News Article on Wang Paper - PIE is Anatolian again?

I mean, the text of the article is illogical. Since little or NO connection between Yamnaya and Maykop then it would appear logically Anatolian/Caucasus would NOT be PIE homeland.
 
What i don't understand is if there are already IE Anatolian names from Northwest Syria from 2500 BC, then who are the brachycephal invaders of Anatolia from 2000 BC?

% of brachycephal people went suddenly from %16 to %42 - %50 so these invaders were very numerous and until now the samples from their period doesn't show steppe admixture too. At the same time, Anatolian languages started to expand with these invaders.
 
Cpluskx said:
What i don't understand is if there are already IE Anatolian names from Northwest Syria from 2500 BC, then who are the brachycephal invaders of Anatolia from 2000 BC?

% of brachycephal people went suddenly from %16 to %42 - %50 so these invaders were very numerous and until now the samples from their period doesn't show steppe admixture too. At the same time, Anatolian languages started to expand with these invaders.
Click to expand...

Hattians perhaps?
 
markod said:
Hattians perhaps?
Click to expand...
How is this possible? I read that Hattian language seems related to Caucasian languages but Hattians are known to be the local population and Hittites are known to be the intruders. In this case Hattians would be the intruders.
 
Exactly. Yamnaya could have been a language related to Caucasian languages that was carried by R1b and that spread into Europe with its only living descendant being Basque. Since these cultures leave no written records, all theories about their language are just speculation.
 
Joey37 said:
Exactly. Yamnaya could have been a language related to Caucasian languages that was carried by R1b and that spread into Europe with its only living descendant being Basque. Since these cultures leave no written records, all theories about their language are just speculation.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm leaning towards atm. No IE language can be shown to be traced back to Yamnaya rather than Corded Ware. So funnily enough, after the ridicule in this thread (and I also thought it ridiculous), I actually think PIE WAS a farmer language (just of one of the later waves into Europe, and that spread to Sredny Stog/proto-CW through Cucuteni-Trypillia). That, or PIE was aboriginal to the Western Pontic-Caspian Steppe (i.e. Sredny Stog) and spread early to Anatolia with Suvorovo
 
in fact Iberian BB are devoid of CHG admixture, so it is more easy, they didn't came from steppes or Central Europe. The apparent EHG can be attributed to forcing programs to assign ADN chunks to given pops, maybe this recently published paper were there were diverse HG survivals or admixtures is delivering ghost pops.
 
berun said:
in fact Iberian BB are devoid of CHG admixture, so it is more easy, they didn't came from steppes or Central Europe. The apparent EHG can be attributed to forcing programs to assign ADN chunks to given pops, maybe this recently published paper were there were diverse HG survivals or admixtures is delivering ghost pops.
Click to expand...

They must have CHG, surely, otherwise it would be a dead giveaway
 
berun said:
in fact Iberian BB are devoid of CHG admixture, so it is more easy, they didn't came from steppes or Central Europe. The apparent EHG can be attributed to forcing programs to assign ADN chunks to given pops, maybe this recently published paper were there were diverse HG survivals or admixtures is delivering ghost pops.
Click to expand...

After all this time you still haven't figured out that Bell Beaker pottery is just that...a pottery style...and not an ethnicity, and that the original Iberians who used Beakers are DIFFERENT genetically from the Central European people who adopted beakers and other hallmarks of that culture?
 
Angela said:
After all this time you still haven't figured out that Bell Beaker pottery is just that...a pottery style...and not an ethnicity, and that the original Iberians who used Beakers are DIFFERENT genetically from the Central European people who adopted beakers and other hallmarks of that culture?
Click to expand...

I figure that BB is pottery inside a cultural package linked to a big demographic change in Western Europe carried mainly by R1b, that it is to say ethnicity, they had the same religion even. Maybe you could read more about them.
 
Angela said:
After all this time you still haven't figured out that Bell Beaker pottery is just that...a pottery style...and not an ethnicity, and that the original Iberians who used Beakers are DIFFERENT genetically from the Central European people who adopted beakers and other hallmarks of that culture?
Click to expand...

I definitely think a migration was involved with the spread of BB pottery to Iberia though, even if people of different ancestries used the pottery simultaneously. What that was I don't know (it could be North African-related, L51-related, G2a-related etc.), but I know it's very rare for brand new pottery styles to emerge with no clear immediate predecessor.
 
berun said:
maybe you can find it, I'm not capable...
Click to expand...
Let's try scaled Global25 on Iberia Bell Beaker (with steppe); it's surely not gospel, but it's something.

HG sources going eastward from Iberia:
68% Iberia CA, 19% El Miron, 13% Iberia N, 0% Iberia Mesolithic - distance 7.67479%
44% LBK N, 18% Iron Gates HG, 17% Vestonice 16, 21% Iberia CA - distance 5.6527%
55% Iberia CA, 24% EHG, 21% LBK N - distance 2.5947%

Adding CHG sources:
61% Iberia CA, 22% EHG, 17% Peleponnese N Outlier - distance 2.1621%
68% Iberia CA, 19% EHG, 7% CHG, 6% LBK N - distance 1.8130%

With Yamnaya:
72% Iberia CA, 28% Yamnaya Samara - distance 1.1723%
70% Iberia CA, 24% Yamnaya Samara, 4% EHG, 2% LBK N - distance 1.0501%

Has a somewhat higher ratio of EHG:CHG than Yamnaya does (unless this is some artifact of G25).
 
berun said:
I figure that BB is pottery inside a cultural package linked to a big demographic change in Western Europe carried mainly by R1b, that it is to say ethnicity, they had the same religion even. Maybe you could read more about them.
Click to expand...



No matter how many people over the years have tried to explain it, no matter what tools they use, you don't grasp that people from a Bell Beaker "setting" are going to differ genetically based on time period and where they adopted the "Beaker" package.

Maciamo wrote about it years ago. Culture and genetics are NOT synonymous with this group. Period.
 
ToBeOrNotToBe said:
I think the recent Iberia paper may have actually exposed a glimmer of doubt for Yamnaya being IE
Click to expand...

Why do you say that?

As for all IE languages being derived from a CWC language, do we already know if the steppe ancestry in the Balkans and especially in Greece and Armenia fits better with a (probably) Late Yamnaya/Early Catacomb or with a CWC origin? If the former, that would immediately falsify the idea that CWC can explain the entire expansion of IE languages. Besides, Yamnaya and Sredny Stog were autosomally and culturally much, much closer to each other than Yamnaya to any Caucasian CA or BA culture or to Cucuteni-Tripolye, which suggests to me that it is more likely that SS and Yamnaya shared the same language family than Yamnaya speaking a completely different language, let alone one of contemporaneous Caucasian stock (PIE was certainly a continuum of several dialects and maybe even had sister languages that eventually died out during the expansion of some more successful languages within that linguistic area).

Additionally, the Iberia paper as well as others confirmed that Central European BB was probably a big part of the history of Indo-Europeanization of Europe, but BB as far as I can see cannot be responsible for what happened in the Balkans (their easternmost reach was Hungary and they didn't have much influence beyond that), which also involved full Indo-Europeanization. Besides, it's not even certain that those Central European Bell Beakers were of CWC stock, and not coming from an intermediate homeland ultimately derived from Yamnaya. I find it tremendously unlikely that they just shifted to the language of theCWC women (not that they married only or mostly CWC women, they had far too much EEF ancestry for that), not just women, but women of a declining and generally less advanced culture than their own (language shift when the conquerors are a minority conquering a fully formed civilization is not a given, i.e. the Turkish in Anatolia or Arabs in Egypt, let alone when the conquerors are not absorbing a high culture and very complex society to rule them).

If you want to know my present leanings (of course they may change as I read more and more studies are released): ~5000 BC: Khvalynsk (pre-PIE) and Sredny Stog (para-PIE) > ~4200 B.C.: Suvorovo-Novodanilovka (early PIE) > 4000 B.C.: Sredny Stog and Late Khvalynsk (homogeneization of the languages of the steppe, followed by a new dialect continuum), with Suvorovo "islands" in the Balkans leading to the Indo-Europeanization of some communities (possibly in Cernavoda and/or Ezero) > 3500 B.C.: Repin/Early Yamnaya (second wave of linguistic homogeneization of the steppe, with LPIE dialects expanding and either absorbing or forcing a "reconvergence" of linguistic aspects towards a new lingua franca)... Or something like that. lol
 
ToBeOrNotToBe said:
I definitely think a migration was involved with the spread of BB pottery to Iberia though, even if people of different ancestries used the pottery simultaneously. What that was I don't know (it could be North African-related, L51-related, G2a-related etc.), but I know it's very rare for brand new pottery styles to emerge with no clear immediate predecessor.
Click to expand...

Spread TO Iberia? Aren't the earliest BB remains from Iberia, more specifically Portugal? I've always thought of BB as a local, Iberian development (obviously foreign influences must have happened, too) that simply spread northward as a very prestigious cultural package through trade routes and maybe trade outposts and colonies to the North Sea region, where many people - not all, as we can see from the recent results of the arrival of steppe BB-like ancestry in the Balearic islands in the BA - picked it up much like Japanese people picked a lot of Western MATERIAL culture even if they maintained their cultural distinctiveness, ethnic identity and ancestry.
 
