Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 57

Thread: David Anthony on the Indo-Europeans-again

  1. #26
    Banned Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    545
    Points
    1,481
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,481, Level: 10
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 69
    Overall activity: 99.0%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    That doesn't work as evidence, because, first of all, Hittite doesn't have that word, so it's irrelevante when it was (and I'm sure you can appreciate the difference between written attestation and a language's existence, i.e. it is obvious that some form of Hittite was already spoken many centuries before its first written evidence appears)​, and the Yamnaya-related steppe migrations had already spread far and wide by the time Sumerian was still being spoken and written down, and the word could've come to them via some of those migrant groups (probably even Gutians themselves, who might have been distantly related to the Tocharians according to some non-mainstream hypothesis) or even indirectly via populations that had learned that word and the object associated with it from IE speakers (much like words similar to "computer" and "software" spread to many unrelated languages in the last decades).
    You have a strange imagination about the ancient times, this is the map of the world in Babylonian era:



    Someone with no clear reason says that Gutians were Tocharian and you believe but when I talk about hundreds evidences which show they were Germanic, you don't believe!
    Anyway when Gutians as an IE people lived in Iran from at least the 3rd millennium BC and we know proto-Greek and some other IE people lived in the same area and the same period, so it was IE, not Yamnaya.

    Caucasian languages and Caucasian culture show that the Caucasus had almost no role in the spread of IE culture, this Russian map is interesting for me, however I don't know what it says:

    Last edited by Cyrus; 15-08-19 at 11:47.

  2. #27
    Banned Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    15-07-18
    Posts
    630
    Points
    2,745
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,745, Level: 14
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 5
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: UK - England



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    So don't most of your comments basically point to a PIE origin and expansion coming from the eastern Balkans with a population formed by a mix of SE European EEF with PC Steppe people, eventually spreading from there back into the steppes and westwards into the rest of Europe, and many of these later BA steppe-admixed European populations in fact mostly replaced the local EEF peoples completely and basically expanded over them, without much mixing, and with relatively few changes over more than 1,000-2,000 years? Sorry if I just mistook what you meant, but that's what your evaluations of the data always seemed to be ultimately about in my view.
    Yes, this is broadly something that the data suggests, but this is only part of an overall story that has many other aspects, and the results are not 'about' anything. There is no agenda.
    Also, this has nothing to do with PIE. There is insufficient evidence to show who spoke it, in my view, and I doubt it was the main language of Balkan Chalcolithics.

  3. #28
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    spruithean's Avatar
    Join Date
    29-08-12
    Posts
    332
    Points
    9,071
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,071, Level: 28
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 279
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    You have a strange imagination about the ancient times, this is the map of the world in Babylonian era:

    Someone with no clear reason says that Gutians were Tocharian and you believe but when I talk about hundreds evidences which show they were Germanic, you don't believe!
    Anyway when Gutians as an IE people lived in Iran from at least the 3rd millennium BC and we know proto-Greek and some other IE people lived in the same area and the same period, so it was IE, not Yamnaya.
    Caucasian languages and Caucasian culture show that the Caucasus had almost no role in the spread of IE culture, this Russian map is interesting for me, however I don't know what it says:
    Provide your "hundreds of evidences" that show they were Germanic (I've requested this a lot).

    Your Russian map appears to be based on the Anatolian hypothesis.

  4. #29
    Banned Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    545
    Points
    1,481
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,481, Level: 10
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 69
    Overall activity: 99.0%


    Country: Iran



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by spruithean View Post
    Provide your "hundreds of evidences" that show they were Germanic (I've requested this a lot).
    And I have talked about them several times in this forum and you don't even read them, for example in this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...sound-European I have talked about European, especially Germanic, origin of the names of ancient lands and people in Iran.

  5. #30
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,582
    Points
    297,724
    Level
    100
    Points: 297,724, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    3 out of 4 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    And I have talked about them several times in this forum and you don't even read them, for example in this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...sound-European I have talked about European, especially Germanic, origin of the names of ancient lands and people in Iran.
    We've all read your idiotic theories. No one is convinced by them. If you continue to post the same thing over and over again you will receive infractions for spamming. Am I clear???


