Alan
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,522
- Reaction score
- 456
- Points
- 83
- Ethnic group
- Kurdish
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1a1a1
- mtDNA haplogroup
- HV2a1 +G13708A
Not autochthonous, but most likely from the Caucasus. If they were authochthonous then they wouldn't have been subjugating the Hattic people there before them and using all their place names for the area. The paper mentions the problems with this that I'm sure everyone else is thinking about
"We cannot at this point reject a scenario in which the introduction of the Anatolian IE languages into Anatolia was coupled with the CHG-derived admixture prior to 3700 BCE, but note that this is contrary to the standard view that PIE arose in the steppe north of the Caucasus (4) and that CHG ancestry is also associated with several non-IE-speaking groups, historical and current. Indeed, our data are also consistent with the first speakers of Anatolian IE coming to the region by way of commercial contacts and small-scale movement during the Bronze Age."
"Among comparative linguists, a Balkan route for the introduction of Anatolian IE is generally considered more likely than a passage through the Caucasus, due, for example, to greater Anatolian IE presence and language diversity in the west"
I do agree though, it would probably be more constructive to get DNA from Luwian speakers further west from before the Hittite empire.
What I dislike is that they talk about there being non-IE-speaking populations associated with CHG as if All EHG is associated with is IE. Finno_Ugrics?
Last edited: