an archaic IE language could reach Anatolia so early.

3. Pastoralists who moved very early into South_Central Asia mixed with the local H&G and gave birth to the first PIE and from there some branches moved into the PC Steppes and further, from the Eastern Caspian route, to give birth to Yamna, Andronovo and CW. Some other waves moved directly through Iran into Asia Minor giving birth to groups such as Hittites.

I've always believed that Yamnaya culture was a mixture of Mykop and Russian hunter gatherer. I just didn't expect the Mykop portion to be solidly R1b, and we can't conclude on the basis of samples from a single site that it was. But that would explain how R1b got to Anatolia (with the Hittites). And I still think Yamnaya evolved in situ, from a fusion of Mykop bronze makers and Russian hunter gatherers turned pastoralists (perhaps with the help of farmers from further west). The combination of pastoralism, bronze and chariots created a culture ripe to expand as soon as the steppes experienced any drought or the population outstripped local resources. But, IMO, that still doesn't tell us whether Proto-IE originated with Mykop or Yamnaya.

 

[Angela]

From Wikipedia:
Tripolye and Gumelnitsa cultures in present-day Romania and Moldova, near the Suvorovo graves. These agricultural cultures had not previously used polished-stone maces, and horse bones were rare or absent in their settlement sites. Probably their horse-head maces came from the Suvorovo immigrants. The Suvorovo people in turn acquired many copper ornaments from the Tripolye and Gumelnitsa towns. After this episode of contact and trade, but still during the period 4200-4000 BCE, about 600 agricultural towns in the Balkans and the lower Danube valley, some of which had been occupied for 2000 years, were abandoned. Copper mining ceased in the Balkan copper mines,^[57] and the cultural traditions associated with the agricultural towns were terminated in the Balkans and the lower Danube valley. This collapse of "Old Europe" has been attributed to the immigration of mounted Indo-European warriors.^[58] The collapse could have been caused by intensified warfare, for which there is some evidence; and warfare could have been worsened by mounted raiding; and the horse-head maces have been interpreted as indicating the introduction of domesticated horses and riding just before the collapse.

I want to be clear here. I am not saying that it's impossible for the western steppe people to have been riding horses around this time (4200 BCE). What I am saying is that there is no evidence for it. The fact that some horse head maces were found in some graves in Tripoliye and Gumelnitsa does not even prove that they came from Yamnaya related cultures much less that the horses were being ridden and used for raiding at that time and place. The horse head mace could have been a totem emblem for an animal very important in their world (as totems of buffalo or lions or birds might appear in other kinds of primitive cultures) without their having been domesticated, much less ridden, and could have arrived from further afield.

As I said upthread, the earliest evidence of domestication and the use of a bridle is 3600 BC in Kazakhstan.
http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=114345

Perhaps a new find is just around the corner that will change the picture, but in my opinion, as things stand now, to categorically state that Yamnaya migrations around 4200 BC were spearheaded by mounted raiders is unwarranted because it isn't supported by the evidence.

 

[MOESAN]

Hmm, this makes me thinking. Bride swapping - if Latvians got part of wives from raids in Lithuania (and vice versa), and Estonians in raids in Latvia. And Karelians in raids in Estonia. Then in say century Lithuanian adna and mtdna gets into Karelia through chain of wife swaps. With y-dna same Karelian.
Add more scale to geography and compensate by increased time...

This should work in both/all directions. That is as long as both/all cultures approve such actions (as in approve doing it themselves).[/QUOTE

It 's not to challenge your principal opinion but I think these stories of no end rapts of wives are a bit TV series myths, at high scale I want say -
but yes, exchanges at the mergins between populations have surely occurred and long scale time can explain some erosion of autosomes differences between geofraphically close populations - that said, even today, out of big life centers, the regional differences take time to disappear even at very local scale... so in past? uneasy to answer, according to landscape and way of life? concerning Baltic SE shores, the today Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia populations (without Russians or Tatars) show still means differences spite their all time vicinity... these differences are badly illustrated by rough autosomes poolings -
just an opinion without attached theory
good forum

 

[Alan]

Wasn't there just recently a linguistic/archeological paper published which stated Proto_Indo Europeans (based on the language) must have been "highlanders who lived close to a lake"?



http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...s-were-the-Highlanders-who-lived-near-the-sea

 

[Sile]

Hmm, this makes me thinking. Bride swapping - if Latvians got part of wives from raids in Lithuania (and vice versa), and Estonians in raids in Latvia. And Karelians in raids in Estonia. Then in say century Lithuanian adna and mtdna gets into Karelia through chain of wife swaps. With y-dna same Karelian.
Add more scale to geography and compensate by increased time...