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  6. #31
    Banned Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    545
    Points
    1,481
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,481, Level: 10
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 69
    Overall activity: 99.0%


    Country: Iran



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    We've all read your idiotic theories. No one is convinced by them. If you continue to post the same thing over and over again you will receive infractions for spamming. Am I clear???
    You have no right to insult me or other members of this forum, we are here to express our own views and opinions, not what you like, if you want to ban me for this reason, please do it as soon as possible.

  7. #32
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    spruithean's Avatar
    Join Date
    29-08-12
    Posts
    332
    Points
    9,071
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,071, Level: 28
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 279
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: Canada-Ontario



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    And I have talked about them several times in this forum and you don't even read them, for example in this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...sound-European I have talked about European, especially Germanic, origin of the names of ancient lands and people in Iran.
    I have read them, and they are not evidence. They are coincidental, if vaguely similar orthographies for words or terms in different languages. Show me concrete verifiable evidence with supporting data.

  8. #33
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    10-12-15
    Posts
    520
    Points
    6,293
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,293, Level: 23
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 257
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: Canada



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    that Gutians were Tocharian and you believe but when I talk about hundreds evidences which show they were Germanic, you don't believe!
    Anyway when Gutians as an IE people lived in Iran from at least the 3rd millennium BC and we know proto-Greek and some other IE people lived in the same area and the same period, so it was IE, not Yamnaya.

    Caucasian languages and Caucasian culture show that the Caucasus had almost no role in the spread of IE culture, this Russian map is interesting for me, however I don't know what it says:

    I don’t know the tocharian theory, but the map could be explained by CHG migration.
    Actually the CHG paper author thought that the CHG seems to be PIE spreader. But I thought that CHG did not speak PIE, but had PIE words. So I always said that 4500bc Anatolian and 3700bc tocharian did not speak PIE, but just with PIE words. It is because altai-related language (turk, korean, japanese) have tons of tamil words, but they do not speak tamil. I think WSHG migration makes this thing happen. Likewise, ancient the caucasus people would not speak german, even if there were so many ancient german words in there. Thus, nostraic theory seems to be very persuasive.



    susumu Ōno,[9] and homer b. hulbert[10] propose that early dravidian people, especially tamils, migrated to the korean peninsula and japan. clippinger presents 408 cognates and about 60 phonological correspondences. clippinger found that some cognates were closer than others leading him to speculate a genetic link which was reinforced by a later migration.[11][12] the japanese professor tsutomu kambe found more than 500 similar cognates between tamil and japanese.[13] there are two basic common features:[14] all three languages are agglutinative, all three follow sov word order, and consequently modifiers always precede modified words and particles are post-positional. however, typological similarities such as these could easily be due to chance; agglutinative languages are quite common, and half of the languages in the world follow sov word order. the lack of a statistically significant number of cognates and the lack of anthropological and genetic links can be adduced to dismiss this proposal.[1] comparative linguist kang gil-un found 1300 dravidian tamil cognates in korean. he insisted that the korean language is based on the nivkh language and was influenced later.[15]
    Tocharian theory:
    in a posthumously-published article, w. b. henning suggested that the different endings of the king names resembled case endings in the tocharian languages, a branch of indo-european known from texts found in the tarim basin (in the northwest of modern china) dating from the 6th to 8th centuries ce.[5] henning also compared the name guti with kuči, the native name of the tocharian city of kucha, and with the name of the yuezhi, pastoral nomads described in chinese records as living to the east of the tarim in the 2nd century bce,[5] although the latter name is usually reconstructed with a *ŋʷ- initial in old chinese.[6] he also compared tukriš, the name of neighbours of the guti, with the name twγry found in old turkish manuscripts from the early 9th century ce and thought to refer to the tocharians.[5] gamkrelidze and ivanov explored henning's suggestion as possible support for their proposal of an indo-european urheimat in the near east.[7][8] however, most scholars reject the attempt to compare languages separated by more than two millennia.[9]
    same thing here:


  9. #34
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Most Popular

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,727
    Points
    26,994
    Level
    50
    Points: 26,994, Level: 50
    Level completed: 45%, Points required for next Level: 556
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    Someone with no clear reason says that Gutians were Tocharian and you believe but when I talk about hundreds evidences which show they were Germanic, you don't believe!
    You're readings posts too fast and inattentively. I said some think the Gutians might be Indo-European-speaking and were thought by some to be distantly related to Tocharians, that is, one of the groups that Split and expanded eastward the earliest, and that's based on the assumption of a certain linguist that some of the few Gutian terms could be interpreted with slightly similar Tocharian words. But it's of course just speculation. Our difference is that you said Germanic people definitely came straight from Iran in the Iron Age. I just said it is possible that Gutians were Indo-Europeans related to Tocharians in the Early Bronze Age. Totally diferente matters of likelihood.

    Caucasian languages and Caucasian culture show that the Caucasus had almost no role in the spread of IE culture
    Actually, Leyla-Tepe and Maykop cultural influence is very evident in early IE culture. As for modern Caucasian languages, we don't know if they have always had their present reach in the Caucasus or even were Always spoken there, and most certainly we do know that the broad Caucasus area is very multilingual even today with modern states and technologies, let alone back in the Neolithic era. Besides, I'm not sure who told you PIE may only have arisen from the Caucasus. It's just as likely that it was originally spoken by the EHG hunter-gatherers, or maybe it was spoken by a CHG-related populations in the slopes of the North Caucasus, not occupying the Caucasus itself. So, the Caucasian linguistic diversity does not necessarily need to have much to do with PIE.

  10. #35
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Most Popular

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,727
    Points
    26,994
    Level
    50
    Points: 26,994, Level: 50
    Level completed: 45%, Points required for next Level: 556
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by johen View Post

    Oh God, what a nonsense to anyone with a modicum of interest in historical linguistics. It seems many people still do not get that:
    1) sound similarities are just the very first step to prove any kind of linguistic connection (even supposed loanwords), particularly if you cannot prove a regular sound correspondence between one and the other - as languages tend to adapt foreign words to their phonology somewhat regularly -, but just totally random sound-alikes (some not even that convincing... I mean, who really believes that typho pronounced [typʰo:] sounds much like tathtowe?);
    2) linguistics does not preclude knowledge of archaeology, history and even plain common sense, otherwise it risks becoming lost in mere baseless fantasy;
    3) and, given that there are only so much phonemes available, many of them reasonably possible to be heard as allophones (and in fact I very much doubt that that Cherokee orthography is correctly capturing the precise phonology of Cherokee, using only plain Latin lettes), and on the othe other hand, there are thousands and thousands of words, you can find dozens of sound-alikes and "prove" any connection you want between any two languages if you look hard enough and you naively believe that "hey they sound kind of similar and have somewhat similar meanings" alone is a solid scientific evidence.

  11. #36
    Banned Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-10-18
    Posts
    545
    Points
    1,481
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,481, Level: 10
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 69
    Overall activity: 99.0%


    Country: Iran



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    Actually, Leyla-Tepe and Maykop cultural influence is very evident in early IE culture.
    I am really interested to know what these influences are, for example what exists in Indian or Greek culture which could be from the north of Caucasus?

  12. #37
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,408
    Points
    40,323
    Level
    61
    Points: 40,323, Level: 61
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 27
    Overall activity: 18.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by johen View Post
    I don’t know the tocharian theory, but the map could be explained by CHG migration.
    Actually the CHG paper author thought that the CHG seems to be PIE spreader. But I thought that CHG did not speak PIE, but had PIE words. So I always said that 4500bc Anatolian and 3700bc tocharian did not speak PIE, but just with PIE words. It is because altai-related language (turk, korean, japanese) have tons of tamil words, but they do not speak tamil. I think WSHG migration makes this thing happen. Likewise, ancient the caucasus people would not speak german, even if there were so many ancient german words in there. Thus, nostraic theory seems to be very persuasive.







    same thing here:

    I am not very convinced by all these lists of words supposed of "common" roots, where voluntarism play the first role. It spite me.

