bicicleur 2
Regular Member
- Messages
- 6,406
- Reaction score
- 1,439
- Points
- 113
there may have been a 3rd IE clade, apart from R1a and R1b, certain sublades of I2a2a
not for Myceneans, but for the expansion toward the Carpathian Basin from the steppe
David Reich speech on steppe migrations-April 29, 2017
- Thread starter Angela
- Start date
there may have been a 3rd IE clade, apart from R1a and R1b, certain sublades of I2a2a
not for Myceneans, but for the expansion toward the Carpathian Basin from the steppe
DuPidh
Banned
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 51
- Points
- 0
I am surprised with the new classification of Albanian as Germanic language, but its not really funny. Albanian original words, not the borrowed one, contain a number of German words (but not too many) that can not be explained with Gothic or Vandal invasions. Also 2 Austrian linguists published a work saying that Albanian is the base of all European languages including Germanic, and Albanian language is not related to Illyrian. Albanians were annoyed to their suggestion of Albanian not related to Illyrian since there is evidence of relation and ignored their findings. To make my point, even if Albanian is not Germanic signs of some kind of relation are there. But the question is who brought that language to Albanians since genetically Albanians are Balkanic and R1b Germanic is not common among Albanians.
spartan owl
Regular Member
yes you are right about that, but a simple explanation could be that when cyprus was hellenized the myceneans were already settled in greece for centuries so even if the original myceneans were predominately R1a the invading armies of cyprus had all greek haplotypes in the normal percentages.Then if you consider the fact that this army was mingled with the locals then ydna differences are to be aspected anyway.
Yetos
Active member
- Messages
- 5,955
- Reaction score
- 520
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Makedonia
- Ethnic group
- Makedonian original
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- G2a3a
- mtDNA haplogroup
- X2b
Personally I believe that Myceneans cause they are connected with Vucocar since we found many common with should be R1b
and Hellenes-Dorians should be R1a since Makedonians were Dorians but also consider as cousins the Bryges a Thracian nation, the Mygdones
Cyprus was first colonised by Myceneans and Achaioi,
much later only 2 areas colonised by Makedonians at Ammochostos/famagusta and North at Solotoi if remember correct,
but linguistic Cyprus belongs to Arcado-Cypriot Dialect,
which means is Connected with minor-Asian population the known at Hettite as Arzawa-Asuwa the ones in Centum Greek called Arcadia
and Hellenes-Dorians should be R1a since Makedonians were Dorians but also consider as cousins the Bryges a Thracian nation, the Mygdones
Cyprus was first colonised by Myceneans and Achaioi,
much later only 2 areas colonised by Makedonians at Ammochostos/famagusta and North at Solotoi if remember correct,
but linguistic Cyprus belongs to Arcado-Cypriot Dialect,
which means is Connected with minor-Asian population the known at Hettite as Arzawa-Asuwa the ones in Centum Greek called Arcadia
M
MarkoZ
Guest
This is refreshing - it's great to see that David Reich is so willing to adjust his hypotheses to accomodate new evidence. I'd think much of Gramkelidze's & Ivanov's work has been vindicated by recent DNA, though there's still quite some inertia when it comes to more popular theories. Anecdotally, what converted me from being Gimbutas' most loyal acolyte was G&I demonstration that early attested Indo-European societies fit quite perfectly in the pan-West-Asian cultural horizon. That always seemed like a stronger argument to me than the Y-DNA monomania and such and made me doubt their intrusive nature. This is in no contradiction to an intermediate steppe episode, which G&I discuss in several chapters.
Incidentally they also attempt to demonstrate the West Asian centrality of Greek culture. They even hint at the possibility that the extant Greeks might have been but an offshoot of a larger population inhabiting Anatolia and the Transcaucasus, which was displaced in its original homeland. If there was no early steppe incursion into the Balkans that suggestion might not be so outrageous after all.
Incidentally they also attempt to demonstrate the West Asian centrality of Greek culture. They even hint at the possibility that the extant Greeks might have been but an offshoot of a larger population inhabiting Anatolia and the Transcaucasus, which was displaced in its original homeland. If there was no early steppe incursion into the Balkans that suggestion might not be so outrageous after all.
