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.
I guess this is because they believe PIE came from south, because new samples of Yamanaya have CHG + Anatolian_Neolithic + EHG, but how do they defferienciate EEF of Anatolia_Neolithic ?We already knew that the Caucasus genetic profile is Anatolian Neolithic + CHG, what can that tell us about the languages spoken in the Caucasus and Europe ?
Etruscan’s genealogical linguistic relationship with Nakh-Daghestanian and other ancient languages like Hurrian and Urartian could very well be explained as emanating from a language spoken by Anatolian farmers.
other theories connect Basque and Georgian.
That is if an ancestor language of Etruscan was indeed spoken by European farmers.
We already knew that the Caucasus genetic profile is Anatolian Neolithic + CHG, what can that tell us about the languages spoken in the Caucasus and Europe ?
Etruscan’s genealogical linguistic relationship with Nakh-Daghestanian and other ancient languages like Hurrian and Urartian could very well be explained as emanating from a language spoken by Anatolian farmers.
other theories connect Basque and Georgian.
That is if an ancestor language of Etruscan was indeed spoken by European farmers.
As regards these Tyrrhenians, some declare them to be natives of Italy, but others call them foreigners. Those who make them a native race say that their name was given them from the forts, which they were the first of the inhabitants of this country to build; for covered buildings enclosed by walls are called by the Tyrrhenian as well as by the Greeks tyrseis or "towers." So they will have it that they received their name from this circumstance in like manner as did the Mossynoeci in Asia; for these also live in high wooden palisades resembling towers, which they call mossynes.
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...Waves-into-Southeast-Asia?p=534836#post534836 (#14)The practice of digging shaft tombs was a widespread phenomenon with prominent examples found in Mycenaean Greece; in Bronze Age China; and in Mesoamerican Western Mexico.[2]
The only sound conclusion I can draw from this is that the common Caucasus ancestry between Transcaucasia and the Steppe was driven by female-mediated gene flow, how that happened may not be as stupid as my mind pictures it for me.
Its true Hajji Fairoz was Z2013, but given how large the admixture into the north is, you would expect at least one guy who is L or J or G. and yet none have been found.
If their society was matriarchial, then PIE could have been spoken south of Caucasus, else all IE language branches fall to the north, even Anatolian.
Those mtDna lineages indicate to me that there was bride exchange going both ways, but the impact north of the Caucasus might have been greater since the population density would have been less.
I have to go back and comb through it again, but the only samples I recall which had definite autosomal gene flow from a late Maykop type group were some of the "Steppe Maykop" ones.
Also, as I said, I don't see much difference between Late Maykop and Kura Araxes, so that ancestry definitely moved north.
Did you even bother reading the paper? This paper burried your Steppes hypothesis finally. Even the authors themselve say this. Embarrassing.
How does the "steppe" that the amateurs found in some early Armenian groups fit into all this?
if there was bride exchange both sides of the Caucasus, it must have been before the arrival of Anatolian farmers south of the Caucasus,
and then, it stopped
Holy crap Steppe Maykop far more EHG than Yamnaya? As I wrote in a post at the Central_ South Asian thread. How does this work with the narrative "EHG exclusive to north like Steppe/East Europe, CHG/Iran_Neo exclusive Iranian Plateau_Caucasus"? How can a part of a southern culture have more EHG than a culture further North from which according to some people they should have actually absorbed it.This is getting muddy in terms of the genetics.
"An interesting observation is that steppe zone individuals directly north of the592 Caucasus (Eneolithic Samara and Eneolithic steppe) had initially not received any593 gene flow from Anatolian farmers. Instead, the ancestry profile in Eneolithic steppe594 individuals shows an even mixture of EHG and CHG ancestry, which argues for an595 effective cultural and genetic border between the contemporaneous Eneolithic populations in the North Caucasus, notably Steppe and Caucasus. Due to the temporal597 limitations of our dataset, we currently cannot determine whether this ancestry is598 stemming from an existing natural genetic gradient running from EHG far to the north599 to CHG/Iran in the south or whether this is the result of farmers with Iranian farmer/600 CHG-related ancestry reaching the steppe zone independent of and prior to a stream601 of Anatolian farmer-like ancestry, where they mixed with local hunter-gatherers that602 carried only EHG ancestry."
Well, if it wasn't there before, and then it was there, wouldn't you lean toward it moving in, especially as it's showing up in steppe Maykop?
Anyway, this is helpful to keeping it straight:
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
Well, there's no R1b south of the Caucasus in this set, that's for sure.
Why do you say that, Bicicleur?
Why would there be ? Isn't E1b1b1 the lineage of Natufians and some EEF ? Why would they be in the Caucasus ?
Did you even bother reading the paper? This paper burried your Steppes hypothesis finally. Even the authors themselve say this. Embarrassing.
if there was still bridal exchange after Anatolian farmers had arrived south of Caucasus, then there also should have been autosomal Anatolian farmer in the steppe, quod non
This thread has been viewed 240231 times.