New studies says that Anatolian IEs came from East

tyuiopman

Regular Member
Messages
270
Reaction score
32
Points
0
Researchers Matilde Serangeli and Thomas Orlander claim that the Proto-Anatolians came from Maykop in their new book Dispersals and Diversifications Linguistic and Archaeological Perspectives on the Early Stages of Indo European.

However, Hittite scholar Petra Goedegeburre suggests that Kura-Araxes was culturally mixed, and contained a Proto-Anatolian element that spread westward. However, she claims that the Anatolians originally came from the Steppe, but left prior to farming reaching the north Black Sea region.

It seems that the scholars are now leaning toward an eastern/Caucasus origin for the Hittites, etc.
 
Last edited:
Researchers Matilde Serangeli and Thomas Orlander claim that the Proto-Anatolians came from Maykop in their new book Dispersals and Diversifications Linguistic and Archaeological Perspectives on the Early Stages of Indo European.

However, Hittite scholar Petra Goedegeburre suggests that Kura-Araxes was culturally mixed, and contained a Proto-Anatolian element that spread westward. However, she claims that the Anatolians originally came from the Steppe, but left prior to farming reaching the north Black Sea region.

It seems that the scholars are now leaning toward an eastern/Caucasus origin for the Hittites, etc.

If, indeed, Anatolian speakers arrived from the Caucasus area rather than arriving from the Balkans, then the eastern Caucasus makes more sense as that's the easiest route south. If they came from the west the easiest route would have been by sea along the coast. There are a few trails through the mountains, but I never thought that was the likeliest means of access. The same applies to Italy. I think any reasonably large migration will skirt the mountains where possible.

I honestly don't know if this question will ever be resolved satisfactorily. I used to think that the genetics analyses would point solidly in one direction, but so far that isn't the case imo.
 
If, indeed, Anatolian speakers arrived from the Caucasus area rather than arriving from the Balkans, then the eastern Caucasus makes more sense as that's the easiest route south. If they came from the west the easiest route would have been by sea along the coast. There are a few trails through the mountains, but I never thought that was the likeliest means of access. The same applies to Italy. I think any reasonably large migration will skirt the mountains where possible.

I honestly don't know if this question will ever be resolved satisfactorily. I used to think that the genetics analyses would point solidly in one direction, but so far that isn't the case imo.

Well, to my understanding, this new research, which is building off Damgaard's 2018 research, suggests that there was an infusion of Caucasus-linked ancestry into Asia Minor during the Neolithic, so this is part of the reason why they are leaning toward a Proto-Anatolian IE homeland in the Caucasus. In other words, they're saying that this influx of Caucasian-ancestry into the Anatolian heartland was brought by the Proto-Anatolians during the Neolithic.

Your point about the eastern Caucasus is interesting, since people in Daghestan have a high degree of Y-haplogroup R1b (although it could have come from the south possibly). Obviously, this would negate the Maykop theory but it could theoretically work with the Kura-Araxes theory.

I streamed a lecture tonight from the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago regarding this topic (which is what inspired and informed this post). I'll link it when it gets posted to their Youtube account.
 
I have been quite intrigued recently by the results I tested for the DNA samples from the Caspian part of northern Iran (Tepe Hissar) and, moving westward, from Armenia (Areni), both from the Chaltolichic Period. I consistently got genetic affinities, even if in some individuals very minor ones, with Chalcolithic Pontic-Caspian populations (especially Vonyuchka_Eneolithic) even as I tested several different models with numerous reference populations (including ANE-related and EHG-related early samples to account for some possible pre-Bronze Age or even pre-Neolithic influx of hunter-gatherers). If there is at least some clue to the truth in those modeled results, I think we might be observing a southward movement from the southern portion of the Pontic-Caspian steppe, just north of the Caucasus, as early as the Chalcolithic Era, first spreading to Transcaucasia and the Elburz.

That could explain the virtual lack of steppe ancestry in MLBA Anatolia until no (very few samples have been sequenced until now from that region and time period), because the Hittites, Luwians and other Anatolian IEs would have already arrived with a mostly ANF + CHG + Iran_Neo genetic makeup, further diluting their steppe ancestry (which was probably itself already richer in CHG than the average Yamnaya, CWC or Bell Beaker, if they were indeed similar to the Vonyuchka_Eneolithic samples) as they mixed with Chalcolithic and EBA Anatolians.
 
Ancients called people of Anatolians, Asians ..............after Asia Minor , older name for Anatolia
Old papers state the same in regards to Daghestan...........because this area has the majority of different haplogroups found anywhere
 
I would not be surprised if in the future they say that homeland of all IE languages is Caucasus,
 
Well, to my understanding, this new research, which is building off Damgaard's 2018 research, suggests that there was an infusion of Caucasus-linked ancestry into Asia Minor during the Neolithic, so this is part of the reason why they are leaning toward a Proto-Anatolian IE homeland in the Caucasus. In other words, they're saying that this influx of Caucasian-ancestry into the Anatolian heartland was brought by the Proto-Anatolians during the Neolithic.

Your point about the eastern Caucasus is interesting, since people in Daghestan have a high degree of Y-haplogroup R1b (although it could have come from the south possibly). Obviously, this would negate the Maykop theory but it could theoretically work with the Kura-Araxes theory.

I streamed a lecture tonight from the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago regarding this topic (which is what inspired and informed this post). I'll link it when it gets posted to their Youtube account.

Thanks. I'm definitely very interested to listen to it.
 
I have been quite intrigued recently by the results I tested for the DNA samples from the Caspian part of northern Iran (Tepe Hissar) and, moving westward, from Armenia (Areni), both from the Chaltolichic Period. I consistently got genetic affinities, even if in some individuals very minor ones, with Chalcolithic Pontic-Caspian populations (especially Vonyuchka_Eneolithic) even as I tested several different models with numerous reference populations (including ANE-related and EHG-related early samples to account for some possible pre-Bronze Age or even pre-Neolithic influx of hunter-gatherers). If there is at least some clue to the truth in those modeled results, I think we might be observing a southward movement from the southern portion of the Pontic-Caspian steppe, just north of the Caucasus, as early as the Chalcolithic Era, first spreading to Transcaucasia and the Elburz.

That could explain the virtual lack of steppe ancestry in MLBA Anatolia until no (very few samples have been sequenced until now from that region and time period), because the Hittites, Luwians and other Anatolian IEs would have already arrived with a mostly ANF + CHG + Iran_Neo genetic makeup, further diluting their steppe ancestry (which was probably itself already richer in CHG than the average Yamnaya, CWC or Bell Beaker, if they were indeed similar to the Vonyuchka_Eneolithic samples) as they mixed with Chalcolithic and EBA Anatolians.

That makes sense. Of the two possible routes (setting aside for now the hypothesis that Indo-European "arose" in Anatolia or the Caucasus itself) this is more plausible to me than the arrival from the Balkans in terms of the archaeology. I just never saw any evidence in the archaeology for that route. Rather, it seemed like the influence went in the opposite direction.

Given that the lecturer gives a date for the "invention" of the wheel which could have been any time between 4,000 to 3,000 BC, then I suppose that would cover it, given that Hittite doesn't share a common word for the wheel with the other Anatolian languages.

There's also the case of agriculture terminology, however. The lecturer has to thread the needle again because the migration would have to take place before agriculture reached the northern Black Sea.
 
Seems a logical outcome


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
That makes sense. Of the two possible routes (setting aside for now the hypothesis that Indo-European "arose" in Anatolia or the Caucasus itself) this is more plausible to me than the arrival from the Balkans in terms of the archaeology. I just never saw any evidence in the archaeology for that route. Rather, it seemed like the influence went in the opposite direction.

Given that the lecturer gives a date for the "invention" of the wheel which could have been any time between 4,000 to 3,000 BC, then I suppose that would cover it, given that Hittite doesn't share a common word for the wheel with the other Anatolian languages.

There's also the case of agriculture terminology, however. The lecturer has to thread the needle again because the migration would have to take place before agriculture reached the northern Black Sea.

Did the Hittites (or other Anatolian IEs) have a word for "navel"/"hub"/"center"?
 
the Hittites were conquerers, they conquered the land of the Hatti, who were not IE

afaik, the Luwians and other IE appeared later in history, maybe they arrived later
 
the Hittites were conquerers, they conquered the land of the Hatti, who were not IE
afaik, the Luwians and other IE appeared later in history, maybe they arrived later

That's not what modern Hittiteologists are saying though. See the video link for the Oriental Institute lecture that I posted above.

The Hattic language is not Indo-European but according to the new theories, some ethnic Hittites spoke Hattic.

The new theories state that the Proto-Anatolians came from either the Steppe (by way of Kura-Araxes) or only came from Maykop (possibly no Steppe). There's also Reich's (and Damgaard's) that the Anatolians split off from the Indo-Hittites around northern Iran or Armenia. So if they conquered the Hattians, they did so from a neighboring region to Hatti.

The first two theories date the arrival to 6000-8000 years ago.

It seems, too, that the Luwians's presence in Anatolia is just as old as the Hittites', and probably more widespread even than the Hittites'.
 
I wonder if all the genetic labs that had been looking for steppe ancestry in the ancient DNA samples from all over Eurasia have "adapted" their genetic models and tried finding a kind of steppe ancestry that is not based on the premise of Yamnaya admixture, using the Eneolithic samples from Vonyuchka and Progress in the southernmost portion of the Pontic-Caspian steppe, right on the piedmont of the North Caucasus. They were clearly "steppic" in genetic makeup (essentially a mix of EHG and CHG), but with far more CHG than the Sredny Stog and the Khvalynsk samples. Modelling in nMonte using the genetic coordinates of Global25, using several reference populations, I have noticed Progress or Vonyuchka are always picked up to form the Yamnaya, the Sredny Stog, the steppe admixture in Bell Beaker and Corded Ware samples and even, yes, in Eneolithic samples from Anatolia (not the EBA and MLBA samples though, two of which only have very negligible proportions of Progress-like admixture), Armenia, North (Caspian) Iran and Turkmenistan - so, basically, Progress/Vonyuchka-like admixture was apparently present in all of northern West Asia by the Copper Age.

I really wished these results were explained by someone more professional than me in population genetics using more advanced tools, but if it does point to something that truly exists then it could well explain how the PIE language spread, including the mysterious Anatolian IEs: PIE would have arisen right to the north of the Caucasus Mountains, in a steppe population enriched in CHG but still heavy in EHG (~45-55%), spreading northward, westward and southward between the Copper Age and the Early Bronze Age, and the Yamnaya would've been just one early IE branch (probably the mother of most known IE languages) among others. The Anatolian IE would've then been the sole known or surviving branch descending from PIE and evolving in West Asia, where it had been present since the Late Chalcolithic.
 
I wonder if all the genetic labs that had been looking for steppe ancestry in the ancient DNA samples from all over Eurasia have "adapted" their genetic models and tried finding a kind of steppe ancestry that is not based on the premise of Yamnaya admixture, using the Eneolithic samples from Vonyuchka and Progress in the southernmost portion of the Pontic-Caspian steppe, right on the piedmont of the North Caucasus. They were clearly "steppic" in genetic makeup (essentially a mix of EHG and CHG), but with far more CHG than the Sredny Stog and the Khvalynsk samples. Modelling in nMonte using the genetic coordinates of Global25, using several reference populations, I have noticed Progress or Vonyuchka are always picked up to form the Yamnaya, the Sredny Stog, the steppe admixture in Bell Beaker and Corded Ware samples and even, yes, in Eneolithic samples from Anatolia (not the EBA and MLBA samples though, two of which only have very negligible proportions of Progress-like admixture), Armenia, North (Caspian) Iran and Turkmenistan - so, basically, Progress/Vonyuchka-like admixture was apparently present in all of northern West Asia by the Copper Age.

See what I mean with the results of a model of genetic ancestry for several key ancient DNA samples, using 18-19 reference populations from all over Eurasia: https://imgur.com/a/TnFLTTy
 
I really wished these results were explained by someone more professional than me in population genetics using more advanced tools, but if it does point to something that truly exists then it could well explain how the PIE language spread, including the mysterious Anatolian IEs: PIE would have arisen right to the north of the Caucasus Mountains, in a steppe population enriched in CHG but still heavy in EHG (~45-55%), spreading northward, westward and southward between the Copper Age and the Early Bronze Age, and the Yamnaya would've been just one early IE branch (probably the mother of most known IE languages) among others. The Anatolian IE would've then been the sole known or surviving branch descending from PIE and evolving in West Asia, where it had been present since the Late Chalcolithic.

This seems to be basically what Reich suggests, but he places the original PIE homeland just south of the Caucasus rather than just north of the Caucasus.
 
It's maybe nothing but, recent samples from the Caucasus paper showed R1b-V1636 in some samples, one thousand years after, the same R1b clades is found in " Late " Kura-Araxes as R1b-M415. This lineage, V1636 is nowadays almost found in south caucasus and anatolia. There is a possibility of shift in population in Kura-Araxes from Early to Late stadium. They would have conserved the culture, but the population could have experienced a shift. This whole point was already adressed on Eurogenes, and i think it's an interesting one. Not sure if V1636 can be linked with IE languages, but it certainly can be linked with Steppe movements, so let's see in the future.
 
It's maybe nothing but, recent samples from the Caucasus paper showed R1b-V1636 in some samples, one thousand years after, the same R1b clades is found in " Late " Kura-Araxes as R1b-M415. This lineage, V1636 is nowadays almost found in south caucasus and anatolia. There is a possibility of shift in population in Kura-Araxes from Early to Late stadium. They would have conserved the culture, but the population could have experienced a shift. This whole point was already adressed on Eurogenes, and i think it's an interesting one. Not sure if V1636 can be linked with IE languages, but it certainly can be linked with Steppe movements, so let's see in the future.

I think PIE was spoken by HG on both sides of the Caucasus.
As the Wang paper showed, exchange stopped ca 6,7 ka when farmers arrived in the Caucasus, but the was Transcaucasian mtDNA on the steppe and European DNA in Transcaucasia.
But despite the arrival of farmers, the HG language in Transcaucasia must have survived somehow and moved west later.

As for R1b-V1636, it must have crossed the Caucasus north to south at some time.
 
I think PIE was spoken by HG on both sides of the Caucasus.
As the Wang paper showed, exchange stopped ca 6,7 ka when farmers arrived in the Caucasus, but the was Transcaucasian mtDNA on the steppe and European DNA in Transcaucasia.
But despite the arrival of farmers, the HG language in Transcaucasia must have survived somehow and moved west later.

As for R1b-V1636, it must have crossed the Caucasus north to south at some time.

Let's wait for the Dzudzuana release, and see how Steppe individuals and Kotias/Satsurblia reacts towards Dzudzuana ancestry.
 

This thread has been viewed 20631 times.

Back
Top