Massive migration from the steppe - extended discussion

Guys you will go so deep into this discussion that we will again end up with a whole thread of 5-6 pages full of discussion in it.
And everyone will lose the interest in this thread.
Please let us just wait for the upcoming samples and than take conclusions out of it.

What we know so far,for now is that R1a M417/R1b P25 originated roughly somewhere in this area. More is just too speculative imo.

fb5de9-1423942174.jpg
 
What we know so far,for now is that R1a M417/R1b P25 originated roughly somewhere in this area.

We only know that ancestor of M417 lived in Karelia. We don't know where exactly did M417 emerge.

But the farther from Karelia, the less likely. And the closer to Karelia, the more likely.

So areas north of the Black Sea - Caspian Sea - Aral Sea line are more much more probable now.

Check also this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans

The Proto-Indo-Europeans likely lived during the late Neolithic, or roughly the 4th millennium BC [4000 - 3000 BCE]. Mainstream scholarship places them in the forest-steppe zone immediately to the north of the western end of the Pontic-Caspian steppe in Eastern Europe. Some archaeologists would extend the time depth of PIE to the middle Neolithic (5500 to 4500 BCE) or even the early Neolithic (7500 to 5500 BCE), and suggest alternative location hypotheses.

Our Karelian hunter - ancestor of M417 - lived between 5500 and 5000 BCE.

M417 emerged between 2800 and 4800 BCE. Everything fits pretty well.
 
Fire Haired, you write that ”autosomally Mesolithic Karelians are very different from modern ones, they aren't the same people. N1c is probably a recent arrival in northeast Europe. There was no obvious east Asian ancestry in both Mesolithic Russians, but modern Finno-Urgics heavy in N1c do have obvious east Asian ancestry.”
When I look at the chart Shaikort posted http://s28.postimg.org/rqa2facbf/admixt.jpg I would not say that Mesolithic Karelians are so very different from modern Finns. Even that East Asian part seems to be of equal size.
 
You're assuming N1c is original in Karelia because lots have it today. Autosomally Mesolithic Karelians are very different from modern ones, they aren't the same people. N1c is probably a recent arrival in northeast Europe. There was no obvious east Asian ancestry in both Mesolithic Russians, but modern Finno-Urgics heavy in N1c do have obvious east Asian ancestry.

Europe has gone through two major genetic events since the Mesolithic; arrival of west Asians during the Neolithic and migrations out of Russia during the bronze age. No region in Europe has had significant genetic continuum since the Mesolithic. Finno-Urgics are very similar to Indo European-speaking north Europeans, and can fit as being close to 50% Yamna. They aren't Mesolithic relics and have alot of recent common history with other northern Europeans.

Every Y DNA sample from pre-historic Russia-Siberia going all the way back to the Upper Palaeolithic is R, except for a few which are probably from foreign admixture. This is no coincidence.

If R1 came to Mesolithic Russia from west Asia, those west Asians had no ENF ancestry making them very different from modern west Asians. West Asia in this sense is just a geographic location. These R1-bearing west Asians would be as foreign to modern west Asians as Mesolithic Russians are.

Will you finally stop with your west Asian-centrism? No one is attacking west Asians. Saying most R1b and R1a in modern west Asians came from Europe isn't inferiorating west Asians. History doesn't follow agendas. It's the story of random events that were ignorant of each other(people had a little knowledge of history before modern times).

The slogan of historians should be "Random shit happened in the past".

I think there's alot of diversity of R1 and R in general in west and south Asia we should not ignore. If R1b1 was in Spain and Russia 7,000YBP, who's to say it wasn't in Siberia and Iraq. I don't agree with Davidski's simplistic ideas about R and ANE.
Native people of Europe were not Indo-European. Saami in Northern Europe are native people of that region and they’re very similar to Finnic people. They are not Indo-European, nor are people in Finland Indo-Europeans. N1c1and I haplogroups are very frequent in that area and not in other parts of the world. That mean that those haplogroups are just native to those areas. Yamnaya was for a huge part West Asian. Yamnaya folks were actually West Asians who mixed with the A hunter-gatherer in the Steppes. We all know right not that R1b entered Europe from West Asia. I’m sure that the same happened with R1a...
 
In my opinion N1c1 could be in Karelia at the same time as R1a (or shortly later).

