Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 33 of 33

Thread: Yamnayan decline

  1. #26
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    05-01-18
    Posts
    223
    Points
    1,619
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,619, Level: 11
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 231
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Ethnic group
    Irish/British
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Pip View Post
    I'm not looking at founder effects, just referencing Silesian's chart, which shows two branches of Z2109 in "Europa" and only one in "Yamnaya".
    You brought up founder effects to explain the prevalence of R1b in western Europe, but seem to be deaf to them in regard to R1a in central and southern Asia. Much lower population density in central Asia made it a much more likely incubator of founder effects (and drift) than in western Europe, which had much higher population densities dating from the neolithic.
    "I think Marija's 'kurgan hypothesis' has been magnificently vindicated by recent work." --Lord Colin Renfrew, 4/18/2018.

  2. #27
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    15-07-18
    Posts
    497
    Points
    2,458
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,458, Level: 14
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 292
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Country: UK - England



    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey View Post
    You brought up founder effects to explain the prevalence of R1b in western Europe, but seem to be deaf to them in regard to R1a in central and southern Asia. Much lower population density in central Asia made it a much more likely incubator of founder effects (and drift) than in western Europe, which had much higher population densities dating from the neolithic.
    It's not that I'm deaf to founder effects, just that I wanted to stick to the theme of the thread (Yamnayan decline), rather than getting sidetracked into Yamnayan formation.
    I was just saying that if there are 3 branches of a SNP, only one of which was Eastern, this doesn't demonstrate that the Eastern location was necessarily the origin point.

  3. #28
    Moderator Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second ClassThree Friends10000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,606
    Points
    24,014
    Level
    47
    Points: 24,014, Level: 47
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 536
    Overall activity: 38.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Pip View Post
    Data suggests a decline or collapse of Yamnayan populations in the Central Steppe during the late third millennium BC, and its replacement by (for want of a better expression) Indo-Aryan types, approximately as below:
    Samara 3,000 BC -100% Yamnayan
    to Poltavka 2,400 BC - 60% Yamnayan
    to Potapovka 2,200 BC - 30% Yamnayan
    to Sintashta 2,000 BC - 1% Yamnayan

    Does anyone have any data or other information/suggestions about this?
    Do the results remain the same if you use Srubnaya instead of Sintashta? The bulk of Sintashta was in present-day Kazakhstan east of Caspian sea, not exactly the "focal point" of Yamnaya. Is there any difference as to the Yamnaya affinity between Srubnaya and Sintashta?

    Also, from a linguistic point of view, it is interesting to consider that some linguists in the past suggested that it was possible that Cimmerian might have been a sort of middle-ground branch between Daco-Thracian and Indo-Iranian. Furthermore, Hellenic, Armenian, Phrygian and others also seem to have shared many common innovations and are considered by some to be among the last to Split and evolve in complete independence from the "core" dialect continuum of PIE. Almost all of those language families were historically Balkanic (or arguably so, in the case of Armenian), except for Indo-Iranian (which also has many parallels to Balto-Slavic - an interesting position, considering it's also assumed to have shared some close relationship with pre-Greek and pre-Armenian, perhaps when it was still expanding back onto the steppes).

    Therefore, isn't it possible that there was a massive southward displacement of the direct successors to Yamnaya (Potapovka/Catacomb), colonizing new lands in the Balkans and maybe also parts of the Caucasus, and therefore avoiding the increasing pressure of the mostly CWC-derived Sintashta/Srubnaya/Andronovo? Proto-Greek was probably spoken around 2500-2000 B.C. and probably arrived in Greece just a few centuries later, possibly not reaching Greece directly from the steppes. Could the Balkans have become the new homeland of the steppe Yamnaya people (their cultural and genetic heirs)?

  4. #29
    Moderator Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second ClassThree Friends10000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,606
    Points
    24,014
    Level
    47
    Points: 24,014, Level: 47
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 536
    Overall activity: 38.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Pip View Post
    If Sarmatians and Scythians were eastern tribes, as many believe, I wonder why they would have named the western rivers as the near ones and the eastern rivers as the far ones. The suggestion from etymology is perhaps that the originators of these names lived near to the westernmost of these rivers - the Danube?.
    Not that their ancestors also came from the east, but it is very probable that the names of those rivers were taken from Scythian tribes (Sarmatians came a bit later) that were already well established in the westernmost part of the Pontic-Caspian steppe in close contact with the other peoples who really lent those hydronyms to us. It's unlikely they all still had a sense of belonging to just one ethnic community and having the same origin after centuries of expansion in heavily tribal and patriarcal societies without much complex, long distance political organization. They could well have derived from eastern tribes (in turn derived from an eastward movement of western people i.e. pre-Sintashta and pre-Srubnaya ancestral tribes), but those that named those rivers as "the near ones" and "the far ones" were the ones that were to become firmly established in the westernmost part of the steppe - and the way the peoples to their east named those rivers went simply unknown to us, because they had next to no direct and regular influence on the peoples outside the steppes in Eastern Europe. We shouldn't assume those people spoke a uniform dialect and named their rivers or landscapes in the same way just because they might've been linguistically and genetically similar.

