steppe theory and western europe

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ironically, threads about ancient Greeks and Romans tend to be taken over by discussions about the steppe, despite the fact it was a minority component.

are the Barbarians still living north of Greece & Italy?
 
are the Barbarians still living north of Greece & Italy?

Come on bicicleur, is that really necessary to ask that as a rhetorical question? It is true though, that discussion about the steppe admixture in ancient people is discussed very often, over other components. You thinking that pointing that out is tantamount to calling people barbarians is a real stretch.


As you do know, there is non-steppe admixture in people north of Greece and Italy too.
 
Also, please refer to my comment to Alichu about Anatolian_n, it is not a matter of liking or not liking components. I am speaking in matters of fact:

Obviously that is not what I am saying. It is not a matter of liking, or not liking, it is matters of fact. I don't understand the point you are making, the vast majority of my own autosomal DNA is Anatolian_N, with a smaller but significant amount of CHG. The fact remains, that the lines are not blurred, because we can see that there are differences that make modern populations unique, from each locations in question. The middle east has different admixture rates, with a substantial amount of Natufian, and SSA. Just because they have CHG and Anatolian_N doesn't make them one in the same as Southern Europeans. They are different, and no one here is saying there is something wrong with that. There is no moral imperative to demand people must like or not like it.
 
I agree, it is not a matter of liking.
But in reality, some seem to be proud for having steppe, and others are proud for not having steppe.
As if having steppe or not makes you a whole different person.
IMO that is a reason why steppe is discussed so much in a thread re ancient Rome & Greece, and ancient Rome & Greece is discussed in a steppe thread.
 
I will never understand what would be wrong with genetics in general, but specially with Early Neolitics from Anatolia or Greek/Rome/Phoenician genetics... they were by far the smartest people of their time... so it?s absolutely ridiculous to refuse or hide them... while Northern Eurasian people were almost up the trees... I believe it?s simply some kind of inferiority complex or something. This type of items really makes me laugh. People with these mental problems should visit ancient sites in Anatolia, Canaan, Greece, Tunisia, Central/Southern Italy or Southern/Eastern Spain to discover and understand why Europe and America are now what they are.
 
I agree, it is not a matter of liking.
But in reality, some seem to be proud for having steppe, and others are proud for not having steppe.
As if having steppe or not makes you a whole different person.
IMO that is a reason why steppe is discussed so much in a thread re ancient Rome & Greece, and ancient Rome & Greece is discussed in a steppe thread.
Well I am proud to be exactly what I am, today, and some of that has taken contributions from the steppe.
 
I will never understand what would be wrong with genetics in general, but specially with Early Neolitics from Anatolia or Greek/Rome/Phoenician genetics... they were by far the smartest people of their time... so it�s absolutely ridiculous to refuse or hide them... while Northern Eurasian people were almost up the trees... I believe it�s simply some kind of inferiority complex or something. This type of items really makes me laugh. People with these mental problems should visit ancient sites in Anatolia, Canaan, Greece, Tunisia, Central/Southern Italy or Southern/Eastern Spain to discover and understand why Europe and America are now what they are.

Ok yes, that is true, but it is 2000 or more years ago.

Europe didn't come out of the dark ages because those cultures suddenly came to live again.
It is because of some rational thinkers that gave up all existing dogma's just a few centuries ago.
Only afterwards Europe rediscovered it's long forgotten past.

Some here keep on boasting their steppe forbears, others have to remind us all the time on anciant times.
 
Well I am proud to be exactly what I am, today, and some of that has taken contributions from the steppe.

To "hate" a group which is a part of your ancestry is emotionally unsound; all your ancestors in combination made you who you are.

I carry an Indo-European mtDna and my father was U-152, as is, therefore, my brother, my uncles and all my male cousins. Would I wish them not here? I'd be wishing myself not here.

I'm also 25% steppe autosomally. To deny it is to deny part of who I am. To hate it is to hate myself and my father, mother, etc.

It would also be to deny my history and the history of my people; the fusions which created us.

History, however, and archaeology, teach us about these peoples, and not just genetics. There can be no compromise with the truth. Only the facts matter. If certain groups did certain things, it is what it is. Let the chips fall where they may.

To use a modern example, I'm proud of my heritage as an Italian. Can anyone really think that I'm proud that an Italian invented fascism and that under him Italian pilots bombed Ethiopia, all to get territory and join the "Colonialist" Club? It would be ludicrous.