This should work in both/all directions. That is as long as both/all cultures approve such actions (as in approve doing it themselves).[/QUOTE

It 's not to challenge your principal opinion but I think these stories of no end rapts of wives are a bit TV series myths, at high scale I want say -
but yes, exchanges at the mergins between populations have surely occurred and long scale time can explain some erosion of autosomes differences between geofraphically close populations - that said, even today, out of big life centers, the regional differences take time to disappear even at very local scale... so in past? uneasy to answer, according to landscape and way of life? concerning Baltic SE shores, the today Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia populations (without Russians or Tatars) show still means differences spite their all time vicinity... these differences are badly illustrated by rough autosomes poolings -
just an opinion without attached theory
good forum

this "bride" business is ridiculous, ..........was there marriage in this period of history? ..............does anyone have proof?

The simple answer is that anyone bedded anyone, by force or not ..................we even see this much later in later etruscan society, that even though a couple was in union ( was their marriage ?), their was a agreement that anyone could bed anyone else without issue.....................which is why the man was never really sure if the child was really his.

The most likely scenario is that either the women moved with the men that could feed her and her children or she was taken against her will

 

[Angela]

this "bride" business is ridiculous, ..........was there marriage in this period of history? ..............does anyone have proof?

The simple answer is that anyone bedded anyone, by force or not ..................we even see this much later in later etruscan society, that even though a couple was in union ( was their marriage ?), their was a agreement that anyone could bed anyone else without issue.....................which is why the man was never really sure if the child was really his.

The most likely scenario is that either the women moved with the men that could feed her and her children or she was taken against her will

Where on earth do you get these ideas? The gossip of the ancient Greeks and Romans about their neighbors and competitors? There is actual scholarship in this field, you know.

If nothing else, at least start with Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscan_society
"The princely tombs were not of individuals. The inscriptional evidence shows that families were interred there over long periods, marking the growth of the aristocratic family as a fixed institution, parallel to the gens at Rome and perhaps even its model. It is not an Etruscan original, as there is no sign of it in the Villanovan. The Etruscans could have used any model of the eastern Mediterranean. That the growth of this class is related to the new acquisition of wealth through trade is unquestioned. The wealthiest cities were located near the coast.

The Etruscan name of the family was lautn.^[1] At the center of the lautn was the married couple, tusurthir. The Etruscans were a monogamous society that emphasized pairing. The lids of large numbers of sarcophagi (for example, the "Sarcophagus of the Spouses") are adorned with sculpted couples, smiling, in the prime of life (even if the remains were of persons advanced in age), reclining next to each other or with arms around each other. The bond was obviously a close one by social preference
It is possible that Greek and Roman attitudes to the Etruscans were based on a misunderstanding of the place of women within their society. In both Greece and Republican Rome, respectable women were mostly confined to the house and mixed-sex socialising did not occur. Thus the freedom of women within Etruscan society could have been misunderstood as implying their sexual availability.
It is worth noting that a number of Etruscan tombs carry funerary inscriptions in the form 'X son of [father] and [mother]', indicating the importance of the mother's side of the family."


http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1153&context=etruscan_studies

https://books.google.com/books?id=2...=marriage in Etruscan society society&f=false

Nothing was more sacred to the Etruscans than the family unit, and that included verified lines of descent from both father and
mother:
http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/at-the-interface/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/sandhoffewfpaper.pdf

Ancient Marriage in Both Myth and Reality:
http://www.cambridgescholars.com/download/sample/57805

In five more minutes I could compile a list of dozens of scholarly references, but an analysis of Etruscan marriage is off topic. If you wish to discuss Etruscan marriage habits perhaps you might care to open a thread about it or add to an existing thread on their culture. However, the scholarship is what it is and it bears no resemblance to what you stated in your post.

 

[Aberdeen]

Wasn't there just recently a linguistic/archeological paper published which stated Proto_Indo Europeans (based on the language) must have been "highlanders who lived close to a lake"?

Doesn't sound very "Steppic" to me.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...s-were-the-Highlanders-who-lived-near-the-sea

That may not sound very "Steppic" but to me it sounds fairly "Uralic". IMO, the IE language could have originated with either R1b people from the Caucasus or with R1a Russian hunter gatherers, or a synthesis of the two, and we don't have enough evidence yet to decide.