David Reich speech on steppe migrations-April 29, 2017

How can Albanian be descended from Proto-Germanic?:

http://s22.postimg.org/ayiu8c9gx/tree.png
In the IE tree as a whole in my opinion the Albanian language was located somewhere between Germanic and Balto-Slavic languages.
My impression about this language was that the native words(non borowings) find their closest cognates either in Germanic or Balto-Slavic,i can't count the percentage to which is more close.

Some linguist make it most close to Lithuanian,still as seen here with Germanic,yet some to Old Slavic,but is between both in my opinion.
 
Where did you find the video of the speech, Angela? It's hard to comment without having heard it.

Regarding the new tree, I had proposed since 2009 that the Mycenaeans were predominantly R1a and descended from the Srubna culture by a nearly direct migration from the Steppe around 1600 BCE. I believe that the later Dorian migration brought R1b (Z2103, U152?) to Greece. Therefore Greek is a hybrid IE branch, and this is hard to show on such a tree.

However I disagree that this should be the case of the Armenian branch too. It is clear that Armenians are predominantly R1b-Z2103 (and especially L584). They have 30% of R1b for only 5% of R1a. The Mitanni or other Indo-Iranian tribes surely brought R1a-Z93 and probably also some R1b-Z2103 (Y24543 clade, found in Armenia, South Asia and Ukraine). That's probably what they found with ancient DNA. The Mitanni came first to Armenia (from 1500 BCE), then the actual Proto-Armenians from the Balkans (from 1200 BCE). That's what archaeology and history say.

I also find it odd to place Albanian with the Germanic branch. I wonder what are their justification for that. Albanian belong to R1b-Z2103 (SE European CTS9219 clade), not even to R1b-L51. I would place Albanian split a bit before the split between Italo-Celtic and Germanic. Phylogenetically, the Albanian branch is more closely related to the Armenian branch.

Actually there are many Germanic words in Albanian language, but the common explanation has been that they have derived from Gothic invasion some time AD. Similarities are seen in grammar. Also the hapogroups I1+I2 Germanic are present in Ydna of Albanians at the rate of around 5%. R1b Germanic also is present . So genetically speaking if the classification has any ground it could be those people who brought it
 
well if the written facts of Irish monks are conspiracy, :useless:
then what about Fallmayer and Metternich?

anyway Fallmayer theory suggested that Greeks were swaped by Slavs and Greeks moved to Asia,
but all genetical results dissapointed him and his followers :indifferent:

Again, read:
I don't have any slightly idea of what are you talking. Open a new thread and elaborate your conspiracy theories.
 
Actually there are many Germanic words in Albanian language, but the common explanation has been that they have derived from Gothic invasion some time AD. Similarities are seen in grammar. Also the hapogroups I1+I2 Germanic are present in Ydna of Albanians at the rate of around 5%. R1b Germanic also is present . So genetically speaking if the classification has any ground it could be those people who brought it

I1 means nothing if you did not expand to more deeper,

I1 is also mark of traditional Greek tribes
that have nothing to do with Albania
 
David Reich said

Reich told :

We also see no evidence of steppe migrations through the Balkans into Anatolia, 'cause there's time series data now through the Balkans and there's no evidence of steppe ancestry in the Balkans or even in the sporadic samples we have from Anatolia. So, the model that people have been thinking about, about a source in the steppe which transmits these Hittite languages through the Balkans and impacts Anatolia, there's just no support for it in the genetic data, and in fact there's contradiction in terms of certain suggestions in India.
 
The podcast may go up at the APS site eventually but it's not there yet.

The crucial question is what is the date of their youngest group of Balkan samples? It's one thing if there is no steppe there 4200-3000 BC or so, and this thus calls into question the movement of Anatolian languages from the steppe into Anatolia via the Balkans. I've maintained since the days of dna forums that there's no clear archaeological trail moving in that direction at that time; rather the reverse.

It's another thing if there's no steppe up to the time of the Mycenaeans. How then and with whom did the Greek language arrive? How did related Armenian get to eastern Anatolia?

As for India, he's not saying there's no steppe ancestry, just that it doesn't look like Andronovo or Sintashta were the vectors. For all we know they may have found a more proximate population
 
The crucial question is what is the date of their youngest group of Balkan samples? It's one thing if there is no steppe there 4200-3000 BC or so, and this thus calls into question the movement of Anatolian languages from the steppe into Anatolia via the Balkans. I've maintained since the days of dna forums that there's no clear archaeological trail moving in that direction at that time; rather the reverse.

I think that this is just a problem of sample bias. There were lots of people living in the Balkans from 4200 to 3000 BCE. How many did they test? Ten? One hundred? Was it from different locations and different periods? If they tested over one hundred from at least 10 different locations and periods, including cultures that archaeologists thought had Steppe influence like Cernavodă, Ezero, Glina or Bubanj-Hum, then it would be rather surprising. But if they took samples from cultures still belonging to Old Europe like Boian or Karanovo, then there is nothing odd about it. Even in the former case, there was surely a strong segregation between the Steppe invaders and the indigenous population, so not finding any Steppe ancestry could just mean that they got samples belonging to unmixed indigenous people in the conquered population.
 
I see Srubna as related to R1a-Sintashta, but catacomb as R1b-Yamna
So did Myceneans come from Srubna or Catacomb?
They certainly came from the people of western Ukraine who invented the sword. Those same people also got into the Carpathian Basin, even before the Myceneans in Greece.

It could have been either the Late Catacomb or the Early Srubna culture. It's not very clear the the Mycenaeans appear just after the transition period between the two cultures in the Steppe.
 
