All Iberian men were wiped out by Yamna men 4,500 years ago

[Angela]

Disappointed that you can produce such a remark.

As early as the 1640s, Von Boxhom and Saumaise had a clear hunch that Sanskrit and Persian shared a common origin with European languages. By 1900, while archaeologists were still digging away, and long before population genetics were even conceived of, linguists had drafted a rough sketch of the migrations that would later be confirmed. Hardly any voodoo in that.

Indeed. Linguistics is what brought us here in a sense.

 

[Olympus Mons]

Disappointed that you can produce such a remark.

As early as the 1640s, Von Boxhom and Saumaise had a clear hunch that Sanskrit and Persian shared a common origin with European languages. By 1900, while archaeologists were still digging away, and long before population genetics were even conceived of, linguists had drafted a rough sketch of the migrations that would later be confirmed. Hardly any voodoo in that.

Hrvclv, you are not properly contextualizing my comment.
eg CWC -- left pottery, weapons, tools etc (Archeology) and we are extracting alleles and SNPs or STRs from their bones (aDna).... what do you have of their language? what plaques, what inscriptions, what texts? see what I mean? ... if you say for certainty that they spoke PIE/Not PIE than it's voodoo sh*it... that all I was saying.

 

[hrvclv]

Hrvclv, you are not properly contextualizing my comment.
eg CWC -- left pottery, weapons, tools etc (Archeology) and we are extracting alleles and SNPs or STRs from their bones (aDna).... what do you have of their language? what plaques, what inscriptions, what texts? see what I mean? ... if you say for certainty that they spoke PIE/Not PIE than it's voodoo sh*it... that all I was saying.

That's what linguistic reconstruction is all about : trying to figure out what we can reasonably deduce from what we definitely know.

Exactly the same kind of inference archaeologists try to arrive at from teeny-weeny bits of pots or flint stones. I could just as well contend, in blatant bad faith, that for all I know, what is presented as a flint arrowhead was merely an accident of nature.

The same goes for genetics. When you see how discrepant the results you get from various calculators (and for that matter, from different labs) can be in terms of ancient ancestry, you can also claim the whole thing is a hoax.

So what do we do, give it all up and go watch TV ?

One thing I am sure of: calling people names seldom helps, whether that be on a forum, at work, in a bar, or on a sports field.

 

[Olympus Mons]

That's what linguistic reconstruction is all about : trying to figure out what we can reasonably deduce from what we definitely know.

Exactly the same kind of inference archaeologists try to arrive at from teeny-weeny bits of pots or flint stones. I could just as well contend, in blatant bad faith, that for all I know, what is presented as a flint arrowhead was merely an accident of nature.

The same goes for genetics. When you see how discrepant the results you get from various calculators (and for that matter, from different labs) can be in terms of ancient ancestry, you can also claim the whole thing is a hoax.

hrvclv .... if you do not notice the difference between working with the physical evidence and entities ---- and mythical, non tangible, no record at all as the language that CWC spoke... then we just agree to disagree.

One thing I am sure of: calling people names seldom helps, whether that be on a forum, at work, in a bar, or on a sports field.

Please, please do not appeal to victimhood culture, weakling mentality since there is enough of that around in the world as it is, and there is no call for "safe spaces " to be assumed from what I wrote.

 

[hrvclv]

Please, please do not appeal to victimhood culture, weakling mentality since there is enough of that around in the world as it is, and there is no call for "safe spaces " to be assumed from what I wrote.

Whose "victim" could I be here? Immi uiros rios toutias rias : I am a free man from a free people! And "safe spaces" are not something I've ever cared for very much. I used to step into boxing rings in a sweat - never in a cold sweat.

I was just asking for some sense of decency, self-restraint, tact, civility, respect... you know, those virtues that keep relationships gentlemanly and harmonious. Apparently, we don't share the same values.

 

[Olympus Mons]

Whose "victim" could I be here? Immi uiros rios toutias rias : I am a free man from a free people! And "safe spaces" are not something I've ever cared for very much. I used to step into boxing rings in a sweat - never in a cold sweat.

I was just asking for some sense of decency, self-restraint, tact, civility, respect... you know, those virtues that keep relationships gentlemanly and harmonious. Apparently, we don't share the same values.

