Corded Ware Culture admixture against Yamnayans

I don't save the results of all the formal stats analyses being done. Perhaps I should save some, but I don't. I've been figuring once we have the long awaited paper everything may change anyway, at least slightly. My recollection, however, is that one of the "CHG" samples, Satsurblia, perhaps, can be modeled as mostly Iran Neolithic with some EHG.

The CHG samples are very old. I'm a bit skeptical that some pure "CHG" population survived and was moving into western Anatolia at these late dates. For some analysts I think using the ancient sample is a convenient way to track the ancestry, not that some "pure" population remained. The CHG would be mixed with some other ancestry, I believe. I do also think, however, that some experimenters would prefer to think this is some pure northern Caucasus/quasi European ancestry, rather than something related to Iranian Neolithic.

If I'm remembering this incorrectly, someone can correct the record.

There's a mistake in post 37. Anatolia Neolithic moved east and northeast in the Near East.
 
I don't save the results of all the formal stats analyses being done. Perhaps I should save some, but I don't. I've been figuring once we have the long awaited paper everything may change anyway, at least slightly. My recollection, however, is that one of the "CHG" samples, Satsurblia, perhaps, can be modeled as mostly Iran Neolithic with some EHG.

The CHG samples are very old. I'm a bit skeptical that some pure "CHG" population survived and was moving into western Anatolia at these late dates. For some analysts I think using the ancient sample is a convenient way to track the ancestry, not that some "pure" population remained. The CHG would be mixed with some other ancestry, I believe. I do also think, however, that some experimenters would prefer to think this is some pure northern Caucasus/quasi European ancestry, rather than something related to Iranian Neolithic.

If I'm remembering this incorrectly, someone can correct the record.

There's a mistake in post 37. Anatolia Neolithic moved east and northeast in the Near East.
Yes it could be modeled like this, because CHG and Iranian Farmer where very related and there was a leak of EHG through caucasus too. On top of it all 3 groups were related on very ancient level through Baloch admixture. All had substantial level of it. My deduction comes from analyzing proportion of Caucasus and Baloch admixtures in Yamnayans, and these point to Iranian Farmer being main source and not CHG.
 
I've studied the K = 14 too, and I find it very interesting.

You'll find the Yamna, Afanasievo and Poltavka are all similar :
lots of EHG with an important share of CHG and no EEF, their identified Y-DNA is R1b-P297

Poltavka outlier, Potapovka, CW, Sintashta, Srubna & Andronovo are different :
lots of EHG too, but CHG is reduced and they have EEF, their identified Y-DNA is R1a-M417
they took over from the R1b-P297

There is clear evidence of steppe mixing with EEF (almost certainly directly to the West) in Srubna, Poltavka, Sintashta, and Corded Ware that must have happened prior to, or at least without any CHG/Iran Neolithic admixture(or very little). This is consistent with the notion of steppe mixing with Europe very early on, which subsequently formed, at least in part, the R1a dominant populations that spread onto the steppe after Yamnaya.
 
I just see a simple expansion of CW over unprofited Central Asian steppes (Sintashta, Andronovo, etc.), carrying there R1a and developing there the great Indo-Aryan branch.
 
I just see a simple expansion of CW over unprofited Central Asian steppes (Sintashta, Andronovo, etc.), carrying there R1a and developing there the great Indo-Aryan branch.

Perhaps, but what is CW? It appears to be composed of EHG and EEF admixture with less CHG than Yamnaya, and in some samples no CHG at all (or barely).

Actually we see the same thing in Bell Beaker, Unetice, and Nordic Bronze age too. What I'm saying is that these populations are evidence of Steppe mixing with EEF/WHG before the arrival of CHG in the magnitudes seen in Yamnaya.
 
This is consistent with a pre-Yamnaya PIE that began to move into Western Europe before what we all call Yamnaya.

I still think Yamnaya spoke Indo-Iranian, which was closer to Indic than Iranian (Indic Homeland). CW at the outset was probably very Indic sounding as well, but eventually differentiated into Iranian on the steppe and Baltic in the north. Compare Lithuanian, Sanskrit, and Avestan.
 
