Corded Ware Culture admixture against Yamnayans

Goga said:
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
Click to expand...

Lithuanian is so similar to the reconstructed PIE that you can't call it a "young" language. It was historically attested late, but it's basic forms have been spoken since PIE itself.

All of your great looking trees don't change this or the similarities to Sanskrit.

And the oldest IE Language is certainly Anatolian, not your fantasy PIE/Iranian on the Iranian Plateau.
 
Last edited:
berun said:
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.
Click to expand...

Evidence? There is mixing all over the place at the CT/Steppe interface. How bout Sredny Stog and Bug Dniester? And I don't think we got the samples we would need to really investigate this. I know the graves are a complete mixed bag physically with Steppe and Mediterranean types. I think we only got sample from the Yamnaya horizon above Dnieper Donets, which actually gave some indication of this process with an I2 male, but who was very autosomally Yamnaya.

Germanic also shows coevolution with Celtic, and it also contains a whole vocabulary Non-IE sea faring words among others. Probably the I1 dominated farmers that preceded them. It's actually really interesting because not coincidentally you have the first North European culture where boats and the sea play a huge part.

Germanic actually looks like an interface language between Baltic, Celtic, and the pre-IE (presumably, but this is vague) Scandinavian farmers.
 
Last edited:
Goga said:
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
Click to expand...

My god. Lol
 
holderlin said:
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.
Click to expand...

that is the same way I see it
these R1a tribes didn't have any CHG prior to their contacts with Yamna populations, but they had already mixed with EEF
 
Lithuanian is only 'conservative' in comparison with Slavic, which has more innovations due to its complex history and didn't retain the conservative declension system that is still seen in Lithuanian. Any inference about the origin however are likely to be false in this regard, since we know that Balto-Slavic must have come from a region that is nowadays Slavic. A similar dynamic can be seen in the Germanic branch, whose most archaic member Icelandic is quite far from the ultimate origin.

Balto-Slavic itself isn't that archaic in the grand scheme. Mastasovic speculates that the relative paucity of foreign words is due to the proto-language being surrounded by other Indo-European branches.

The best attested representative of a 'pure' Indo-European language is still Sanskrit, imho. Witzel states that only 3% of its vocabulary have an unresolved or foreign etymology.
 
Goga said:
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
Click to expand...

So, in regards to the insert , where does Pontic-Greek come in ?...............as Armenian-Greek?
 
I think you gentlemen should take a look at this spreadsheet by one of the very good posters on eurogenes. It includes both modern and ancient samples. The fact that the percentages for the ancient samples like Loschour, Karelia, etc. are so good gives me confidence that the percentages for samples like Corded Ware are probably pretty good as well.

It was posted in a thread about an upcoming paper which may follow Krause in holding that CHG is the Indo-European cluster.

This is why I said you need to look at formal stats as well.

See:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...VkZnFNb4XUVX7TT_HEZz-IFdk/edit#gid=1880196592
 
Angela said:
I think you gentlemen should take a look at this spreadsheet by one of the very good posters on eurogenes. It includes both modern and ancient samples. The fact that the percentages for the ancient samples like Loschour, Karelia, etc. are so good gives me confidence that the percentages for samples like Corded Ware are probably pretty good as well.

It was posted in a thread about an upcoming paper which may follow Krause in holding that CHG is the Indo-European cluster.

This is why I said you need to look at formal stats as well.

See:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...VkZnFNb4XUVX7TT_HEZz-IFdk/edit#gid=1880196592
Click to expand...


Angela,and what is your take on it?
 
Olympus Mons said:
Angela,and what is your take on it?
Click to expand...

Do you mean whether I think CHG is the Indo-European marker?

If that's the question, I'd say I'm not sure yet but it's possible. These are, for now, in both cases speculation, because the papers haven't come out yet. Neither has the long awaited Reich/Patterson paper on all those ancient Caucasus area genomes.