The crucial question is what is the date of their youngest group of Balkan samples? It's one thing if there is no steppe there 4200-3000 BC or so, and this thus calls into question the movement of Anatolian languages from the steppe into Anatolia via the Balkans. I've maintained since the days of dna forums that there's no clear archaeological trail moving in that direction at that time; rather the reverse.

AFAIK there is no trail at all, not from the Balkans, neither from anywhere else

anyway archeological trails are always guesswork
if it is possible to get hold of the proper DNA the trail becomes much clearer and much more certain
 
The "weird tree" comes from 'Indo-European and Computational Cladistics' by Ringe et al. Albanian assumes a more typical position when Germanic is removed.
 
It could have been either the Late Catacomb or the Early Srubna culture. It's not very clear the the Mycenaeans appear just after the transition period between the two cultures in the Steppe.

R1a Z93 found in Srubna basically rules out Srubna for Greece unless other Srubna carried sometype of R1b.
 
Maciamo

Greeks being as a R1a nation? Hmm.. Read the Cypriot y dna paper. There is 0 correlation with R1a and Greek language spread into Cyprus. Most R1a present today in Greece is from medieval Slavic settlers.


For the R1b in Armenia coming from Balkanes. There is no archaeological evidence and no genetic evidence. You simply don't want to accept that Anthony's theory was wrong about that.

And btw it was wrong also about Hittites. Reich is not a person that will make bold claims without serious evidence.
Chernavoda was caused by Anatolia Chl entering into Europe and not by Steppe incursion. Before Myceneans there was no enough Steppe in South Balkans. Look at Montenegro BA on PCA You will see that Reich is correct. I will attach it.
 
Language shift is not always caused by "massive" migration of people(DNA).In my opinion the said group sometimes can be near unnoticable.Let's look at the Altaic family,I don't know what will be the difference with Indo European supermen fighting on horseback, while the Altaics were far superior in this,or the Arabic speaking people of north Africa.In more modern times in Europe I can think of Italians and Romanians speaking Romance and their similarity.Cyprus is yet small island it could have been "Hellenized" in many different ways.
 
Milan.M

You need to read that Cyprus paper. Cyprus was Hellenized by E-V13, R1b, and J2-M67. No R1a and I2a1 which both are recent Slavic settlers in Greece during Byzantine epoch.
 
Milan.M

You need to read that Cyprus paper. Cyprus was Hellenized by E-V13, R1b, and J2-M67. No R1a and I2a1 which both are recent Slavic settlers in Greece during Byzantine epoch.

I'm really not arguing which haplogroups are originally Greek if we can speak of that in the first place,was giving an examples of language shift nor is there any indications that R1a and I2a arrived with Slavic settlers to be honest(not enough data) but mere interpretation of historical data by amateurs.Trying to fit all that with genetics which not always work so well,always coming something new to surprise us.
 
Concerning that tree which as far as I understand is based on Chang et al computational model. Which can create exotic branchings.
Any tree that place the split between Indo Aryan and Iranian after 2000 BC is wrong wrong wrong.
You can have dozens of ancient dna from Sintashta and Andronovo You will not find the Indian L657.

Because it was not there and it made a leap frog directly from maybe Abashevo to Indus Valley.

Albanian being a Germanic language is also very funny.
 
Any tree that place the split between Indo Aryan and Iranian after 2000 BC is wrong wrong wrong.
You can have dozens of ancient dna from Sintashta and Andronovo You will not find the Indian L657.

Because it was not there and it made a leap frog directly from maybe Abashevo to Indus Valley.

Do you think Sintashta, Andronovo, Srubnaya spoke Iranian not proto-Indo Iranian? And that the Indo Aryans with L657 were already moving towards South Asia in 2000 BC?
 
Concerning that tree which as far as I understand is based on Chang et al computational model. Which can create exotic branchings.
Any tree that place the split between Indo Aryan and Iranian after 2000 BC is wrong wrong wrong.
You can have dozens of ancient dna from Sintashta and Andronovo You will not find the Indian L657.

Because it was not there and it made a leap frog directly from maybe Abashevo to Indus Valley.

Albanian being a Germanic language is also very funny.

Indo Iranians split is still later than Tocharian because there in the east we have a Centum dialect,Satemization must have occurred at later level because Tocharian would have been affected too by this innovation which affects Indo-Iranian,Balto-Slavic,Armenian,Albanian,Thracian,Dacian etc,partly Greek.
 
Last edited:
Greeks being as a R1a nation? Hmm.. Read the Cypriot y dna paper. There is 0 correlation with R1a and Greek language spread into Cyprus. Most R1a present today in Greece is from medieval Slavic settlers.

That only applies to Mycenaeans, and I didn't say that a lot of Mycenaean Y-DNA lineages survived. Indo-European lineages were either R1a or R1b, but if you remove Slavic, Germanic, Celtic and Roman R1a and R1b in Greece, there is not much left. Mostly R1b-Z2103 and R1a-Z93, but that's just a few percents of the population. If the Dorians were R1b -Z2103 from the Balkans, then all that is left for the Mycenaeans is R1a. However R1a-Z93 probably came from the Near East. So chances are that the Mycenaeans had quite Proto-Slavic looking lineages like R1a-Z282 (either Z280 or M458) that cannot easily be distinguished from those of later Slavic invasions. That would explain why there is R1a all over Greece even though the Slavs only really settled in the north. Those two separate sources of similar-looking R1a would also explain why R1a is considerably higher in the north, but present throughout Greece. It is also in agreement with the new tree proposed by David Reich, which places Greek in the R1a branch alongside the Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian branches.
 

This thread has been viewed 43524 times.

Back
Top