There is clear evidence of steppe mixing with EEF (almost certainly directly to the West) in Srubna, Poltavka, Sintashta, and Corded Ware that must have happened prior to, or at least without any CHG/Iran Neolithic admixture(or very little). This is consistent with the notion of steppe mixing with Europe very early on, which subsequently formed, at least in part, the R1a dominant populations that spread onto the steppe after Yamnaya.
The samples from East -Central Yamnaya that we have tell us a different story. There is only mixing with Iranian Neolithic and CHG. You might be right about West Yamnaya but we don't have any samples yet. Corded show both influences Iranian and EEF farmers.

HarappaWorld in Gedmatch admixtures of ancient populations are very telling.
 
Perhaps, but what is CW? It appears to be composed of EHG and EEF admixture with less CHG than Yamnaya, and in some samples no CHG at all (or barely).
Isn't it more likely that they came with IN/CHG admixture already and got EEF from local farmers? You know, central and even north europe were full of them, right?

Actually we see the same thing in Bell Beaker, Unetice, and Nordic Bronze age too. What I'm saying is that these populations are evidence of Steppe mixing with EEF/WHG before the arrival of CHG in the magnitudes seen in Yamnaya.
A good evidence of Bronze Age population with high WHG/EHG without IN/CHG is only Hungarian Bronze Age. They could have been West Yamnayans.
 
This is consistent with a pre-Yamnaya PIE that began to move into Western Europe before what we all call Yamnaya.

I still think Yamnaya spoke Indo-Iranian, which was closer to Indic than Iranian (Indic Homeland). CW at the outset was probably very Indic sounding as well, but eventually differentiated into Iranian on the steppe and Baltic in the north. Compare Lithuanian, Sanskrit, and Avestan.
Nothing but noncense. Lithuanian has absolutely nothing to do with the Iranian. Greek & Armenian are closer to Iranian than Lithuanian, lmao what are you talking about???

Proto-Iranian is much older that Corded Ware culture. Corded Ware is max 2900 BCE.

Proto-Iranian is from 4000 BCE.

2Atkinson-IE-Branches-Map.png


ie1.jpg



http://www.geocurrents.info/cultura...-area-in-which-proto-indo-european-was-spoken
 
CW was proto-Germanic, has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the Iranian, period. Proto-Iranian predate CW by at least 1000 years. Actually, Iranian is closer to Armenian and Greek due to Graeco-Aryan connection in West Asia. Proto-Iranian was antive to the Iranian Plateau. NOBODY speaks Iranian outside the Iranian Plateau. Iranian is part of the Zagros Mountains and the Iranian Plateau.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Aryan
 
Isn't it more likely that they came with IN/CHG admixture already and got EEF from local farmers? You know, central and even north europe were full of them, right?

A good evidence of Bronze Age population with high WHG/EHG without IN/CHG is only Hungarian Bronze Age. They could have been West Yamnayans.

There's several samples in post Yamnaya (presumably IE) cultures that show disproportionately low CHG, and it does look completely absent in some. I'm going off the admixture run. I'm saying this looks like evidence that there was early mixing between EHG/Steppe and the farming cultures to the West. The Hungarian Sample is the best example with none, but I'm saying that this looks to show up in many samples in all of the post-Yamnaya layers.
 
CW was proto-Germanic, has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the Iranian, period. Proto-Iranian predate CW by at least 1000 years. Actually, Iranian is closer to Armenian and Greek due to Graeco-Aryan is West Asia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Aryan

No, CW was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too early to be called Proto-Germanic. Proto-Germanic is Nordic Bronze age.

Lithuanian is strikingly similar to Indic.
 
Nothing but noncense. Lithuanian has absolutely nothing to do with the Iranian. Greek & Armenian are closer to Iranian than Lithuanian, lmao what are you talking about???

Proto-Iranian is much older that Corded Ware culture. Corded Ware is max 2900 BCE.

Proto-Iranian is from 4000 BCE.

2Atkinson-IE-Branches-Map.png


ie1.jpg



http://www.geocurrents.info/cultura...-area-in-which-proto-indo-european-was-spoken

You don't know what you're talking about. Lithuanian and Indic are ridiculously similar AND Lithuanian is essentially identical to PIE.
 