M
MarkoZ
Guest
I seem to have missed the tree 
That's a bit odd, isn't it? Albanian a Germanic language? :startled:
That's a bit odd, isn't it? Albanian a Germanic language? :startled:
Apsurdistan
Banned
- Messages
- 283
- Reaction score
- 62
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Bošnjak
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- I-Z63
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H5c
So Albanian is Germanic? No wonder the Germans are one of the founders of the greater Albania project. Kosovo was first and looks like parts of Macedonia might be next.
M
MarkoZ
Guest
Albanian definitely isn't Germanic. I guess computational models produce some weird results in some cases.
This is the relevant paper for anyone who can properly interpret it:
https://www.cs.rice.edu/~nakhleh/CPHL/RWT02.pdf
Early Slavic speakers settled pretty much throughout the Balkans, all the way deep into southern Greece, going by toponymy (even in Albania, especially the area south of the Shkumbin river and Tosks do seem to have R1a and I2a associated with the Slavic expansion at higher levels than Ghegs so that's kinda corroborated) but it's true that there seems to be a south-north cline in their impact, if not the exact density of toponyms, as you said.
Based on what I've seen, and with my limited knowledge, don't Albanians and Greeks have similar levels of R1b (~ low teens) potentially associated with early Indo-European expansions (rather than later ones from Western Europe into the Balkans etc.) by the way?
Also, to keep to the particular tree, there's a Greco-Armenian node and Armenian is pretty associated with R1b overall, isn't it? You can make the "Mycenaeans" post-Greek Indo-Iranians arrivals to Greece, per the theories of Huxley and Makkay of course, who would be using an already existing Greek dialect. Unless you also have in mind something along the lines of what Garrett considers in 'Convergence in the Formation of Indo‑European Subgroups: Phylogeny and Chronology'
http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~garrett/IEConvergence.pdf
https://www.cs.rice.edu/~nakhleh/CPHL/RWT02.pdf
Early Slavic speakers settled pretty much throughout the Balkans, all the way deep into southern Greece, going by toponymy (even in Albania, especially the area south of the Shkumbin river and Tosks do seem to have R1a and I2a associated with the Slavic expansion at higher levels than Ghegs so that's kinda corroborated) but it's true that there seems to be a south-north cline in their impact, if not the exact density of toponyms, as you said.
Based on what I've seen, and with my limited knowledge, don't Albanians and Greeks have similar levels of R1b (~ low teens) potentially associated with early Indo-European expansions (rather than later ones from Western Europe into the Balkans etc.) by the way?
Also, to keep to the particular tree, there's a Greco-Armenian node and Armenian is pretty associated with R1b overall, isn't it? You can make the "Mycenaeans" post-Greek Indo-Iranians arrivals to Greece, per the theories of Huxley and Makkay of course, who would be using an already existing Greek dialect. Unless you also have in mind something along the lines of what Garrett considers in 'Convergence in the Formation of Indo‑European Subgroups: Phylogeny and Chronology'
http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~garrett/IEConvergence.pdf
Last edited:
M
MarkoZ
Guest
This probably wasn't your original intent when posting this, but I think this is something important that's often omitted from these discussions:
This corresponds to the picture that Robert Drews paints in his 'The Coming of the Greeks' regarding the spread of Hittite, which is that of rather peaceful plebeian usurpation of an advanced urban culture. I imagine that this transformation couldn't have been effected without significant gene flow.
This corresponds to the picture that Robert Drews paints in his 'The Coming of the Greeks' regarding the spread of Hittite, which is that of rather peaceful plebeian usurpation of an advanced urban culture. I imagine that this transformation couldn't have been effected without significant gene flow.
Angela
Veteran member
- Messages
- 21,796
- Reaction score
- 12,340
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
There are quite a few entries on the Hittites in "Empires of the Silk Road". He agrees it was a peaceful, gradual infiltration, not a military invasion.
https://books.google.com/books?id=-...r&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q=Hittites&f=false
Even if they find a Hittite sample with steppe, given the Mitanni influence I don't know how that would be dispositive. I think we need lots of samples from south eastern Balkan cultures.
https://books.google.com/books?id=-...r&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q=Hittites&f=false
Even if they find a Hittite sample with steppe, given the Mitanni influence I don't know how that would be dispositive. I think we need lots of samples from south eastern Balkan cultures.