Probably Uralic-speakers (N1c1) and Proto-Indo-European speakers (R1a1 + R1b1a) lived close to each other:

http://www.kunstkamera.ru/en/temporary_exhibitions/virtual/gerasimov/10/

(...) Skeletons from Yuzhny Oleniy Island were studied by many anthropologists (the most detailed examination was undertaken by V.P. Yakimov). Stature was rather high for that time – about 173 cm in males. While most people were Caucasoids, some display Mongoloid characteristics – flat faces and rather flat noses. (...)
 
Yes. Relic of old migration from Karelia.
Lol, funny guy. M198 is very close to R1a* to which I do belong. Is my R1a* also a relic from Karelia??? And about what old migration from Karelia into West Asa are you talking about? Did I miss something ? The only migrations that I know about are all from West Asia into Europe ...
 
M198 is very close to R1a* to which I do belong. Is my R1a* also a relic from Karelia???

No, your R1a* is much older than M198. It is from Paleolithic times, over 21,000 - 25,000 years old.

It has nothing to do with Indo-Europeans, though. M417 is the kind of R1a related to Indo-Europeans.
 
R1b1a* is much younger than R1a1* …

But Karelian R1a1 was found to be M17 (M417) - a direct ancestor of R1a1a, which is 4800 - 6800 years old.

In other words, in Karelia 7000 - 7500 years ago lived the man who is ancestor of 99% of modern people who are R1a.

You are among the remaining 1% who are not his descendants. And this 1% were not Indo-Europeans, but Paleolithic survivors.
 


No, your R1a* is much older than M198. It is from Paleolithic times, over 21,000 - 25,000 years old.

Your R1a* is a relic from out-of-Africa migration to Eurasia. Your hg is over 20 thousand years old.

It has nothing to do with Indo-Europeans, though. Only R1a M417 is related to Indo-Europeans.
My R1a* has been also evolving all those thousands of years among my people. It is part of the Kurds today, before it's was part of the Medes (Mitanni) and other West Iranic peoples etc. My evolved R1a* is not the same as R1a* among my direct ancestors. So it's as modern as all other R1a* But it has its roots with the ancient R1a*. The same can be said about M198. Well, R1a evolved from R1*, R1* evolved from R*, R* evolved out of P, P evolved from K, K is from F etc. And yeah at one point huam race came from Africa I guess...
 
And here I agree.
 


But Karelian R1a1 was found to be M17 (M417) - a direct ancestor of R1a1a, which is 4800 - 6800 years old.

In other words, in Karelia 7000 - 7500 years ago lived the man who is ancestor of 99% of modern people who are R1a.

You are among the remaining 1% who are not his descendants. And this 1% were not Indo-Europeans, but Paleolithic survivors.
OMG, where is the proof that all direct descendants of R1a1a are from that Karelian fella and not from another M17 (M417) from West Asia? Maybe all modern S224 folks are descendants from a M17 (M417) from West Asia and NOT Karelia at all ! If you have trouble to understand this simple FATC I'm done with you. And my 'R1a*' = Iranic, because my ancestors were ALL Iranic (Medes) and it was part of them too. So, I've got my R1a* from Iranic people...
 
Native people of Europe were not Indo-European. Saami in Northern Europe are native people of that region and they’re very similar to Finnic people. They are not Indo-European, nor are people in Finland Indo-Europeans. N1c1and I haplogroups are very frequent in that area and not in other parts of the world. That mean that those haplogroups are just native to those areas. Yamnaya was for a huge part West Asian. Yamnaya folks were actually West Asians who mixed with the A hunter-gatherer in the Steppes. We all know right not that R1b entered Europe from West Asia. I’m sure that the same happened with R1a...

Indo Europeans are just as native to Europe was Finno-Urgics. They have the same basic genetic makeup as IE speaking north Europeans. They have significant west Asian ancestry like all Europeans. You're calling them "native" simply because they don't speak an IE language which isn't good evidence.

Y DNA I1 is popular in Norse. Just because Finno-Urgics live next to Norse doesn't mean they have alot of I1, because they don't. Autosomally speaking(Y DNA doesn't tell total ancestry) Lithuanians are more Mesolithic-derived than Saami.
 
Fire Haired, you write that ”autosomally Mesolithic Karelians are very different from modern ones, they aren't the same people. N1c is probably a recent arrival in northeast Europe. There was no obvious east Asian ancestry in both Mesolithic Russians, but modern Finno-Urgics heavy in N1c do have obvious east Asian ancestry.”
When I look at the chart Shaikort posted http://s28.postimg.org/rqa2facbf/admixt.jpg I would not say that Mesolithic Karelians are so very different from modern Finns. Even that East Asian part seems to be of equal size.