Our own attachment to our ancestors, to our people, to our cultures, should never interfere with a rigorous pursuit of TRUTH, of the FACTS, and as I've said before, to quote Ben Shapiro, "Facts don't care about our feelings."
 
I will never understand what would be wrong with genetics in general, but specially with Early Neolitics from Anatolia or Greek/Rome/Phoenician genetics... they were by far the smartest people of their time... so it�s absolutely ridiculous to refuse or hide them... while Northern Eurasian people were almost up the trees... I believe it�s simply some kind of inferiority complex or something. This type of items really makes me laugh. People with these mental problems should visit ancient sites in Anatolia, Canaan, Greece, Tunisia, Central/Southern Italy or Southern/Eastern Spain to discover and understand why Europe and America are now what they are.


in my opinion , it is a result of propagnda in davidski and other
blogs who promote how great are the steppe people and stuff :unsure:.......
 
David Reich seems to think the Indo-European homeland is south of the Caucasus or in Armenia. Meaning it may have started with CHG-like people, that brought it north to EHG. I wonder if some people would like the Steppe less if this turned out to be irrefutably true.
 
David Reich seems to think the Indo-European homeland is south of the Caucasus or in Armenia. Meaning it may have started with CHG-like people, that brought it north to EHG. I wonder if some people would like the Steppe less if this turned out to be irrefutably true.

Jovialis: Great question and while I am not in any way trying to read your mind, just to be clear, my interpretation of your question is sort of from a rhetorical perspective. Thus, I think it is likely if what Professor Reich hypothesizes is confirmed by the DNA evidence, the love affair with the Steppe will be less of a love affair.
 
Jovialis: Great question and while I am not in any way trying to read your mind, just to be clear, my interpretation of your question is sort of from a rhetorical perspective. Thus, I think it is likely if what Professor Reich hypothesizes is confirmed by the DNA evidence, the love affair with the Steppe will be less of a love affair.

I think that's right, but at the same time, I don't know why it is even a big deal to some people in some kind of convoluted terms of ethnic pride. No matter who brought what to who, the ethnogeneisis of the Steppe people were still basically a two-way admixture of EHG and CHG.
 
David Reich seems to think the Indo-European homeland is south of the Caucasus or in Armenia. Meaning it may have started with CHG-like people, that brought it north to EHG. I wonder if some people would like the Steppe less if this turned out to be irrefutably true.

qpgraph-dzudzuana.jpg


Isn't CHG a mixture of Dzudzuana with ANE and EHG a mixture of ANE with WHG ?
It seems to me that the Dzudzuana in Transcaucasia turned into CHG when the forbears of the EHG arrived north of the Caucasus and mixed with the Dzudzuana folks south of the Caucasus.
Afaik the earliest DNA from north of the Caucasus is from the Wang paper, and it was not EHG, but EHG mixed with CHG, i.e. steppe DNA.
My feeling is that when the EHG forbears arrived, there formed a cline CHG Transcaucasia - steppe Ciscaucasia - EHG further north and a EHG-WHG further west along the Dnjepr and in the Danube Gorge.
Around 4,7 ka the steppe DNA started to expand from Ciscuacasia further into the steppe.
It may be existing steppe DNA coming from Ciscaucasia, or it may be CHG coming from Transcaucasia and mixing there with the EHG, forming a new batch of steppe DNA.

Anyway, as I see it, the CHG was formed at the end of the paleolithic by a mixture of Dzudzuana with the incoming ANE or EHG.
And it is possible that steppe DNA arrived on the steppe because people came from Transcaucasia.

CHG or EHG or steppe, they were all made in the same soup.
 
David Reich seems to think the Indo-European homeland is south of the Caucasus or in Armenia. Meaning it may have started with CHG-like people, that brought it north to EHG. I wonder if some people would like the Steppe less if this turned out to be irrefutably true.

That would not surprise me one bit. Too many renowned geneticists/anthropologist are floating that theory.
As you can see from a thread I started regarding L283 and CHG, I myself am leaning towards that theory.

Personally, I do not see why it would matter... Too many people are brainwashed with propaganda IMO. >6kya our ancestors were all over, and given how many ancestors we have since 6kya, if we take 5 generations per 100 years, 2^(6000x5/100) ~ 2.04e+90....* this whole trend of applying modern prejudices to ancient populations is useless.
(*http://dgmweb.net/Ancillary/OnE/NumberAncestors.html , but of course you have to keep in mind repetitions/inbreeding since that number 2.04e+90 dwarfs the number of humans that ever lived https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12288594/)



But as you say I am sure a bunch of steppe supremacists/middle east prejudists, might get butthurt... as if north or south of the Caucasus really matters.

Edit: Pretty much agree with the previous 4 comments.
 
qpgraph-dzudzuana.jpg


Isn't CHG a mixture of Dzudzuana with ANE and EHG a mixture of ANE with WHG ?
It seems to me that the Dzudzuana in Transcaucasia turned into CHG when the forbears of the EHG arrived north of the Caucasus and mixed with the Dzudzuana folks south of the Caucasus.
Afaik the earliest DNA from north of the Caucasus is from the Wang paper, and it was not EHG, but EHG mixed with CHG, i.e. steppe DNA.
My feeling is that when the EHG forbears arrived, there formed a cline CHG Transcaucasia - steppe Ciscaucasia - EHG further north and a EHG-WHG further west along the Dnjepr and in the Danube Gorge.
Around 4,7 ka the steppe DNA started to expand from Ciscuacasia further into the steppe.
It may be existing steppe DNA coming from Ciscaucasia, or it may be CHG coming from Transcaucasia and mixing there with the EHG, forming a new batch of steppe DNA.

Anyway, as I see it, the CHG was formed at the end of the paleolithic by a mixture of Dzudzuana with the incoming ANE or EHG.
And it is possible that steppe DNA arrived on the steppe because people came from Transcaucasia.

CHG or EHG or steppe, they were all made in the same soup.

Indeed, they are, this is the point I wanted to make:

WHG (25%) + ANE (75%) = EHG
Dzudzuana (64%) + ANE (36%) = CHG

EHG (60%) + CHG (40%) = Yamnaya
 
^^IMHO I think Anatolian_N is a remnant of Dzudzuana that existed in a nearly(?) "pure" form. I know there is debate on this topic, as to the ethnogenisis of Anatolian_N.


But it makes me wonder why has the paper-remained in pre-print since 2018... Could it shake up and upset some pet ideas of others who via for a different ethnogenesis explanation?
 
That would not surprise me one bit. Too many renowned geneticists/anthropologist are floating that theory.
As you can see from a thread I started regarding L283 and CHG, I myself am leaning towards that theory.

Personally, I do not see why it would matter... Too many people are brainwashed with propaganda IMO. >6kya our ancestors were all over, and given how many ancestors we have since 6kya, if we take 5 generations per 100 years, 2^(6000x5/100) ~ 2.04e+90....* this whole trend of applying modern prejudices to ancient populations is useless.
(*http://dgmweb.net/Ancillary/OnE/NumberAncestors.html , but of course you have to keep in mind repetitions/inbreeding since that number 2.04e+90 dwarfs the number of humans that ever lived https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12288594/)



But as you say I am sure a bunch of steppe supremacists/middle east prejudists, might get butthurt... as if north or south of the Caucasus really matters.

Edit: Pretty much agree with the previous 4 comments.

Indeed, a martini is a martini, it doesn't matter if you poured in vodka before pouring in the vermouth. It is the same cocktail drink.
 
The thing is it looks most of early Yamnaya were exclusively R1b-L23 with some instances of I2. So very likely they were the initial Proto IE speakers, with R1a being very similar due to same paternal origin and getting assimilated very early on.

But one thing to consider is that thousands of years before completely different Y-DNA could live right next to each other, so we don't really know if some other Y-DNA joined a specific tribe.
 
The thing is it looks most of early Yamnaya were exclusively R1b-L23 with some instances of I2. So very likely they were the initial Proto IE speakers, with R1a being very similar due to same paternal origin and getting assimilated very early on.

But one thing to consider is that thousands of years before completely different Y-DNA could live right next to each other, so we don't really know if some other Y-DNA joined a specific tribe.

yamna is more specific R1b-Z2103
but for IE I would include R1b-M269, which also incorporates a Caucasian branch : R1b-PF7562
it looks very much like R1b-PF7562 got into the Caucasus area after splitting from R1b-M269
at least it's subclades Y36978 and FGC73148
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-PF7562/

another branch of which some subclades crossed the Caucasus is R1b-V1636
Wang et al found this north of the Caucasus in steppe Maykop, yet it was also in later Kura-Araxes
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V1636/

I'm almost sure some subclades of J2 crossed the Caucasus in the other direction

but the crossings happened prior and after Maykop, not during as Wang et al demonstrated
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 11833 times.

Back
Top