Ygorcs said:
Why do you say that?

As for all IE languages being derived from a CWC language, do we already know if the steppe ancestry in the Balkans and especially in Greece and Armenia fits better with a (probably) Late Yamnaya/Early Catacomb or with a CWC origin? If the former, that would immediately falsify the idea that CWC can explain the entire expansion of IE languages. Besides, Yamnaya and Sredny Stog were autosomally and culturally much, much closer to each other than Yamnaya to any Caucasian CA or BA culture or to Cucuteni-Tripolye, which suggests to me that it is more likely that SS and Yamnaya shared the same language family than Yamnaya speaking a completely different language, let alone one of contemporaneous Caucasian stock (PIE was certainly a continuum of several dialects and maybe even had sister languages that eventually died out during the expansion of some more successful languages within that linguistic area).

Additionally, the Iberia paper as well as others confirmed that Central European BB was probably a big part of the history of Indo-Europeanization of Europe, but BB as far as I can see cannot be responsible for what happened in the Balkans (their easternmost reach was Hungary and they didn't have much influence beyond that), which also involved full Indo-Europeanization. Besides, it's not even certain that those Central European Bell Beakers were of CWC stock, and not coming from an intermediate homeland ultimately derived from Yamnaya. I find it tremendously unlikely that they just shifted to the language of theCWC women (not that they married only or mostly CWC women, they had far too much EEF ancestry for that), not just women, but women of a declining and generally less advanced culture than their own (language shift when the conquerors are a minority conquering a fully formed civilization is not a given, i.e. the Turkish in Anatolia or Arabs in Egypt, let alone when the conquerors are not absorbing a high culture and very complex society to rule them).

If you want to know my present leanings (of course they may change as I read more and more studies are released): ~5000 BC: Khvalynsk (pre-PIE) and Sredny Stog (para-PIE) > ~4200 B.C.: Suvorovo-Novodanilovka (early PIE) > 4000 B.C.: Sredny Stog and Late Khvalynsk (homogeneization of the languages of the steppe, followed by a new dialect continuum), with Suvorovo "islands" in the Balkans leading to the Indo-Europeanization of some communities (possibly in Cernavoda and/or Ezero) > 3500 B.C.: Repin/Early Yamnaya (second wave of linguistic homogeneization of the steppe, with LPIE dialects expanding and either absorbing or forcing a "reconvergence" of linguistic aspects towards a new lingua franca)... Or something like that. lol
Click to expand...

It's ultimately my gut instinct, clearly as that has changed a couple of times it isn't anything to rely on too heavily though. The main things I can think of atm are the fact that proto-Anatolian doesn't have the word for wheel (and PIE seems to have been spoken by a community familiar with farming), that Tocharian is likely not related to Afanasevo imo given the distance from the Tarim basin and the fact that likely Tocharian speakers from the Tarim Basin were CW-derived R1as, that in many ways it seems the CWC was not descended from Yamnaya, and that Yamnaya actually matches rather well with Dene-Caucasian of all things...

Yamnayan offshoots have presences in areas where Vasconic (BB culture - NOTE I STILL DON'T THINK IT WAS YAMNAYA DERIVED, but potentially derived from Kemi-Oba or something pre-Yamnaya), Yenesian (Afanasievo culture) and North Caucasian (Yamnaya proper but also potentially Maykop if Dene-Caucasian spread originally from Maykop) are spoken, with influence where Sino-Tibetan is spoken (Afanasevo introduced bronze metallurgy to East Asia and extremely extensive contacts with China existed with Afanasievo's descendents for thousands of years, so perhaps language transfer or at least influence was involved). That's Sino-Caucasian languages accounted for in terms of Yamnaya, Na Dene is harder to explain however they have modern swastikas and other similarities with areas of the Old World that only really date back at most to the 5th mBC (not getting into a debate about that though, but it's one of the things that I'll never change my mind on and not out of narrow-mindedness).

I definitely do think Catacomb was IE as it just makes a lot of sense for Greek and Armenian, so idk. Maybe Catacomb was influenced by CW, or perhaps everything I've mentioned so far are actually Repin and not Yamnaya offshoots as they all lack kurgans (afaik none in Afanasievo, BBs etc.) and thus Yamnaya was IE-ised by Maykop but Repin predating Maykop influence wasn't?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 84575 times.

Back
Top