Hey. Enough already. I think none of us really meant to upset the other. It's all good. Cheers

 

[Ygorcs]

AS if you know what language Yamnaya, or CWC or Sredny Stog spoke.
Apparently in iberia you had similarly autosomal R1b-l51, with ones speaking PIE and others 100 miles ways speaking something a keen of Iberian...
To me it looks like ever so more that linguistics are voodoo or astrology spreaders in the archeology and aDna environment .

It does not matter. What matters is that R1b-L51 cannot explain the expansion of all Indo-European branches in all the huge territory where IE languages are known to have been spoken in the historic past or are still spoken. It's found in appreciable proportions only in a very specific (and minor) part of the Indo-European-speaking Eurasia. Only some combination of R1b-L51, R1b-Z2103 and R1a-M417 (main haplogroups, not the sole ones) accounts for the entire reach of Indo-European linguistic expansion until the late Iron Age. If these haplogroups were not concentrated in populations living close to each other, but all of them spread very close IE languages descended from the very same PIE, then we'll have to conclude that in the Copper Age a huge territory encompassing different cultures, different genetics and distant populations spoke the very same language, a sort of "micro" global language in times without empires, organized states and writing (or perhaps you want us to believe that those languages evolved in a freezingly slow pace since the earlier Neolithic with your Shulaveri-Shomu and all of that? No, I won't consider what is impossible).

 

[markod]

Good point - I’ve thought about this before. The way I see it is that, either way, Z2103 and L51 split at the same period, and everyone here at least seems to assume this phylogenetic split was when Western IE broke away. If so, why does it matter whether or not that split took place on the Steppe, or if it took place in the Balkano-Asian region? It surely makes more sense that the split took place before Yamnaya at least, given the ages of Z2103 and L51. And an earlier split on the Steppe, well before Yamnaya, isn't very practical.

Alternatively, it could just be the case that Western IE is from Corded Ware - people see the question of why the Basque language is not IE given all that L51 as due to the mothers raising the children, so the same logic could apply to a L51-Corded Ware hybrid (blonde QTs raise the kids instead of their abusive ginger husbands).

Regardless, the Z2103 question should be enough to put the Yamnaya theory of L51 into extreme doubt. I'll say it again: Where did all the L51 come from, if Yamnaya and its cultural affiliations along the Danube all belonged to Z2103?

Also, why is this so surprising, if the Tocharians were in ******* China...

If Anthony is to be believed there are thousands of kurgan mounds associated with the Yamnaya-Vucedol culture in Hungary and Croatia. Perhaps a marginal group of P312/U106/L11 males managed to completely replace the dominant lineage there? Statistcally that's really unlikely I guess, though not impossible :embarassed:

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

If Anthony is to be believed there are thousands of kurgan mounds associated with the Yamnaya-Vucedol culture in Hungary and Croatia. Perhaps a marginal group of P312/U106/L11 males managed to completely replace the dominant lineage there? Statistcally that's really unlikely I guess, though not impossible :embarassed:

Yeah, exactly. Also, I haven?t had a proper response to that - so the Steppe theory still has that gaping hole...

 

[Olympus Mons]

It does not matter. What matters is that R1b-L51 cannot explain the expansion of all Indo-European branches in all the huge territory where IE languages are known to have been spoken in the historic past or are still spoken. It's found in appreciable proportions only in a very specific (and minor) part of the Indo-European-speaking Eurasia. Only some combination of R1b-L51, R1b-Z2103 and R1a-M417 (main haplogroups, not the sole ones) accounts for the entire reach of Indo-European linguistic expansion until the late Iron Age. If these haplogroups were not concentrated in populations living close to each other, but all of them spread very close IE languages descended from the very same PIE, then we'll have to conclude that in the Copper Age a huge territory encompassing different cultures, different genetics and distant populations spoke the very same language, a sort of "micro" global language in times without empires, organized states and writing (or perhaps you want us to believe that those languages evolved in a freezingly slow pace since the earlier Neolithic with your Shulaveri-Shomu and all of that? No, I won't consider what is impossible).