No, CW was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too early to be called Proto-Germanic. Proto-Germanic is Nordic Bronze age.

Lithuanian is strikingly similar to Indic.
lol, you don't know what you are talking about. CW were resposible for Nordic Bronze Age after they arrived from Yamnaya. CW was just proto-Germanic. Nothing special about it.

Indic is not even close to the ancient Sanskrit. 2 very different languages. Indic people don't even understand Sanskrit. Indic is for a HUGE part Dravidian. How can it be similar to Lithuanian, lmao ?
 
You don't know what you're talking about. Lithuanian and Indic are ridiculously similar AND Lithuanian is essentially identical to PIE.
Lithuanian derived from proto-Balto-Slavic. Has nothing to do with PIE. It is not even directly evovled from PIE. It has been evolved from proto-Baltic.

First we got frist stage PIE around the Iranian Plateau,
then second stage of PIE in Yamnaya Horizon,
then proto-Balto-Slavic,
then proto-Baltic,
then proto-Western Baltic
then proto-Lithuanian,
then modern Lithuanian

So, to many steps from PIE. Lithuanian has nothing to do with PIE. And definitely nothing to do with Iranian/Aryan. Lithuanian has many Finno-Ugric (Mongoloid) infuences...

I'm sure proto-Graeco-Iranian, proto Anatolian were much closer to PIE, to it's source, since first stage of PIE is from West Asia.

Proto-Iranian is even OLDER than then proto-Balto-Slavic.

Indic and Sanskrit are 2 very different languages, there are only very few similarities between Sanskrit and modern-Indic. People in India don't understand Sanskrit. Indic is mostly Dravidian....
 
Lithuanian is a VERY young language. Only 1000 years old! Split between Latvia and Lithuanian (from proto-Baltic, then proto-Western Baltic) was only 1000 years ago. It is also heavily mixed with Finno-Ugric (Mongoloid). Nothing special about it.

First we got frist stage PIE around the Iranian Plateau,
then second stage of PIE in Yamnaya Horizon,
then proto-Balto-Slavic,
then proto-Baltic,
then proto-Western Baltic
then proto-Lithuanian,
then modern Lithuanian


image_2516_2-Indo-European-Languages.jpg



http://www.sci-news.com/otherscienc...s-originated-pontic-caspian-steppe-02516.html
 
Corded Ware is only from 2900 BCE. Aryan split from Graeco-Aryan is from 5300 BCE. It was MUCH older than Corded Ware. Corded Ware has absolutely nothing to do with Graeco-Aryan that took shape in West Asia. There is almost 2500 years gap between Graeco-Aryan and Corded Ware. Graeco-Aryan connection is MUCH older. Corded Ware was very young and was actually proto-Germanic, nothing special about it at all. Stop with your ridiculous claims that proto-Iranian is from Corded Ware. Just don't insult proto-Iranian people, my direct ancestors...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Aryan
 
This is consistent with a pre-Yamnaya PIE that began to move into Western Europe before what we all call Yamnaya.

I still think Yamnaya spoke Indo-Iranian, which was closer to Indic than Iranian (Indic Homeland). CW at the outset was probably very Indic sounding as well, but eventually differentiated into Iranian on the steppe and Baltic in the north. Compare Lithuanian, Sanskrit, and Avestan.

pre-Yamnayan PIE going west? which aracheological culture support it? as far as I know there is none.

For the linguistic side, in the CW area developed Germanic and Balto-Slavic, and such branches are first degree sisters.
 
lol, you don't know what you are talking about. CW were resposible for Nordic Bronze Age after they arrived from Yamnaya. CW was just proto-Germanic. Nothing special about it.

Nordic Bronze age was over a thousand years after CW. Saying that CW was "responsible" for NBA isn't correct. A lot of shit happens in a thousand years and this is a unique culture.

Indic is not even close to the ancient Sanskrit. 2 very different languages. Indic people don't even understand Sanskrit. Indic is for a HUGE part Dravidian. How can it be similar to Lithuanian, lmao ?

Sanskrit is the earliest written Indic language. So WTF are you talking about
 

This thread has been viewed 91335 times.

Back
Top