Y-DNA of the earliest known Indo-European people (Hittites, Mycenaeans, Luwians,...)?

Shahmiri

Regular Member
Messages
301
Reaction score
17
Points
0
In the recent years we see different studies about ancient DNA of different people in Eurasia but I think if we want to know who these people were, we should focus on known people, what are the Y-DNA of earliest known Indo-European people which have been found so far?
 
Hittites, Mycenaeans, Luwians, Vedic Indians were too late to be meaningful to the PIE homeland and expansion question. Especially Anatolian IEs (Hittites, Luwians etc.), who spoke a language that probably split off from PIE before 4000 B.C., too early even for Yamnaya and CWC. All those were MLBA people living in historically very populous and already civilized areas 2,000 years after the PIE people. This would be a bit like those people who still insist on drawing conclusions about the origins of Proto-Turkic language and people in the Y-DNA haplogroup makeup of modern Turks, Turkmens, Azeris, Uzbeks etc. Those people may have kept the language and even some (or much) of the original genetics, but they are very different from each other and from their earliest ancestors about 2,500 years ago, including in Y-DNA makeup.
 
Hittites, Mycenaeans, Luwians, Vedic Indians were too late to be meaningful to the PIE homeland and expansion question. Especially Anatolian IEs (Hittites, Luwians etc.), who spoke a language that probably split off from PIE before 4000 B.C., too early even for Yamnaya and CWC. All those were MLBA people living in historically very populous and already civilized areas 2,000 years after the PIE people. This would be a bit like those people who still insist on drawing conclusions about the origins of Proto-Turkic language and people in the Y-DNA haplogroup makeup of modern Turks, Turkmens, Azeris, Uzbeks etc. Those people may have kept the language and even some (or much) of the original genetics, but they are very different from each other and from their earliest ancestors about 2,500 years ago, including in Y-DNA makeup.

I said the earliest known Indo-European people, not modern people. Some Pan-Turk Azeris claim Proto-Turkic was spoken in Azerbaijan and Sumerians who also worshiped Dingir/Tengri, were originally Turks but we know the earliest known Turkic languages were spoken somewhere in the north of China, but again these Pan-Turk Azeris mention some similar Sumerian and Elamite words and say 2,000 years earlier they lived in Azerbaijan and then they migrated to China. They may be right but the main point is that there should be also genetic evidences for this migration.

Hittites, Mycenaeans, Indo-Iranian Mitanni, ... are the earliest known Indo-European people, no miracle happened, if you believe they migrated from the steppe then there should be genetic evidences for this migration.
 
I said the earliest known Indo-European people, not modern people. Some Pan-Turk Azeris claim Proto-Turkic was spoken in Azerbaijan and Sumerians who also worshiped Dingir/Tengri, were originally Turks but we know the earliest known Turkic languages were spoken somewhere in the north of China, but again these Pan-Turk Azeris mention some similar Sumerian and Elamite words and say 2,000 years earlier they lived in Azerbaijan and then they migrated to China. They may be right but the main point is that there should be also genetic evidences for this migration.

Hittites, Mycenaeans, Indo-Iranian Mitanni, ... are the earliest known Indo-European people, no miracle happened, if you believe they migrated from the steppe then there should be genetic evidences for this migration.

Oh my God, you clearly didn't understand my point. Let me make it simpler:

Totally undivided PIE (Anatolian+all other branches): 3,500-4,500 BCE
Earliest attested IE-derived languages from Hittites, Mycenaeans, Mitanni etc.: ~1,600-1300 BCE
Chronological difference: ~1,900-3,200 years

Undivided Proto-Turkic: ~500 BCE - 1 CE
Modern Turkic speakers: ~2000 CE
Chronological difference: ~2,000-2,500 years

Is it clearer now? Did modern Turks come straight from the Proto-Turkic homeland and are direct, unmixed, immediate descendants of the early speakers of Proto-Turkic in that very far homeland? No, they aren't. The same thing almost certainly is true for PIE speakers and their descendants many centuries, even millennia later. Your reasoning is very weak from a historical and linguistic point of view.
 
Hittites, Mycenaeans, Indo-Iranian Mitanni, ... are the earliest known Indo-European people, no miracle happened, if you believe they migrated from the steppe then there should be genetic evidences for this migration.

There is: steppe ancestry, EHG+CHG admixture. More often than not there are also uniparentals, but those aren't 100% necessary, because everyone knows the profound effects of drift in uniparental lineages and ABOVE ALL in Y-DNA haplogroups, because of the way ancient societies worked regarding males and their marriage and breeding prognostics.
 
Oh my God, you clearly didn't understand my point. Let me make it simpler:

Totally undivided PIE (Anatolian+all other branches): 3,500-4,500 BCE
Earliest attested IE-derived languages from Hittites, Mycenaeans, Mitanni etc.: ~1,600-1300 BCE
Chronological difference: ~1,900-3,200 years

Undivided Proto-Turkic: ~500 BCE - 1 CE
Modern Turkic speakers: ~2000 CE
Chronological difference: ~2,000-2,500 years

Is it clearer now? Did modern Turks come straight from the Proto-Turkic homeland and are direct, unmixed, immediate descendants of the early speakers of Proto-Turkic in that very far homeland? No, they aren't. The same thing almost certainly is true for PIE speakers and their descendants many centuries, even millennia later. Your reasoning is very weak from a historical and linguistic point of view.

These dates are hypothetical, the earliest known Turkic language is Orkhon Turkic (Gokturk) which was spoken in Mongolia, so it is generally believed that Turkic language originated somewhere near to Mongolia.

I don't know why you talk about modern Turks, did I talk about Brazilians or other modern Indo-Euroepan speaking people? The question is about the earliest known Indo-European people, the only thing which can help us to find where they originally lived is Genetics.

About the Turkic people, haplogroup N has been found in the earliest known Turkic people in the north of China and Mongolia, so it is believed that this haplogroup relates to original Turkic migration, however most of modern Turkic people have different haplogroups.

3ln6_n-vl73.jpg
 
There is: steppe ancestry, EHG+CHG admixture. More often than not there are also uniparentals, but those aren't 100% necessary, because everyone knows the profound effects of drift in uniparental lineages and ABOVE ALL in Y-DNA haplogroups, because of the way ancient societies worked regarding males and their marriage and breeding prognostics.

It is not a complicated issue, some people thought the spread of IE culture relates to steppe-related ancestry, so first they focused on ancient Anatolians, as the earliest known Indo-European people and said steppe-related ancestry moved through southeast Europe into Anatolia, now geneticists say "No evidence that steppe-related ancestry moved through southeast Europe into Anatolia" (The Genomic History of Southeastern Europe), we also read "Moreover, while Bronze Age Anatolian individuals have CHG-related ancestry, they have neither the EHG-related ancestry characteristic of all steppe populations sampled to date, nor the WHG-related ancestry that is ubiquitous in Neolithic southeastern Europe. An alternative hypothesis is that the ultimate homeland of Proto-Indo-European languages was in the Caucasus or in Iran."

The fact is that genetic science doesn't support the steppe theory at all but those who still believe this theory, try to support it in another ways, some of them say there was a "Proto-Proto-Indo-European" language in Caucasus/Iran as the ancestor of Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Anatolian language!! Some other one says Indo-European spread in the whole Anatolia without any migration!! ...
 
Oh my God, you clearly didn't understand my point. Let me make it simpler:

Totally undivided PIE (Anatolian+all other branches): 3,500-4,500 BCE
Earliest attested IE-derived languages from Hittites, Mycenaeans, Mitanni etc.: ~1,600-1300 BCE
Chronological difference: ~1,900-3,200 years

Undivided Proto-Turkic: ~500 BCE - 1 CE
Modern Turkic speakers: ~2000 CE
Chronological difference: ~2,000-2,500 years

Is it clearer now? Did modern Turks come straight from the Proto-Turkic homeland and are direct, unmixed, immediate descendants of the early speakers of Proto-Turkic in that very far homeland? No, they aren't. The same thing almost certainly is true for PIE speakers and their descendants many centuries, even millennia later. Your reasoning is very weak from a historical and linguistic point of view.

I think that Proto-IE have a lot of similar language. Proto-IE is part of language family.I think that this language family is designate by linguist later.
 
About Mycenaean Greeks, it seems to be J2a-Z6057: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/39737-Ancient-J2-samples-in-Europe-Pre-Phoenecian

0i6u_myc.jpg


But two Minoan samples (I0070 and I0073) are J2a-Y151557, a subclade of J2a-M319, in fact they are from different branches.

Mycenaean J2a-Z6057 and Indian J2a-Y21500 have the same origin, we read about the Indian one: https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_J2_Y-DNA.shtml "Y21500 has a TMRCA of 3700 years and is also found in Russia, which suggests an Indo-Aryan origin - perhaps one of the J2a1 subclades assimilated by R1a invaders in Central Asia before conquering the Indian subcontinent."
 
I think most of the Greek J2a is Neolithic in origin and connected to the Minoan and early Helladic Civilizations and that I9041 is an assimilated native; the Proto-Greek people would have been J2b along with some E-V13, R1b-Z2103, and perhaps some R1a-Z93* from the Catacomb Culture. J2a also made it into India in the Neolithic period.
 
I think most of the Greek J2a is Neolithic in origin and connected to the Minoan and early Helladic Civilizations and that I9041 is an assimilated native; the Proto-Greek people would have been J2b along with some E-V13, R1b-Z2103, and perhaps some R1a-Z93* from the Catacomb Culture. J2a also made it into India in the Neolithic period.

Would you please mention some J2 samples in Greece which date back to before 2,000 BC?
 
Would you please mention some J2 samples in Greece which date back to before 2,000 BC?

There are zero aDNA samples from Greece between the Neolithic and the BA (Minoans and Mycenaeans), so you won't find them... for now.

But J2a was already even in Italy in the NEOLITHIC era, let alone by the 3rd millennium B.C., and tha was many hundreds of kilometers further from the East Mediterranean coast of Asia than Greece is. Also, J2a was also found in at least one Anatolia_N individual, and it is mainly through Anatolia that Europe was colonized by farmers. So, J2a clades were found in at least parts of Europe since the early Neolithic era and probably increased even more after the arrival of more CHG/Iran_N-shifted populations in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age.

Read: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2019/11/06/366.6466.708.DC1/aay6826_Antonio_SM.pdf
 
There are zero aDNA samples from Greece between the Neolithic and the BA (Minoans and Mycenaeans), so you won't find them... for now.

But J2a was already even in Italy in the NEOLITHIC era, let alone by the 3rd millennium B.C., and tha was many hundreds of kilometers further from the East Mediterranean coast of Asia than Greece is. Also, J2a was also found in at least one Anatolia_N individual, and it is mainly through Anatolia that Europe was colonized by farmers. So, J2a clades were found in at least parts of Europe since the early Neolithic era and probably increased even more after the arrival of more CHG/Iran_N-shifted populations in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age.

Read: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2019/11/06/366.6466.708.DC1/aay6826_Antonio_SM.pdf

According to "Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans", before the Bronze Age, Greece and western Anatolia were dominated by Y-chromosome haplogroup G2, as I see there is at least one Minoan sample (#I9130) which has been dated to before 2,000 with haplogroup G2a2b2.
There could be certainly different migrations in different periods, J2 originated in a vast region and it has many different subclades, just some of them relate to Indo-Europeans.
 
According to "Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans", before the Bronze Age, Greece and western Anatolia were dominated by Y-chromosome haplogroup G2, as I see there is at least one Minoan sample (#I9130) which has been dated to before 2,000 with haplogroup G2a2b2.
There could be certainly different migrations in different periods, J2 originated in a vast region and it has many different subclades, just some of them relate to Indo-Europeans.

The Neolithic Anatolians that expanded into Europe during ~8500-7000 years ago were mainly G2, but they also had (as it's been documented by aDNA findings so far) lower proportions of haplogroups like E1b1b, H2, T1, J2, J1, C1a2... and later if not even in Anatolia itself they also got some I2 and R1b (not M269, though). Like virtually all populations ever, except very small clans and tribes, they certainly didn't all belong to just 1 haplogroup.

The authors of that study could only claim what they could say based on the handful of Neolithic Greece samples, which IIRC don't even amount to 10 samples in total. Too little to make a really accurate guess. I'd say it's an incomplete truth to say the least.
 
There is: steppe ancestry, EHG+CHG admixture. More often than not there are also uniparentals, but those aren't 100% necessary, because everyone knows the profound effects of drift in uniparental lineages and ABOVE ALL in Y-DNA haplogroups, because of the way ancient societies worked regarding males and their marriage and breeding prognostics.


I agree very often with you.
But here I think Y-haplo's, if not THE key, are still interesting concerning male elites and transmission of language, spite famous exceptions. Y-HG's can reinforce other elements of proof in some cases, I think. The question of marriages and alliances exists, but it concerns more the autosomes, and concerning times when males clannic systems existed, the Y lineages have some importance for language. The mixing of diverse Y-haplo's in the elites appeared more or less soon><lately according to type of societies, it's true.
 
........
The fact is that genetic science doesn't support the steppe theory at all but those who still believe this theory, try to support it in another ways, some of them say there was a "Proto-Proto-Indo-European" language in Caucasus/Iran as the ancestor of Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Anatolian language!! Some other one says Indo-European spread in the whole Anatolia without any migration!! ...

You strike very strongly!
Todate, nothing is sure about I-Ean craddle, proto- or proto-proto-...
But genetics + archeology and logics seems confirming a stage of early I-Ean or late proto-I-Ean on the Steppes.
To me, an I-Ean under ur form clearly separated and identifiable born South the Caucasus is hard to swallow when I count the number of already different families of languages which are there, their type, and the seemingly deep links with Uralic's, but I am not a specialist.
 
@Shahmiri:
I add I speak of a certain stage of the I-Ean, the Steppes one, what doesn't exclude completlety an earlier proto-form south the Caucasus, whatever I think personally, which is not too important on the matter because I have no clue to date.
 
You strike very strongly!
Todate, nothing is sure about I-Ean craddle, proto- or proto-proto-...
But genetics + archeology and logics seems confirming a stage of early I-Ean or late proto-I-Ean on the Steppes.
To me, an I-Ean under ur form clearly separated and identifiable born South the Caucasus is hard to swallow when I count the number of already different families of languages which are there, their type, and the seemingly deep links with Uralic's, but I am not a specialist.

What are these different families of languages? Elamite in the southwest of Iran? Semitic in Mesopotamia and Arabia? Hurro-Urartian in Anatolia and Levant? Kartvelian in the Caucasus?

e7887a3b3a06756742976180246689da.jpg


What was the main language of people who lived in Iran? We just know in south of modern Khuzistan province (about 5% of the total area of Iran) some people spoke Elamite, what about other regions? Indo-Iranian influence on Hurro-Urartian Mitanni came from where?
 
Some people say in the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, all people of Iran spoke Elamite, so were they these Elamite people who migrated to India and Europe? So why we can't find any element of Elamite culture even in other parts of Iran?
 
Some people say in the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, all people of Iran spoke Elamite, so were they these Elamite people who migrated to India and Europe? So why we can't find any element of Elamite culture even in other parts of Iran?
All of present-day Iran underwent cultural and linguistic transformation
In southwestern Iran, after the Elamites, the Khozi language was common, which is considered to be an extension of the Elamites
And now the Elamite culture is seen among some people of Zagros and nomads of southwestern Iran
 

This thread has been viewed 3121 times.

Back
Top