I think I already told you this previously. So my words a while back;

And IE did spread with Neolithic farmer from Anatolia. I mean at least VIA Anatolia.
That is becoming the elephant in the room: Assuming Krause is right, Now Reich is right and so many others (as me and you)… then it needs to be assumed, it follows, that populations we see moving via Anatolia and arriving to Balkans at 4500bc, such as Kum6 (4600bc), loaded with CHG and different farmers ancestry from Anatolia_N (8000bc) and having heavy shared ancestry with Greece Neolithic, such as Klei10, and Pal7 in Greece, a thousand years later (3500bc) and with even Otzi the Iceman (3300bc) …. They ALL SPOKE PIE/IE!
So, best put, Otzi could very well be a IE speaking person and have never even have met a Steppe person! – Lets start wrapping our minds around it!
I challenge anyone to truly fault this reasoning.

To make simple is something like, follow the CHG admix. - So, apart from those above mentioned and just to refer a few, by end of shulaveri on, we would have: Boian and gulmenita (4500bc) spoke pie, later pre-cucuteni a bit north (4000bc), as combination of the previous admixing with European farmers, spoke pie. So did later the vucedol and tisza…. And if Otzi, by such shared ancestry with the Kum6 girl spoke pie, so did the Ozieri in even south sardinia…. Who else by 3000BC also did?

Remember…. I believe that Yamnaya (as descendants from Shulaveri) also spoke pie, but so did the clash of cousins moving from north black sea cost into yamnaya land by 3800BC. They all spoke pie. -- But my point above was…. You can have a world of PIE without even going to steppe or north northeast of Europe.
2000 years after the shulaveri, so many people with very different admixture spoke a language which descended from the PIE of Shulaveri.

PS: Just added a post about Shulaveri in Archeology. they keep on giving: after being discovered as inventors of wine, now they pushed the discovery on irrigation architectures by over 500 years! first Hydraulic infrastructures by 5900bc!<brutal my SHulaveri, Just Brutal.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

I think I already told you this previously. So my words a while back;



To make simple is something like, follow the CHG admix. - So, apart from those above mentioned and just to refer a few, by end of shulaveri on, we would have: Boian and gulmenita (4500bc) spoke pie, later pre-cucuteni a bit north (4000bc), as combination of the previous admixing with European farmers, spoke pie. So did later the vucedol and tisza…. And if Otzi, by such shared ancestry with the Kum6 girl spoke pie, so did the Ozieri in even south sardinia…. Who else by 3000BC also did?

Remember…. I believe that Yamnaya (as descendants from Shulaveri) also spoke pie, but so did the clash of cousins moving from north black sea cost into yamnaya land by 3800BC. They all spoke pie. -- But my point above was…. You can have a world of PIE without even going to steppe or north northeast of Europe.
2000 years after the shulaveri, so many people with very different admixture spoke a language which descended from the PIE of Shulaveri.

PS: Just added a post about Shulaveri in Archeology. they keep on giving: after being discovered as inventors of wine, now they pushed the discovery on irrigation architectures by over 500 years! first Hydraulic infrastructures by 5900bc!<brutal my SHulaveri, Just Brutal.

Shulaveri is the Armenian hypothesis, right?

 

[halfalp]

Yet the cool kids still have to explain how the very same Proto-Indo-European language (dialects thereof) was clearly spread by R1b-Z2103 people (among other minor haplogroups too) from Yamnaya, R1a-M417 from CWC and earlier (most likely) Sredny Stog... and these R1b-L51 people that they say do not come from the Yamnaya horizon. It would've been the first and most surprising example of a "global language" in a time where there was no fully urban civilization and organized empires.

There are still people who believe to that Babel origin of all languages.

 

[halfalp]

Btw, over all the L-23 and Z2103 sample that we got from eastern europe, how do we even know if there is no low snp samples or marginal errors that would actually made the sample L-51?

 

[halfalp]

I hope we gonna stop with that middle-eastern origin for R1b non-sense one day...

 

[Olympus Mons]

Shulaveri is the Armenian hypothesis, right?