  5. #30
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    05-01-18
    Posts
    223
    Points
    1,619
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,619, Level: 11
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 231
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Ethnic group
    Irish/British
    Country: United States



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    It is said that Danubius was the Thracian and Ister the Celtic name of this river; but it seems most probable that DAN is the same word which is found in Eridanus, Rhodanus, Tanais, and the more modern names of Don, Dnieper, and Dniester, and signifies water. Adelung says that Dan-ubius means the "upper water," and Dan-ister "the lower water," and in the later Roman period it was common to apply the name of Danubius to the upper course of the river, and the name of Ister to the lower course. According to Klaproth the word "don" signifying water is still retained in the language of the Ossetes in Caucasus who are a remnant of the Alans of the middle ages.
    https://books.google.com/books?id=GJ...eri%22&f=false

    Note also the significance of "Danaus" in Greek mythology, who lent his name as the patronym of the Danai or Danaans (or Argives), a term that Homer used to refer to the Greeks generally, although they dislocated his origination to another major river, the Nile. Belus, king of Egypt, a son of Poseidon, sired twin sons, Egyptus, who became King of Egypt, and Danaus, who became king of first Libya, then Argos. The Indo-European root, bel-, means "strong" and is likely the root of bellicose (ME), bellicus/bellum (L). (Note the significance of the "divine twins" in Roman and Celtic mythology.) Note also that Danae, daughter of Acrisias, King of Argos, was the mother of the hero Perseus (sired by Zeus), the slayer of the Gorgon Medusa and purported founder of the city of Mycenae. See The New Century Classical Handbook: https://amzn.to/2O3MdXR.

  6. #31
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    15-07-18
    Posts
    497
    Points
    2,458
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,458, Level: 14
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 292
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Country: UK - England



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    Do the results remain the same if you use Srubnaya instead of Sintashta? The bulk of Sintashta was in present-day Kazakhstan east of Caspian sea, not exactly the "focal point" of Yamnaya. Is there any difference as to the Yamnaya affinity between Srubnaya and Sintashta?

    Also, from a linguistic point of view, it is interesting to consider that some linguists in the past suggested that it was possible that Cimmerian might have been a sort of middle-ground branch between Daco-Thracian and Indo-Iranian. Furthermore, Hellenic, Armenian, Phrygian and others also seem to have shared many common innovations and are considered by some to be among the last to Split and evolve in complete independence from the "core" dialect continuum of PIE. Almost all of those language families were historically Balkanic (or arguably so, in the case of Armenian), except for Indo-Iranian (which also has many parallels to Balto-Slavic - an interesting position, considering it's also assumed to have shared some close relationship with pre-Greek and pre-Armenian, perhaps when it was still expanding back onto the steppes).

    Therefore, isn't it possible that there was a massive southward displacement of the direct successors to Yamnaya (Potapovka/Catacomb), colonizing new lands in the Balkans and maybe also parts of the Caucasus, and therefore avoiding the increasing pressure of the mostly CWC-derived Sintashta/Srubnaya/Andronovo? Proto-Greek was probably spoken around 2500-2000 B.C. and probably arrived in Greece just a few centuries later, possibly not reaching Greece directly from the steppes. Could the Balkans have become the new homeland of the steppe Yamnaya people (their cultural and genetic heirs)?
    Possibly - there's a lot to think about here! I'm pretty busy, but will check Srubnaya and Bronze Age Greece when I get the time.

  7. #32
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    15-07-18
    Posts
    497
    Points
    2,458
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,458, Level: 14
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 292
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Country: UK - England



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    Do the results remain the same if you use Srubnaya instead of Sintashta? The bulk of Sintashta was in present-day Kazakhstan east of Caspian sea, not exactly the "focal point" of Yamnaya. Is there any difference as to the Yamnaya affinity between Srubnaya and Sintashta?
    No, I've checked Srubnaya,and cannot find any good fits with Yamnayan contributions here either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    Therefore, isn't it possible that there was a massive southward displacement of the direct successors to Yamnaya (Potapovka/Catacomb), colonizing new lands in the Balkans and maybe also parts of the Caucasus, and therefore avoiding the increasing pressure of the mostly CWC-derived Sintashta/Srubnaya/Andronovo? Proto-Greek was probably spoken around 2500-2000 B.C. and probably arrived in Greece just a few centuries later, possibly not reaching Greece directly from the steppes. Could the Balkans have become the new homeland of the steppe Yamnaya people (their cultural and genetic heirs)?
    Looking at autosomal fits, yes. Late Bronze Age Greece looks most like about 84% indigenous Greek/South Balkans with 16% mixed Southern Steppe Yamnaya/Armenian EBA. Any thoughts on whether the Southern Yamnayan/Armenian EBA contributors would have been minor players or significant influences in the region?

  8. #33
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    15-07-18
    Posts
    497
    Points
    2,458
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,458, Level: 14
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 292
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Country: UK - England



    I would estimate that Yamnayans were largely displaced by R1a populations during the late 3rd millennium BC, and probably became minor genetic contributors to various peripheral Bronze Age populations in the Eastern Baltic, Greece, Armenia and perhaps East of the Urals.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •