David Anthony on the Indo-Europeans-again

Podcast with David Reich. He is convinced that Yamnaya is IE, Hittite briefly mentioned as not having shared wheel vocabulary
https://youtu.be/LswA9_jz9G0
But Sumerian which became extinct in the south of Mesopotamia hundreds years before the appearance of Hittite language, borrowed this word from Indo-European, it clearly shows Yamnaya is NOT IE.
 
I think you're letting your biases against what Anthony thinks obscure your judgement, because it seems pretty clear to me that the children were kept in the tell towns and lived and died there obviously does not mean that the children died still in their infancy in those tell towns, but that they lived - i.e. were raised, grew up and resided - there and eventually, as adults, died in those tell towns, not spreading much and leaving a gtrong long-term genetic impact.
Absolutely not, because I broadly agree with what Anthony thinks. It's his slanted and misleading way of writing that I do not like much.
Why refer to them only as "children", if not to hint (without any evidence) that they did not reach reproductive maturity, and by implication must have died out without leaving any descendants?
And of course, every person buried in the tell towns died in the tell towns, whether they had steppic DNA or not.
And there is no evidence that the people there with steppic DNA did not spread much or leave a strong long-term genetic impact. In fact, on the contrary, such people fit very well as contributors to a variety of subsequent populations.

Sounds like a conspiracy theory.
A pejorative expression, only ever wheeled out to discredit by association.

Outliers definitely exist, especially in lands without any major geographic barriers isolating the population. Population genetics is always a matter of probabilities: if all the samples from a certain region, having lived in different timeframes, have a certain genetic makeup, and only one or another deviate clearly from the rest, we're probably dealing with outliers that left little genetic impact on the local population after some generations, otherwise we wouldn't expect that definite genetic structure to remain broadly the same for several generations without major changes.
Yes, outliers do indeed exist, and they indicate something that people who term them "outliers" generally wish to ignore.
Poltavka has an outlier sample that a few centuries later mirrored the general population in the same area.
Sredny Stog has an outlier sample that a thousand years or so later mirrored the general population hundreds of miles to its West.
Most so-called outliers that I have seen identified as such have similar genetic traces in subsequent populations.

Well, many people have been doing exactly that on their own, and they still disagree with your hypothesis. It's not like it's that simple, and you're the only sensible and knowledgeable person to be able to see the truth.
What "hypothesis" is this that I'm supposed to have? And what is this "truth" that you suggest I think only I am able to see? I am merely posting data, and don't have any overarching hypothesis for people to disagree with.
In fact, I've spent most of my time cautioning people on this forum that it is not simple, and that many models presented (including by Reich and Anthony) are misleading by virtue of their over-simplicity.
 
Davidski is the Eurogenes blogger and fellow R1a bearer. R1A FAMILY YEAH! He tends to overly boost his haplogroup because his people, the Poles, have been quite downtrodden over the centuries, and now he's finally on the winning side of something, which I'll allow as I am fond of the Polish people, not the least of which because my father's first generation Polish-American stepfather moved the family (including my father, of course) all across the country making sure my mother and father's DNA was in the same county to make me. I post on that blog as Vinitharya (the name of a Tolkien character which has been translated as 'Wendish Warrior', which is what I call my subclade's MRCA), a persona where I show how Carlos Quiles would sound if he believed R1a transmitted Indo-European languages instead of R1b.
 
But Sumerian which became extinct in the south of Mesopotamia hundreds years before the appearance of Hittite language, borrowed this word from Indo-European, it clearly shows Yamnaya is NOT IE.

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).
 
What "hypothesis" is this that I'm supposed to have? And what is this "truth" that you suggest I think only I am able to see? I am merely posting data, and don't have any overarching hypothesis for people to disagree with.
In fact, I've spent most of my time cautioning people on this forum that it is not simple, and that many models presented (including by Reich and Anthony) are misleading by virtue of their over-simplicity.

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.
 
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:

2zp6u0m.jpg


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:

3-19.jpg
 
Last edited:
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.
 
You have a strange imagination about the ancient times, this is the map of the world in Babylonian era:
2zp6u0m.jpg

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:
3-19.jpg
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.
 
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/threads/38969-Why-names-of-ancient-lands-in-Iran-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???
 
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.
 
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/threads/38969-Why-names-of-ancient-lands-in-Iran-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.
 
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:

3-19.jpg

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.

ncomms9912-f4.jpg


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:

comparison.png
 
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.
 

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.
 
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?
 
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.

ncomms9912-f4.jpg






same thing here:

comparison.png

I am not very convinced by all these lists of words supposed of "common" roots, where voluntarism play the first role. It spite me.
 
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/items/510d47d9-aa37-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99#/?zoom=true

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

Greek vs american Indian

http://flathatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/online.png : Greek

il_794xN.1697373856_id50.jpg

2007-05-10_Epidauros%2C_Greece_5.jpg

Poverty_Point_culture

Poverty_Point_Aerial_HRoe_2014.jpg

Poverty_Point_culture

earthworks at poverty point USA:

https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/661...ulpture?ref=landingpage_similar_listing_top-3
 
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/items/510d47d9-aa37-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99#/?zoom=true

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

Greek vs american Indian

http://flathatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/online.png : Greek

il_794xN.1697373856_id50.jpg

2007-05-10_Epidauros%2C_Greece_5.jpg

Poverty_Point_culture


Poverty_Point_culture

earthworks at poverty point USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_Point_culture#/media/File:Poverty_Point_Aerial_HRoe_2014.jpg


https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/661...ulpture?ref=landingpage_similar_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
 
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.
 

This thread has been viewed 39041 times.

Back
Top