I've been on record for a long time as saying that I think there was movement of people from south of the Caucasus north onto the steppe, whether directly over the mountains or by circling around the Caspian. That was in the days when certain bloggers were vociferous in maintaining that the Caucasus mountains were a total block on any "southern" migrations onto the steppe. Now we know there was such movement.

Whether that ancestry is the Indo-European marker I don't know. It's a complicated question. For one thing, are we talking about genetically, culturally, linguistically? If we go by David Anthony, he says that the Indo-Europeans were the Yamnaya people of the steppe from the period around 3500 BC who had a certain genetic mix, a certain culture, and spoke a certain language. That would be a mixed EHG/CHG group, yes? Everyone else would be Indo-Europeanized, including Corded Ware perhaps.

I've leaned that way for a long time, but in addition to the genes, it's clear that a lot of the culture came from south of the Caucasus too, most of it, in fact, I think, that or "Old Europe". Is it possible that those "CHG" migrants brought with them a language related to the "Anatolian" branch of the Indo-European languages. I think it's possible, but as I said, I need to read the actual papers, and see what linguists have to say about it.
 
Sile said:
So, in regards to the insert , where does Pontic-Greek come in ?...............as Armenian-Greek?
Click to expand...

Pontic Greek theoretically descends from Koine, which in turn descends from Attic, just like Standard Modern Greek.
Actually it has more archaic Ionic elements than the standard one. Pontic Greeks can be Greco-Persian genetically, with possible Thracian, 'Scythian', Caucasian etc elements.
It would make sense historically. Their neighbors, may have influenced them because that happens everywhere.
The language is as Greek as the standard one.

Btw, @Goga I don't think that Greek and Albanian or Greek and Armenian can be grouped together. It's worse than grouping Germanic with Slavic.
Is there a link of that study?
 
holderlin said:
My god. Lol
Click to expand...
The biggest LMAO is when you stated that Corded Ware spoke some proto-Iranian, after proto-Iranian was separated from Indo-Iranian and continued to evolve differently from proto-Indic.

It is YOU who try to link (proto-Germanic) Corded Ware to the Iranians/Aryans. The point is that Corded Ware has nothing to do with Iranians/Aryans. This was the biggest joke of 2016 and maybe even of 2017!!!

Aryans/Iranians (my direct ancestors) predate Corded Ware by thousands of years. Corded Ware folks (and their modern descendants) are not Aryan/Iranian, were never Aryan and will never be Aryans. It is a huge LMAO to me when non-Iranians claim and want to be the so called Aryans, while they have nothing to do with the ancient Mitanni, Medes, Persians and Parthians...
 
Sile said:
So, in regards to the insert , where does Pontic-Greek come in ?...............as Armenian-Greek?
Click to expand...
Armenian exhibits more satemization than centumization. Armenian is closer to Indo-Iranian, than to Greek (centum language). But Armenian shares certain features only with Greek. I believe we should compare Armenian moslty to the ancient Anatolian languages.


To my understanding the Pontic-Greek is mostly from proto-Greek with some Anatolian/Armenian influences.

They found the MOST archaic Greek in NorthEAST Anatolia.




"Against all odds: archaic Greek in a modern world

An endangered Greek dialect spoken in Turkey has been identified by Dr Ioanna Sitaridou as a "linguistic goldmine" because of its closeness to a language spoken 2,000 years ago."

http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/against-all-odds-archaic-greek-in-a-modern-world
 
All modern Greek dialects were called 'Romeika' (=Roman) by common people.
So, the scientist who decided to use it for a single language or dialect shouldn't be considered a serious one.
 
A. Papadimitriou said:
Pontic Greek theoretically descends from Koine, which in turn descends from Attic, just like Standard Modern Greek.
Actually it has more archaic Ionic elements than the standard one. Pontic Greeks can be Greco-Persian genetically, with possible Thracian, 'Scythian', Caucasian etc elements.
It would make sense historically. Their neighbors, may have influenced them because that happens everywhere.
The language is as Greek as the standard one.