  13. #38
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    10-12-15
    Posts
    520
    Points
    6,293
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,293, Level: 23
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 257
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    I am not very convinced by all these lists of words supposed of "common" roots, where voluntarism play the first role. It spite me.
    It has just small number of words. I don’t know lingusitic, but their possibility seems to be high.
    Basically R and Q had same culture and language. And then most of R moved west, but Q east.
    Even yamna and afanasievo religous culture was sun head/ animal culture as american indian now.
    Some american Indian was buried as supine with flexed legs in mound like yamna. This typical burial type appeared only in the steppe of repin, yamna and afanasievo. Scholar didnot mention american Indian.

    American indian Cherokee burial:
    https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/...99#/?zoom=true

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/ohlalalucy/12376732174/

    Greek vs american Indian

    http://flathatnews.com/wp-content/up.../09/online.png : Greek






    earthworks at poverty point USA:

    https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/6617..._listing_top-3

  14. #39
    Regular Member Achievements:
    500 Experience Points1 year registered
    Wanderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-04-18
    Age
    27
    Posts
    125
    Points
    965
    Level
    8
    Points: 965, Level: 8
    Level completed: 8%, Points required for next Level: 185
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-L283

    Ethnic group
    Ancient
    Country: United States



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by johen View Post
    It has just small number of words. I don’t know lingusitic, but their possibility seems to be high.
    Basically R and Q had same culture and language. And then most of R moved west, but Q east.
    Even yamna and afanasievo religous culture was sun head/ animal culture as american indian now.
    Some american Indian was buried as supine with flexed legs in mound like yamna. This typical burial type appeared in the steppe of repin, yamna and afanasievo. Scholar didnot mention american Indian.

    American indian burial:
    https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/...99#/?zoom=true

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/ohlalalucy/12376732174/

    Greek vs american Indian

    http://flathatnews.com/wp-content/up.../09/online.png : Greek






    earthworks at poverty point USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Povert..._HRoe_2014.jpg


    https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/6617..._listing_top-3
    You kind of forgot one thing. Haplogroup q in natives diverged much earlier
    Q-m3 diverged 13,300 ybp
    Q-M930 diverged 15200 ybp with Q-M1107 (-M930,)

    Q-M930 -M3 are european
    Q-CTS2730 are native, not european
    Ancick is a subbranch of Q-CTS2730

  15. #40
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    29-04-18
    Posts
    56
    Points
    1,888
    Level
    12
    Points: 1,888, Level: 12
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 262
    Overall activity: 5.0%


    Country: Norway



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Native American populations diverged from Old world maybe 25 000 years ago, probably with some standstill in Beringia. Yamnaya was maybe 5 500 years ago.

  16. #41
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-06-18
    Posts
    379
    Points
    6,136
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,136, Level: 23
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 414
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-M269 (LDNA)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a1b

    Ethnic group
    Thracian
    Country: Greece



    That's why I think linguistics without some historical, archaeological and genetic evidence is a lot of mumbo jumbo. Sorry @Moesan :)! There only so many sounds you can make and some of them will be similar.

  17. #42
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,582
    Points
    297,724
    Level
    100
    Points: 297,724, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigsnake49 View Post
    That's why I think linguistics without some historical, archaeological and genetic evidence is a lot of mumbo jumbo. Sorry @Moesan :)! There only so many sounds you can make and some of them will be similar.
    I agree. I'm ashamed to admit it, but I find that it's a bit like when I'm dragged to a yoga class: I either start to make a to do list for the remainder of the day or I fall asleep.:)

    You know what analogy popped into my mind? I'm a Philistine when it comes to linguistics.

    Only a pop gen geek would know why that's funny. :)

  18. #43
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    770
    Points
    7,659
    Level
    26
    Points: 7,659, Level: 26
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 491
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    The CHG that mixed with EHG to form Eneolithic Steppe and later Yamnaya people seems to be pretty diverged in relation to the CHG represented by the South Caucasus DNA samples that we have found to date. It was already mixed with EHG by the Eneolithic ~4500 B.C., and I wouldn't be surprised if it had started moving down the Caucasus well before that date and had already drifted away from the CHG in Georgia and in other more southern lands in their North Caucasus homeland. When I try to model the genetic ancestry of Europeans using CHG (Kotias, Satsurblia) and EHG (Karelia, Samara) separately, I often find that the EHG is picked up by the software algorithm just fine, but the CHG disappears. But as soon as I try substituting Eneolithic Steppe DNA samples for the former CHG+EHG separate combination, it's found in substantial proportions, as Eneolithic Steppe has a lot of CHG-related ancestry. That's of course not the only reason why I think it's possible that the CHG in the steppe arrived there well before PIE is assumed to have been spoken and was already quite drifted apart from other CHG groups that remained in the South Caucasus, but that stroke me as something really intriguing that confirmed my other suspicions.
    Yes. Recall that "CHG" is just ANE (drifted) that had moved South during the LGM and mixed with Basal Eurasian populations. So the CHG that ends up on the steppe by 4500BC could very well have been there for a long a$$ time and drifted considerably from the core Caucasian populations, as your models prove. It didn't need to move onto the steppe in or near the PIE time frame.

  19. #44
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    770
    Points
    7,659
    Level
    26
    Points: 7,659, Level: 26
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 491
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    Wasn't Repin a derivation of Khvalynsk at least partially? Maybe Siberian input was only more than negligible in the northern parts (core Khvalynsk territory) and not more to the South, or it was simply low enough that it virtually disappeared (given later bottlenecks and random drift) centuries later.
    This. I wouldn't put too much on the dash of Siberian we see in EHG and Eneolithic Steppe samples, and I definitely wouldn't think it's enough to say that populations with samples that have this Siberian could not have been ancestral to populations where it doesn't show up.

  20. #45
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    770
    Points
    7,659
    Level
    26
    Points: 7,659, Level: 26
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 491
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    So, for what it's worth, I decided to play a bit with the aDNA samples available in the Global25 datasheets, and though these are of course flawed and only proximate models I think they're still suggestive and go in the same direction of what the scientific research has been pointing to, which is: 1) Eneolithic Steppe samples from the south near to the Caucasus seem to have been formative for later two presumably IE-speaking culturres(please, don't make me discuss again why Carlos Quiles' "Indo-Uralic" hypothesis is a fanciful attempt at making sense easily of a much more complex history); 2) interestingly, the Early CWC from the Baltic area seems to have more Sredny Stog-related ancestry, whereas the Yamnaya samples have more Progress Eneolithic Steppe ancestry, which I think can have some implications on the origins of the R1a-rich ancestors of the CWC and where they had come from before migrating (orbeing pushed) north; 3) in each and every case, Eneolithic Khvalynsk was only a minor part of the ancestry of the later BA population. Do you think these results are plausible?

    [1] "distance%=3.0953 / distance=0.030953"
    Corded_Ware_Baltic_early

    UKR_Sredny_Stog_II_En 43.1
    RUS_Progress_En 34.9
    RUS_Khvalynsk_En 18.9
    Baltic_LTU_Mesolithic 3.1


    [1] "distance%=2.6627 / distance=0.026627"
    Yamnaya_RUS_Samara

    RUS_Progress_En 55.40
    UKR_Sredny_Stog_II_En 23.55
    RUS_Khvalynsk_En 17.20
    UKR_Dereivka_I_En1 2.10
    RUS_Vonyuchka_En 1.75

    [1] "distance%=2.8016 / distance=0.028016"
    Yamnaya_RUS_Kalmykia

    RUS_Progress_En 53.6
    UKR_Sredny_Stog_II_En 29.2
    RUS_Khvalynsk_En 17.1
    Bingo.

    This is why I've held that PIE was Pre-yamnaya. I think Yamnaya was some form of proto-Indo-Iranian already as I've beat to death during my history on this site.

    Not only that but we see genomes in Sredny Stog, before Yamnaya, that are clearly ancestral to Corded Ware.

  21. #46
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    770
    Points
    7,659
    Level
    26
    Points: 7,659, Level: 26
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 491
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    I don't know how this is speculative.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    After this 4300-4200 BC event, AnatolianFarmer ancestry began to pop up in the steppes. The currently oldest sample with Anatolian Farmer ancestry in the steppes inan individual at Aleksandriya, a Sredni Stog cemetery on theDonets in eastern Ukraine. Sredni Stog has often been discussedas a possible Yamnaya ancestor in Ukraine (Anthony 2007: 239-254). The single published grave is dated about 4000 BC (4045–3974 calBC/ 5215±20 BP/ PSUAMS-2832) and shows 20%Anatolian Farmer ancestry and 80% Khvalynsk-type steppeancestry (CHG&EHG). His Y-chromosome haplogroup wasR1a-Z93, similar to the later Sintashta culture and to South Asian Indo-Aryans, and he is the earliest known sample toshow the genetic adaptation to lactase persistence (I3910T).."
    And this is not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    "The west-to-east gene flow that began after the 4300-4200 BC collapse could have continued into the Yamnayaperiod. Part of the WHG that Wang et al. (2018) detected inYamnaya genomes could have been picked up in the Dniepervalley, where many Dnieper-Donets individuals had WHGancestry, possibly lessening the necessity for mate exchangeswith Globular Amphorae. Probably, late PIE (Yamnaya) evolved in the same part ofthe steppes—the Volga-Caucasus steppes between the lowerDon, the lower and middle Volga, and the North Caucasuspiedmont—where early PIE evolved, and where appropriateEHG/CHG admixtures and Y-chromosome haplogroups wereseen already in the Eneolithic (without Anatolian Farmer).There have always been archaeologists who argued for anorigin of Yamnaya in the Volga steppes, including Gimbutas(1963), Merpert (1974), and recently Morgunova (2014), whoargued that this was where Repin-type ceramics, an importantearly Yamnaya pottery type, first appeared in dated contextsbefore Yamnaya, about 3600 BC. The genetic evidence isconsistent with Yamnaya EHG/CHG origins in the VolgaCaucasus steppes. Also, if contact with the Maikop culture wasa fundamental cause of the innovations in transport andmetallurgy that defined the Yamnaya culture, then the lowerDon-North Caucasus-lower Volga steppes, closest to the NorthCaucasus, would be where the earliest phase is expected."

    " I would still guess that the Darkveti-Meshoko culture andits descendant Maikop culture established the linguisticancestor of the Northwest Caucasian languages inapproximately the region where they remained. I also acceptthe general consensus that the appearance of the hierarchicalMaikop culture about 3600 BC had profound effects on preYamnaya and early Yamnaya steppe cultures. Yamnayametallurgy borrowed from the Maikop culture two-sided molds,tanged daggers, cast shaft hole axes with a single blade, andarsenical copper. Wheeled vehicles might have entered thesteppes through Maikop, revolutionizing steppe economies andmaking Yamnaya pastoral nomadism possible after 3300 BC. So it is still possible that steppe people interacted asraiders and traders and perhaps even political clients of theMaikop people, with interaction intense enough to makeleading political figures in the pre-Yamnaya steppes bilingual inthe Maikop (Northwest Caucasian?) language. Some Maikopwomen might also have become the wives of some preYamnaya men. If their speech was copied by others aroundthem, the linguistic exchanges and interferences suggested byBomhard could have occurred and spread without an equallylarge exchange of mates. But if the interpretations presentedhere are supported, mate exchanges between Maikop and preYamnaya or Yamnaya people were few in number, rare infrequency, and when they did happen, involved primarilyMaikop women, not men. If more mating had occurred, wewould see more EHG among the Maikop genomes and moreAnatolian Farmer among Yamnaya steppe genomes than we dosee. Of course another, final, possibility, consistent with thearchaeological and genetic evidence presented here, is thatthere were two phases of interference from Caucasianlanguages in two periods. The first, perhaps responsible forsome of the basic morphological and phonological traitsBomhard detected, could have occurred in the fifth millenniumBC and involved very archaic eastern Caucasian languages thathad moved to the lower Volga steppes with CHG people, wherethey intermarried with Samara-based EHG pre-Uralic people tocreate early PIE and the Khvalynsk culture and a newEHG/CHG genetic admixture; and the second phase, which left a Northwest Caucasian imprint over late PIE, perhaps moresuperficial (lexical) than the earlier interference, could havebeen during the Maikop period, but without a major geneticexchange between Maikop and Yamnaya."
    Doesn't really matter. Still puts PIE in Eneolithic Steppe I guess, but I'm really seeing corded ware and maybe even Bell Beaker ancestry in those samples from Ukraine, which I think is supported in models.