No! Its my hypothesis and was in contrast with Armenian Hypothesis in the following.
Armenian Hypothesis was about stating that the 4^th and 3^rd MIllennium bc in eastern Anatolia, South Caucasus and north Mesopotamia was the Urheimat of PIE. In their mind the PIE was the language of the Kura-araxes and leyla and Maykop R1b etc came from…. You get the picture. So the Kura Araxes PIE against the Uruk (not pie) kind of thinking.
From the onset I was the ones stating the Shulaveri as the source, in contrast to the Armenian Hypothesys by stating not, I repeat NOT, Kura-araxes, not Maykop, not Yamnaya…. But them as a specific culture was the Urheimat. So 6^th millennium BC. Being that PIE was the spoken language by end 6^th and not beginning of that period. PIE was the Journey of the people from Balkans (7^th Millenia bc) up until the fact that Shulaveri already had a presence in as far as Northwest Iran by 5000bc and PIE it was.

So PIE was not the spoken language of that region/period (eastern Anatolia, South Caucasus, etc) by 4th millenium BC but was spoken by some people in some pockets of places. Meaning as I always said its people and people behave as people, the shulaveri flee (some north into N.caucasus and later steppe) some to west (ended up as Boian/Gulmenita) some south (which I think were Merimde beni salama) and some naturally staid and flee to mountains and other places…. That is were the Anatolia popped up ….

 

[MOESAN]

My "pre-first-generation-natural-computer" works definitely to slowly, and I have to read (if possible) the entire paper about this, to know where the samples have been picked up (and how much), because it's of great importance; but I say some thoughts, without too precise target:
- Los Millares seems having visits and cultural influence of BBs (someones say it WAS fully BB at some stage at least); by contrast El Argar is considered as NOT BB. Most of the old archeologists thought in an "Helladic" origin or something near for El Argar, perhaps with the relay of Sicily and other mediterranean islands. I would have more complete DNA from El Argar because I wonder if some Y-J2 woud not be come there then.
- Italy saw surely early Y-R1b-L51; where and precisely when, it's the question? if they were BBs men they can have been send there from North (say: Western Alps) and have not been the supposed maritime pioneers (hypothesis I don't reject completely for some the L51) - L51 is I think old enough to have been born in Central-Eastern Europe and to have branched in two groups with different journeys.
- the today presence of old SNPs in a region which has few R1b does not prove too much; it shows only the conservation of an ancient stage of the lineage; to have more weight it asks for an upstream SNPs chain or a downstream SNPs chain or both, IMO.
- today distribution of Y-R1b in Iberia shows (to me) an entry or at least a rapid development around Basque country, not even around Valencia where some L51 are found too; Catalonia comes in second place here. It asks for a colonisation by northeastern Spain, not the opposite. I know some downstream ones as U152 have a different distribution but I think some arrived there by other routes, later. I doubt the most of them are all of them descendants of the first Y-R1b colonisation.

 

[Angela]

My "pre-first-generation-natural-computer" works definitely to slowly, and I have to read (if possible) the entire paper about this, to know where the samples have been picked up (and how much), because it's of great importance; but I say some thoughts, without too precise target:
- Los Millares seems having visits and cultural influence of BBs (someones say it WAS fully BB at some stage at least); by contrast El Argar is considered as NOT BB. Most of the old archeologists thought in an "Helladic" origin or something near for El Argar, perhaps with the relay of Sicily and other mediterranean islands. I would have more complete DNA from El Argar because I wonder if some Y-J2 woud not be come there then.
- Italy saw surely early Y-R1b-L51; where and precisely when, it's the question? if they were BBs men they can have been send there from North (say: Western Alps) and have not been the supposed maritime pioneers (hypothesis I don't reject completely for some the L51) - L51 is I think old enough to have been born in Central-Eastern Europe and to have branched in two groups with different journeys.
- the today presence of old SNPs in a region which has few R1b does not prove too much; it shows only the conservation of an ancient stage of the lineage; to have more weight it asks for an upstream SNPs chain or a downstream SNPs chain or both, IMO.
- today distribution of Y-R1b in Iberia shows (to me) an entry or at least a rapid development around Basque country, not even around Valencia where some L51 are found too; Catalonia comes in second place here. It asks for a colonisation by northeastern Spain, not the opposite. I know some downstream ones as U152 have a different distribution but I think some arrived there by other routes, later. I doubt the most of them are all of them descendants of the first Y-R1b colonisation.