Btw, @Goga I don't think that Greek and Albanian or Greek and Armenian can be grouped together. It's worse than grouping Germanic with Slavic.
Is there a link of that study?
Click to expand...

So, when did these Pontic Greeks arrive on the Eastern Black sea coast?

Some DNA haplogroup state they are Ionion from Miletus travelled there.

Can we assume that the Mycenaeans and their replacements, the Dorians spoke the same language and if not which one contributed to these pontic Greeks
 
MarkoZ said:
Lithuanian is only 'conservative' in comparison with Slavic, which has more innovations due to its complex history and didn't retain the conservative declension system that is still seen in Lithuanian. Any inference about the origin however are likely to be false in this regard, since we know that Balto-Slavic must have come from a region that is nowadays Slavic. A similar dynamic can be seen in the Germanic branch, whose most archaic member Icelandic is quite far from the ultimate origin.

Balto-Slavic itself isn't that archaic in the grand scheme. Mastasovic speculates that the relative paucity of foreign words is due to the proto-language being surrounded by other Indo-European branches.

The best attested representative of a 'pure' Indo-European language is still Sanskrit, imho. Witzel states that only 3% of its vocabulary have an unresolved or foreign etymology.
Click to expand...

They're both very unadulterated in comparison to other IE languages. I've heard many explanations as to why Lithuanian is so conservative, and they all seem like reaches to me. Just like Indo-Iranian is closer to Indic than Iranian, Balto-Slavic is more Baltic than Slavic. In other words Slavic is just a more bastardized version of Baltic, IMHO. And actually Rivers that have Baltic names encompass nearly the entire region of CW, which is not a coincidence.

I would only disagree that Sanskrit is more conservative on the simple grounds that there are many words in Lithuanian that are the exact same word as the reconstructed PIE. This is probably overlooked in a more technical analysis, but it's hard to ignore. "Horse" for example if I had to recall one is the same in PIE as Lithuanian. This is amazing to me.

Even more impressive is not only how far apart they are in distance, but how late Lithuanian was even written down that it would present as so conservative.
 
Sile said:
So, when did these Pontic Greeks arrive on the Eastern Black sea coast?

Some DNA haplogroup state they are Ionion from Miletus travelled there.

Can we assume that the Mycenaeans and their replacements, the Dorians spoke the same language and if not which one contributed to these pontic Greeks
Click to expand...

The Greeks supposedly entered what is now modern Greece around 2000BC. I don't know if that is correct. Mycenean Greece is dated around c. 1600 – c. 1100 BC
The Dorian invasion isn't a fact, the semi-mythical events are labeled 'the return of the Heraclidae' in ancient sources. The interpretation is highly speculative.
The Greeks begun to establish colonies after 900-800 BC, first in Eastern Mediterranean.
The colonization of the Black Sea coasts happened later (not sure currently) but when Herodotus wrote his Histories there were Greeks in 'Scythia' (practically Ukraine),
and some of them had left the coasts and settled among the natives (see: Gelonians, Budini) -who imo were Uralic people in the forest steppe, many scholars would disagree-.


You can read about the Bosporan Kingdom. The Persian, Thracian and 'Scythian' elements are obvious.
Also there was the medieval Empire of Trebizond after the sack of Constantinople on 1204 by crusaders.
 
bicicleur said:
that is the same way I see it
these R1a tribes didn't have any CHG prior to their contacts with Yamna populations, but they had already mixed with EEF
Click to expand...

Yes, It looks obvious to me. Bell Beaker too, so R1b as well.

Of course I'm looking for my early Italo-celtic departure as manifesting in Bell Beaker so I'm a bit biased, also looking for Tocharian in Afanasevo.
 
Huh?? There is a huge amount of post-Neolithic Iranian Plateau auDNA from the in the ancient (~ 5000 yo) samples from the Steppes, at least up to 30%...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 91638 times.

Back
Top