The genomic history of southeastern Europe-Mathiesen et al

[epoch]

I know, that's why I posted it :bigsmile:



It can be seen in this plot from Lazaridis (2016):

WHG and Natufian form an almost perfect cline despite the extremely divergent Basal Eurasian component in the latter. Most European farmers plot neatly on this cline in accordance with their varying degrees of additional WHG admixture. Some have slight pull towards highland West Asians due to their minor Iran-Caucasus admixture.



The Iranian samples are hardly relevant to the West Eurasian <-> Levantine continuum since they derive large chunks of their ancestry from another source (i. e. not Basal Eurasian or WHG). Can we agree on this point? I don't see what's controversial about this - recent publications don't leave room for doubt in this regard.



The only case I have is my agreement with Fu et al. with regards to additional West Asian admixture starting with Villabruna or Miron as you correctly pointed out to me. But please do try to help me a bit.

You may want to reread the paper.

No, I don't think any of this works. The component that makes Kotias-Satsurbalia distinctive must have arisen further to the east. Since it seems to be associated with P lineages which weren't present in West Eurasians before its arrival I assume the distant origins should be sought in South-East Asia or Central Asia. South-East Asia would be the place where the ancient paternal ancestor of most West Eurasian must have lived at one point. Iran is merely the crossroads where such migrations naturally end up, as seems to have happened early with the West Eurasians. Without DNA from these pivotal regions the details are murky.



I don't think it's possible to narrow it down in any meaningful way without ancient samples. All we can say is that this type of ancestry appears in Villabrunna when before it wasn't there.

So you can't verify your claims because of lack of samples. I second that.

 

[Angela]

One - I admit rather farfetched - option could be that Anatolian was spoken by a group in the Balkans who were themselves only slightly Steppe admitted. More or less like the Turks today. We *do* have slight Steppe admixture in a Varna sample. After 10 generations 1 persons genetic legacy is about 0.1%. If a slight tiny ruling class managed to impose their language on a large neolithic populace, and that populace would enter Anatolia after a few 100 years we may explain the lack of Steppe admixture.

I agree. I also agree it's rather far fetched.

 

[bicicleur 2]

I agree. I also agree it's rather far fetched.

I see 3 options :

- from the steppe across the Caucasus to Anatolia
- from the steppe across the Balkans to Anatolia
- PIE 6 ka south of the Caucasus, where Anatolian branched of, other PIE (maybe Maykop?) cross the Caucasus to the steppe

there is no trace for either of these 3 options

I still think Anatolians were a small group, expanding inside Anatolia end of 3rd mill BC.
So Anatolina branched off 6000 years ago, but I would like to know, when did Luwian, Hittite and other Anatolian languages split?

I think we all agree PIE minus Anatolian 5.5 ka = Yamna + Afanasievo, later also adopted by CW people

 

[Angela]

Reich's team seems think if there wasn't a Corded Ware or Neolithic Farmer-like mass migration then there was no migration. That's where I have a problem.

That is absolutely not what they're saying or implying: it's another straw man argument.

What you also seem to forget is that they have hundreds and hundreds of samples, and they have a good sense of what will be in the new West Asian paper. Why would they deliberately steer everyone in the wrong direction?

It's a side issue anyway. Maybe it came down through the Caucasus. Goodness, some people are acting as if there's been a death in the family. Should I arrange for bereavement counseling? Maybe we can all hug it out.

 

[MarkoZ]

You may want to reread the paper.

I don't think so. One only has to look at the extended data. In their f3 analysis (ex. Fig. 2) Natufian prefers WHG over Mesolithic and Neolithic Iranians. This affinity increases in other Levantine samples.

So you can't verify your claims because of lack of samples. I second that.

I didn't make any claims. Do you disagree that P originated in South-East Asia?

Perhaps you may want to consider publishing response to Fu et al. and have them lay out their case for you. I'd love to read it.

 

[epoch]

I agree. I also agree it's rather far fetched.

There was some I2a in Sredny Stog. It may be that not the entire Steppe environment was R1b or R1a. This is admittedly even more far fetched Although, the back and forth movement of WHG vs EHG admixture should indicate that if we find R1b in WHG after a while, we may find other minority paternal lines in EHG anytime soon.

 

[epoch]

I don't think so. One only has to look at the extended data. In their f3 analysis (ex. Fig. 2) Natufian prefers WHG over Mesolithic and Neolithic Iranians. This affinity increases in other Levantine samples.

Only that doesn't make your case.

I didn't make any claims. Do you disagree that P originated in South-East Asia?

Perhaps you may want to consider publishing response to Fu et al. and have them lay out their case for you. I'd love to read it.

Where are the oldest N and/or K found? Ust'Ishim and Oase 1.