Very good analysis.

 

[Angela]

I don't know if anyone has posted the El Pais article. I found the following interesting:

"The arrival of the hostile invaders in what is today Spain and Portugal had “a rapid and generalized genetic impact,” said Spanish scientist Íñigo Olalde at a conference two weeks ago in Jena, Germany. According to Olalde, during the Bronze Age, the subsequent populations had “40% of their genetic information and 100% of their Y chromosomes from the migrants.”

Given that children inherit the Y chromosome from their fathers, “this means that the men who arrived had preferential access to local women, again and again,” said Reich at the September event."
https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/10/03/inenglish/1538568010_930565.html

That sounds like a rather brutal and immediate take over, not a gradual process where the R1b men just had some preferential access to women.

I wonder what they mean by "“40% of their genetic information and 100% of their Y chromosomes from the migrants."

Do they mean 40% steppe, or 40% of the mixed ancestry of Beaker type people?

Either way, that would still mean perhaps a wipe out of 70-80% of the native population? It's still like a holocaust. Very different, needless to say, at least going by the samples we have so far, to what happened in Greece.

So, why do modern Spaniards look so different genetically from people of the British Isles, who had perhaps a 90% replacement? How could the Carthaginians have had such a huge impact? Is it all down to the Moors and other Islamic invaders??? I always thought they had some impact, but nothing on that kind of scale.

I really do hope they have some samples from El Argar.

The next question is Italy. What happened there? Did everyone the whole length of the peninsula look like the Parma Beaker sample or not?

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

I don't know if anyone has posted the El Pais article. I found the following interesting:

"The arrival of the hostile invaders in what is today Spain and Portugal had “a rapid and generalized genetic impact,” said Spanish scientist Íñigo Olalde at a conference two weeks ago in Jena, Germany. According to Olalde, during the Bronze Age, the subsequent populations had “40% of their genetic information and 100% of their Y chromosomes from the migrants.”

Given that children inherit the Y chromosome from their fathers, “this means that the men who arrived had preferential access to local women, again and again,” said Reich at the September event."
https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/10/03/inenglish/1538568010_930565.html

That sounds like a rather brutal and immediate take over, not a gradual process where the R1b men just had some preferential access to women.

I wonder what they mean by "“40% of their genetic information and 100% of their Y chromosomes from the migrants."

Do they mean 40% steppe, or 40% of the mixed ancestry of Beaker type people?

Either way, that would still mean perhaps a wipe out of 70-80% of the native population? It's still like a holocaust. Very different, needless to say, at least going by the samples we have so far, to what happened in Greece.

So, why do modern Spaniards look so different genetically from people of the British Isles, who had perhaps a 90% replacement? How could the Carthaginians have had such a huge impact? Is it all down to the Moors and other Islamic invaders??? I always thought they had some impact, but nothing on that kind of scale.

I really do hope they have some samples from El Argar.

The next question is Italy. What happened there? Did everyone the whole length of the peninsula look like the Parma Beaker sample or not?

It surely means 40% of the mixed ancestry Beaker folk. EDIT: Actually, it could just be very poorly worded. I think they might actually mean 40% Steppe. That's a lot...

But what, for some reason, they're missing is that there were farmer samples from the same time period, even after the C14 dating of these R1b-L51 - check them out on this interactive map here. It would have been a typical caste system, only we are looking more at the upper castes, because of the bias of higher status individuals being buried more lavishly as compared to peasants. The farmer types weren't all eradicated (and that's obvious looking back).

 

[MOESAN]

That's where we differ... I see Beakers as Unetice-like men + local cuties.

L11 (more probably L11+) settled in Bohemia/Poland. Some of then remained there and over time developed into the Unetice culture.

Those L11+ people thought in terms of "clan" - the extended family, something like the Roman gens. As the organization was strongly patriarchal, each clan probably had a distinct territory of their own, as well as a distinct forefather of their own. So I guess U106 clans and P312 clans, though neighbors of common extraction, originally sharing the same language, kept themselves to themselves.

U106 clans moved north little by little, mixed with CW first, then with I1 people their advance had pushed ahead. This resulted in Proto-Germanic, i.e PIE altered by local phonological traits and lexical additions.