Modern Finno-Urgics have mostly Mesolithic north and east Euro ancestry similar to EHG, but they are still very different. Just like someone who is 60% Swedish and 40% Iraqi is very different from someone who is 100% Swedish.
 
Armenian Model by Vyacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov & Tamaz V. Gamkrelidze

This does not work.

Read Underhill 2014. R1a was a very small population until M417 emerged.

Only since the emergence of M417 we observe a demographic boom.

This is pretty much in agreement with ancestors of M417 being hunters (= not numerous).

But Underhill back in 2014 did not know that ancestors of M417 lived in Karelia. Now in 2015 we know it.
 
Indo Europeans are just as native to Europe was Finno-Urgics. They have the same basic genetic makeup as IE speaking north Europeans. They have significant west Asian ancestry like all Europeans. You're calling them "native" simply because they don't speak an IE language which isn't good evidence.

Y DNA I1 is popular in Norse. Just because Finno-Urgics live next to Norse doesn't mean they have alot of I1, because they don't. Autosomally speaking(Y DNA doesn't tell total ancestry) Lithuanians are more Mesolithic-derived than Saami.
No, native European folks never spoke an Indo-European language. Most Indo-European speakers of EUROPE got Indo-Europized by folks from Yamnaya. People of Yamnaya were NOT really native to Europe. Basque, Saami and Finnic people are the most native people of Europe and they don't speak an Indo-European language...
 
This does not work.

Read Underhill 2014. R1a was a very small population until M417 emerged.

Only since the emergence of M417 we observe a demographic boom.

This is pretty much in agreement with ancestors of M417 being hunters (= not numerous).

But Underhill back in 2014 did not know that ancestors of M417 lived in Karelia. Now in 2015 we know it.
It actually works very well, because R1b entered Yamnaya from West Asia! Folks in Yamnaya were for a huge part West Asian (Caucaso-Gedrosian). Even the writers of the latest paper did admit that!
 
It didn't say that in the paper.

It did. Check pages 44 and 47, for example.

Armenian Model by Vyacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov & Tamaz V. Gamkrelidze

Read Underhill 2014. R1a was a very small population until M417 emerged.

Only since the emergence of M417 we observe a demographic boom.

This is pretty much in agreement with ancestors of M417 being hunters (= not numerous).

But Underhill back in 2014 did not know that ancestors of M417 lived in Karelia. Now in 2015 we know it.
 


It did. Check pages 44 and 47, for example.



Read Underhill 2014. R1a was a very small population until M417 emerged.

Only since the emergence of M417 we observe a demographic boom.

This is pretty much in agreement with ancestors of M417 being hunters (= not numerous).

But Underhill back in 2014 did not know that ancestors of M417 lived in Karelia. Now in 2015 we know it.
Once again, do you live on a different planet or something, lol? You're so deep, deep in your denial (sleep) that you are in shock to see the things in reality. You have serious trouble with REALITY. First of all they found R1b and NOT R1a in Yamnaya. Yamnaya folks were for a huge part West Asian (Caucaso-Gedrosian). Caucaso-Gedrosia component is from West Asia, like R1b in Yamnaya and even like R1a*. Because there are all kind of R1a* in West Asia, it's for sure that R1b is from West Asia, because of Caucaso-Gedrosia component in it. Why would R1a* not be from West Asia, when R1b and R1a share the same R1* ancestor. And once again, where is the proof that all direct descendants of R1a1a are from that Karelian fella and not from another M17 (M417) uknown West Asian fella? Maybe all modern S224 folks are descendants from a M17 (M417) from West Asia and NOT Karelia at all...
 
Y DNA I1 is popular in Norse. Just because Finno-Urgics live next to Norse doesn't mean they have alot of I1, because they don't. Autosomally speaking(Y DNA doesn't tell total ancestry) Lithuanians are more Mesolithic-derived than Saami.

But that is again not true! The frequency of I1 in Saamis is c. 26%, and frequency of I1 in West Finland is 41% and in East Finland 20%. And what is your reference when you say that Lithuanians are more Mesolithic-derived than Saami?
 

This thread has been viewed 125408 times.

Back
Top