 

[berun]

Could we cut out the conspiracy theory references, Berun? Nobody is out to get Iberians. I see a lot of Iberians on both the Olalde and Rui Martiniano teams. The data is what it is.

To the Board as a whole, could we have a little less heat and no more insults? We can respectfully agree to disagree.

I'm providing data to sustent a possible biased take of the data. But you might look more about how holy cows behave: they just look to the grass and think that all the world is green, the blue patch above it is simply dismissed.

 

[epoch]

I see 3 options :

- from the steppe across the Caucasus to Anatolia
- from the steppe across the Balkans to Anatolia
- PIE 6 ka south of the Caucasus, where Anatolian branched of, other PIE (maybe Maykop?) cross the Caucasus to the steppe

there is no trace for either of these 3 options

I still think Anatolians were a small group, expanding inside Anatolia end of 3rd mill BC.
So Anatolina branched off 6000 years ago, but I would like to know, when did Luwian, Hittite and other Anatolian languages split?

I think we all agree PIE minus Anatolian 5.5 ka = Yamna + Afanasievo, later also adopted by CW people

Agamemnon on Anthrogenica stated that there is not a trace of Caucasian language substrates in Hittite and stated that it is therefore hardly possible they took the caucasian route. Very readable thread, really worth your time:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...ope-during-EBA-and-implications-for-IE-spread

 

[MarkoZ]

Only that doesn't make your case.

It does mean that the HGs of the Levant were WHG-like. This is what Alan tried to explain earlier in the thread.

Where are the oldest N and/or K found? Ust'Ishim and Oase 1.

The question is where P and its ancestor lived. Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014) suggests that the case is quite simple.

 

[epoch]

It does mean that the HGs of the Levant were WHG-like. This is what Alan tried to explain earlier in the thread.

The question is where P and its ancestor lived. Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014) suggests that the case is quite simple.

If there is one thing ancient DNA learns, it is that the ones that distill ancient movements from modern day distributions are guesswork.

 

[epoch]

I don't think so. One only has to look at the extended data. In their f3 analysis (ex. Fig. 2) Natufian prefers WHG over Mesolithic and Neolithic Iranians. This affinity increases in other Levantine samples.

Exactly what fig 2 you mean?

 

[epoch]

It does mean that the HGs of the Levant were WHG-like. This is what Alan tried to explain earlier in the thread.



The question is where P and its ancestor lived. Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014) suggests that the case is quite simple.

So your case is Villabruna came for SE-Asia?

 

[Sile]

The question is where P and its ancestor lived. Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014) suggests that the case is quite simple.

if you read the paper it states P formed in south-east asia.........R as well, but not R1 ( R1a and R1b ) or R2

 

[Angela]

There was some I2a in Sredny Stog. It may be that not the entire Steppe environment was R1b or R1a. This is admittedly even more far fetched Although, the back and forth movement of WHG vs EHG admixture should indicate that if we find R1b in WHG after a while, we may find other minority paternal lines in EHG anytime soon.

I don't think it's all that far-fetched, but the problem isn't just the y, it's the autosomal: no EHG or WHG, just, presumably, lots of CHG in Bronze Age Anatolia. Who knows, that could change, though.

 

[holderlin]

I've been telling many times that CHG admixture on the steppe had already started with Khvalynsk.

People sort of ignore this for some reason. We also have it in Dnieper Donets I believe.

 

[holderlin]

The hypothesis that the Anatolian languages (Hittite, Luwian, Lycian, Lydian etc.) came into Anatolia from the steppe via the Balkans is looking increasingly dubious imo.

I don't know of a single linguist, or even non-linguist, like Anthony, who doesn't date Anatolian to around 4500-4000 BC. based on many factors, including relative chronology.

There was never any archaeological evidence for any movement from the Balkans to Anatolia around that time; indeed, the movement went in the opposite direction.

Now we discover that there was very little steppe ancestry in the Balkans around that time. (You have to look at the dates and Admixture among other things.)

The argument has been made that perhaps these languages didn't enter Anatolia until long after 4000 BC., when there was some more steppe. Ok, let's look at that scenario.

If the Anatolian speakers weren't in Anatolia, where were they? We have to have a rational alternative. They can't have been on the steppe, because then these languages wouldn't be so archaic; they would exhibit the changes present in late PIE. They couldn't have been in the Balkans either for the same reason. Plus the diversity of the Anatolian languages is in Anatolia, and it took place by 1800 BC. It takes at least 1-2000 years for that kind of diversity to develop. I don't see anything in what we know about how languages develop, or what we know about the Anatolian languages that would lend support to the idea that they weren't in Anatolia by 4000 BC.

Now, one could say that maybe it was a very small group which moved through the Balkans into Anatolia. However, could a very small group of simple herders, in a migration too small to leave any archaeological trace, have spawned so many Indo-European speakers? It's starting to seem like special pleading.

The other part of the genetics piece of the puzzle is that steppe has to show up in Anatolia at an appropriate time.

As Hittite is attested in actual documents in the 19th century BC, any steppe found in the Balkans or Anatolia after that time isn't probative of anything. The authors of the paper state they find neither WHG nor EHG in their Bronze Age Anatolian samples. Now that's a problem because you can't have steppe without them. It's true that Hittites burned their dead. However, they weren't the only Anatolian language speakers. There are the Luwians, for example. Does anyone know if any of the samples come from any of the Indo-European speaking areas?

I find it hard to believe that the Reich Lab, given the thousands of samples they have, and given the Lazaridis West Asian paper that is soon to come out, is deliberately steering us in the wrong direction.

I used to think that the Anatolian languages could have come south from the steppe through the Caucasus, but if they find no steppe in any Indo-European speaking areas at the proper time, what then?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_languages

Here's a direct link to the map below so it's larger.

I don't entirely disagree. We just didn't get the samples we NEED yet. The Anatolian bronze age samples pre-date attestation and they're pretty far away from the Hittite epi-center. I agree that they still show not steppe, but it may be an over simplification to expect steppe to appear ubiquitously in Anatolian at such an early date, especially if they were intrusive.

My main problem with PIE in West Asia, as many of you may have heard me ramble on about, is that we have a VERY old historical record in West Asia. Where are the Indo-Europeans? They're no where to be found until the apearance of the Hittites when they're already in Anatolia in around 1800BC, Then shortly after we have Greek attestations.

I don't friggin know.

Hittite is a problem. I realize that, but I this paper doesn't really push me in either direction. Perhaps a little in the Eastward direction I guess I'll admit. But where?

We have Hurrians to the East and Hattic IN Anatolia, which are attested through Assyrians who HAD COLONIES in Anatolia itself by 2100BC. I think we would know of Anatolian Speakers if they were seated in or around these regions, or moving through.

 

[holderlin]

With the data in this paper there's no reason to support or not support a IE Steppe migration from to Anatolia through the Balkans. There simply aren't enough genomes. Basically all of the "Balkan" genomes in this paper come from Bulgaria. Furthermore they pretty much only come from three time periods; 6000-5500 BC, 4500 BC, and 3400-2900 BC. They sampled nothing from Bulgaria dating between 2900 and 1700 BC and nothing between 1700BC and 500 BC. That's a huge gap in time.

One of the Bulgarian genomes dating 3400-2900 BC did have Steppe ancestry! And coincidentally he was buried under a tumulus, indicating he was an early Indo European. He dates to 2900 BC and is therefore older than any Corded Ware genomes.

And the single Bulgarian genome from 1700 BC is basically a Srubnaya man. Also, all three of the Croatian genomes dating to about 1500 BC had Steppe ancestry.

So yes there was a Steppe presence in the Balkans. It may not have been as strong as in Corded Ware or Bell Beaker but it was definitely there. Until we get DNA from ancient Hittites we have no reason to doubt IE speaking Steppe groups went through the Balkans to Anatolia.

I was looking at that R1a comparing to Srubnaya thinking the same thing.

The question isn't amenable to these samples, but we clearly have an interaction zone that could be interpreted as early evidence of movement in the Balkans.

 

[holderlin]

That is absolutely not what they're saying or implying: it's another straw man argument.

What you also seem to forget is that they have hundreds and hundreds of samples, and they have a good sense of what will be in the new West Asian paper. Why would they deliberately steer everyone in the wrong direction?

It's a side issue anyway. Maybe it came down through the Caucasus. Goodness, some people are acting as if there's been a death in the family. Should I arrange for bereavement counseling? Maybe we can all hug it out.

Come on now. I'm pretty sure there were people all but celebrating this "lack of steppe" long before others chimed in maybe even you......

 

[holderlin]

All I'm saying is there aren't enough Balkan genomes across space and time to say there's evidence or a lack of evidence of a Steppe movement to Anatolia through the Balkans.

There definitely could have been Steppe groups moving through the Balkans that lived side by side native groups without outbreeding. Hungarian genomes dating to the 3rd millenium BC demonstrate this is possible. One is 73% Yamnaya(and carries R1b Z2103), one is something like 90% Anatolia Neolithic, another looks like a UkrainNeolithic and AnatoliaNeolithic mixture.



Reich's team seems think if there wasn't a Corded Ware or Neolithic Farmer-like mass migration then there was no migration. That's where I have a problem.

I would say that these conclusions, or comments, in these papers about languages seem sort of amateurish. I know, I know the irony coming from the archetypal amateur forum poster, but still. Why would they say stuff like that? It almost seems like academic tr0lling.