  22. #47
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    770
    Points
    7,659
    Level
    26
    Points: 7,659, Level: 26
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 491
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
    You have a strange imagination about the ancient times, this is the map of the world in Babylonian era:



    Someone with no clear reason says that Gutians were Tocharian and you believe but when I talk about hundreds evidences which show they were Germanic, you don't believe!
    Anyway when Gutians as an IE people lived in Iran from at least the 3rd millennium BC and we know proto-Greek and some other IE people lived in the same area and the same period, so it was IE, not Yamnaya.

    Caucasian languages and Caucasian culture show that the Caucasus had almost no role in the spread of IE culture, this Russian map is interesting for me, however I don't know what it says:

    This as got to be Alan, Goga, or a close associate.

  23. #48
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class1000 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    12-06-19
    Posts
    244
    Points
    1,233
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,233, Level: 9
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 117
    Overall activity: 24.0%


    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by holderlin View Post
    Bingo.

    This is why I've held that PIE was Pre-yamnaya. I think Yamnaya was some form of proto-Indo-Iranian already as I've beat to death during my history on this site.

    Not only that but we see genomes in Sredny Stog, before Yamnaya, that are clearly ancestral to Corded Ware.
    Really interesting idea! I agree--it seems like researchers are moving toward a PIE homeland south of the Caucasus (Reich, Damgaard, Wang, Grolle). I still don't understand why the Pre-Proto Indo-Europeans (Indo-Hittites) aren't the Proto-Indo-Europeans and the Yamnaya called something like "Modern Indo-Europeans", "Pontic Indo-Europeans", or "Classic Indo-Europeans" or something along these lines. If Reich and Damgaard are correct, the Anatolians, who are considered Indo-Europeans, split off prior to the Yamnaya. If Laroche, Fournet, and Bomhard are correct, the Hurro-Urartians were Indo-Europeans who split prior to the Anatolians splitting off. Obviously both of these theories are controversial, but the former is more widely accepted than the latter. The point is--how could there be Indo-Europeans languages (at least Anatolians) who split off before Yamnaya if Yamnaya were the PIEs?

    I think we are going to start seeing that there were numerous migrations back and forth through the Caucasus (think this is what Wang suggests).

    Do you think that Yamyana were only Proto-Indo-Iranians or something like Balto-Slavic-Indo-Iranians?

  24. #49
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    12-03-18
    Posts
    125
    Points
    1,866
    Level
    12
    Points: 1,866, Level: 12
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 284
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United States



    Anybody has info on Arslantepe paper by Max Planck Institute? It's gonna be very important.

  25. #50
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Joey37's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-06-18
    Location
    Coventry, Rhode Island
    Posts
    334
    Points
    4,039
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,039, Level: 18
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 211
    Overall activity: 18.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a-YP445
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c2b

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic
    Country: USA - Rhode Island



    I think Sredny Stog was the main Pre-Indo-European culture, feeding directly into Corded Ware. Yamna, being predominantly R1b-Z2103, most likely influenced the Balkan peoples who have high frequencies of that subclade.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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