Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The Balkan "trail" is 1) steppes (5,000 BCE), Balkans (4,000 BCE), Anatolia (Troy, 3,000 BCE), Hattusa (1,600 BCE). They would have spent a thousand years in the Balkans as an IE "island" surrounded by non-IE speakers, until booted out by the Yamnaya. If from Sredny Stog, they were originally WHG, not EHG, right? Without real royal Hittite DNA, we might never know.
CHG appears on the steppe long before Maykop. Maykop is too late, imo, for it to be responsible for most of the CHG on the steppe.
Does anyone here read german fluently?Found an article by the Copenhagen group. It's in German, looks like they think Caucasus is the home of Early PIE: https://www.academia.edu/36689289/Invasion_aus_der_Steppe
Isn't it strange that Caucasus ancestry expanded all over Anatolia, the Levant, and the Steppe at the same time ?
They weren't a single culture, othrwise we would see the same language family all over the place, who were these people ?
Does anyone here read german fluently?
I would like to know what the paper says, and why exactly the Danish team places early PIE south of the caucasus.
I can read german, but it would take me half a day to read it all and understand it with my untrained german skills. So if someone here can read it rather fast, im curious as to what it says.
Well, we *do* have a population that seems almost like unmixed CHG on the north sloped of the Caucasus: Dolmen_BA. They are seriously too late to be responsible for that admixture. But the very fact they exist mean that *some sort of* hardly unadmixted CHG population must have survived there. And two of the three of their mtDNA as per this paper - U2e1 and H6a1a2a - pops up in in some sort in Corded Ware and Yamnaya, even as it is in the H6 case some upstream variant.
I know, very circumstantial evidence. But still.
Arrival in Anatolia
Already round 2400 BC can we trace the to Indo-European belonging Hittite in Anatolia. How it speakers came there remains enigmatic. Scientist suspect they came from the Caucasus, where a people ancestral to Yamnaya could have lived.
EDIT: So the usual innuendo without stating a proper theory or naming an actual culture.
I translated the texts and read the english version, and every time something in the translation didn't make sense, i read the sentence in the german version. So i was able to read it through pretty fast that way.
Its seems to be an interview rather than an actual paper. So they will probably bring a theory when they release their maykop paper.
As i understand it Kristiansen seems to suspect that the caucasus was the earliest PIE homeland.
At least that is what i understood from this excerpt which i have taken the liberty of translating:
"(K. Kristiansen"Especially the first chapter of the (Indo-European)story needs to be rewritten." He (K. Kristiansen) suspects that there was a precursor to the Yamna culture, in which a kind of early Proto-Indo-European (Ur-Ur-Indo-Europäisch in German) was spoken. And he (K. Kristiansen) also has a suspicion, where this people could have been: The Caucasus, says Kristiansen, was their home."
Das aber sei unausgegoren: »Da klafft noch ein Loch«, gesteht er.
Yes, it seems the "theory" (It really isn't a theory, as it doesn't name a time frame or points to a culture) seems to become en vogue.
It's still wrong, though.
He just states that its not perfect, and that there are still holes. Which is expectable for every theory.PS: You kept out one crucial line from his statement:
Meaning that still leaves holes.
[/COLOR]
Pointing towards specific cultures has pretty much lost its value in processual and post-processual archaeology. Because as you know, we don't know the name of cultures that early on.
So all "cultures" we see in old litterature are constructs. We don't know if they were cultures at all, or if the similar archaeological findings over vast areas are just indications of trade or fashion.
The Bell beakers are a great example. They were not a culture, it was just fashion shared by different groups with different cultures.
So i wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to name a culture, as most of archaeologists today don't believe that material culture equals actual cultures.
@epoch,
but i have read Kristiansens old papers. And i can assure you that he will bring forward a timeframe and more precise geographical location of those Caucasus Proto-Indo-Europeans with one of his next papers. Im sure he is already working hard on it.
I know German fluently. I will translate it partially.
Found an article by the Copenhagen group. It's in German, looks like they think Caucasus is the home of Early PIE: https://www.academia.edu/36689289/Invasion_aus_der_Steppe
No their view hasn't been wiped off any table. The whole meaning of "pots not people" was that material culture doesn't always equal people.Exactly those same most of archaeologists today were all part of the "Pots not People" dogma from 5 years ago. Their view has been wiped off the table by modern DNA research. That gives a pretty good indication on how to place such opinions.
See above.
This thread has been viewed 242151 times.