P312 moved west, mixing with LBK-type people. I think L21 clans moved early, and retained their PIE kw- sound. There must have been a series of raids towards the southwest first, which would explain the low, but fairly homogeneous distribution of L21 all over today's France (Brittany not included) and Iberia (notably the north-west). Maybe DF27 followed - simultaneously or shortly afterwards. They kept in touch with the people they had left behind, and traded with them. Along those trading routes the beaker package spread quickly. The (surviving) natives may have taken advantage of the new opportunities, hence the Beaker samples identified as "southwestern" in southern Germany. Then, from what is now the Rhineland or Benelux, L21 massively and aggressively moved to Britain, bringing along both the 'steppe' and 'beaker' packages.

Those P312+ clans were violent, but not all equally numerous. They mixed abundantly with local women. The y-dna was altered, the autosomal mix was far less impacted. The Lusitanians retained their Proto-Italo-Cletic language. The Ligures mixed theirs with local non-IE languages. The Basques lost theirs.

Meanwhile, U152 stayed north of the Alps, mixing with locals in just the same way. It's easy enough to imagine an east-west linguistic gradient, with the west shifting away from the original as admixture intensified. Somewhere in Austria, tribes kept their kw- sound. In due time, they'd move to Italy and speak Latin. Further to the west, with more local admixture, the P shift occurred, probably because the local people couldn't manage the kw- (and because that kw- seems to have been fairly unstable anyway). The ancestors of the Osco-Umbrians may have lived there, with a language akin to latin, but affected by the sound shift. Further west: the P Celts that would later descend on Gaul and Northern Italy.

These are convictions, not certainties. No-one need agree. I know Ygorcs, for one, will contend that my glottochronology doesn't hold water. Well... alternative scenarios are most welcome. Feel free to criticize and amend.

- SNP's bearers are not aware of their mutations if they are aware fo their closest lineages so clans. I don't see how relatively close clans speaking at the origin the same dialect could keep so neatly separate without some geographic separation. Y-R1b-L11 bearers took two separate ways somewhere sometime. The current distribution of the U106 and P312 descendants and the neat cultural assignation we can imagine to them before subsequent historical brutal moves and slow osmosis pushes me to think L11>U106 took place somewhere near South Baltic shores, or in East Saxony or proximity: N-W Bohemia? (here we have the question of a relative disparition of ancient northwestern clades of Y-R1a). I firstable thought also in W- Austria but we would need deep SNP's to know I think. Maybe Maciamo could tell us if the couple Y-R1b-U106 and Y-I1a shows big respective %'s variations in Europe or not; but I think the bulk of U106 developped in very North at the contact of Y-I1 and pushed the bulk of CWC Y-R1a towards Scandinavia (Norway the most, towards Trondelag), not without some mixture at some stage, surely later (because of clans, this system seems perduring well among half nomadic pops and disappearing progressively among urban pops): part of Germanics making -
We can imagine an other scenario: Y-R1b-U106 in Austria (P312 more western), with tumuli, passing northeastwards through Moravia at Urnfields times and taking over Unetice territory until Poland and Lusace; then influenced by "Urnfielded" Lusacians (maybe still Y-I2a(2) as were some of the Unetice elites and linguistically influenced towards devoicing/fricative of stops (a feature which could have been born around Hungary, in links with proto-Rhaetians/Etruscans(?), bearers or relayers of the cremation/urns tradition (even the pan-talic Veneti would have had some phonologic traits common with Rhaetian, according to someones). Henri Hubert defended the hypothesis of an "Illyrian" cultural and linguistic influence of them upon the proto-Germanics at the Lusace times. But I don't see to well how along Danube the needed strict separation of pre-P312 and pre-U106 could have occurred; I think rather the tumuli pre-Lusacian of Poland were rather P312>U152, linked with pan-Italics (Veneti?) and Celts.
This long story a bit out of topic to recall that to date, for I know, we have only 3 x Y-I2 (Y-2/Y-I2a2/Y-I2c2) for Unetice C., but it's in eastern Germany only; in Liechtenstein Cave Untrut C. influenced by Urnfields we find too a lot of Y-I2a2 but they are close parents.
As you, I make guesses, it's where the fun is, before abundant anDNA.