IronSide
Elite member
- Messages
- 883
- Reaction score
- 279
- Points
- 0
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- I2c2
- mtDNA haplogroup
- T2e1
I get your point, but I feel we're limiting ourselves here by assuming that IE nations must have been either R1a dominant or R1b dominant, that could have been possible at the early days of Yamna maybe, but Indo-Europeans assimilated other groups in their migrations. In the case of Greece, E-V13 satisfies every criteria to be the lineage of proto-Hellenic people, it is a very young lineage that expanded during the bronze age, and not all of its branches are in the Balkans, so it is younger still, maybe a great patriarch lived as close as 2000 BC, R1b would be a secondary minor lineage, one Balkan variety is R1b-CTS9219.
By all means they could have expanded from the northern steppes of Russia if that was your argument for R1a, and I don't understand why we assume Dorians and Mycenaeans have different haplogroups, I don't know but didn't they speak Greek ? one language ? they weren't separate branches of IE, but different dialects of one language, that means they weren't much different genetically, E-V13 and R1b-CTS9219, and personally I would add some G-L13.
If Greek R1a is Mycenaean, two things must be true: 1- it would a clear and different branch than Slavic ones, maybe separated by a TMRCA of about 4000 ybp. 2- it would be present in all places settled by the Greeks, in their conquests and colonies, as well as Roman distribution, so a pan-European presence as well as middle eastern.
Arame
Regular Member
Yes they were exclusively Iranian related culture. Who later became Scythians mixing with Siberians and W Asians.
Indo Aryans were already in Indus valley at 2000 - 1600 bc that is why they don't need Sintashta but Yamna.
Last edited:
berun
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,084
- Reaction score
- 183
- Points
- 0
By the way if Greek Mycaenean and Hittite are attested from 1600 BC such languages might be in place at least in 2000 BC. Of course if Yamnayists are obsesswd to find steppe genes the genetists would'nt be capable to track the IE migration, but for those pointing to a northern homeland it's not so problematic. I recall that Pax Augusta found in RISE595 a 15% of North Slavic.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...-they-for-real?p=499438&viewfull=1#post499438
Even if I'm not confident comparing ancients with moderns (it is more like to find out how where Europeans in the Middle Ages comparing them with Southafrican coloureds), it is an interesting point, also to notice how the Yamnayist obsession can divert us from the right path.
@Markoz,
Yes, the whole paper is interesting I think, but this part is what I had in mind in this case:
"...it hardly makes sense to reconstruct Proto-Greek as such: a coherent IE dialect, spoken by some IE speech community, ancestral to all the later Greek dialects. It is just as likely that Greek was formed by the coalescence of dialects that originally formed part of a continuum with other NIE (Nuclear Indo-European) dialects, including some that went on to participate in the formation of other IE branches"
As for E, J etc. and their potential assimilation on the way to their final stop, various theories (that of Michel Sakellariou in 'Les Proto-Grecs' comes to mind - and sorry for the vagueness since it's been a while :embarassed
that agree with a steppe urheimat have the steppe-associated "proto-Greeks" being accompanied to the south with a non-Indo-European Balkan element alongside them. So it's not unlikely that those lineages were just as important or even more important than any R lineage when those groups finally arrived to the south sometime in the 2200-1900 BC period, assuming such a scenario. But I guess we'll see!
Yes, the whole paper is interesting I think, but this part is what I had in mind in this case:
"...it hardly makes sense to reconstruct Proto-Greek as such: a coherent IE dialect, spoken by some IE speech community, ancestral to all the later Greek dialects. It is just as likely that Greek was formed by the coalescence of dialects that originally formed part of a continuum with other NIE (Nuclear Indo-European) dialects, including some that went on to participate in the formation of other IE branches"
As for E, J etc. and their potential assimilation on the way to their final stop, various theories (that of Michel Sakellariou in 'Les Proto-Grecs' comes to mind - and sorry for the vagueness since it's been a while :embarassed
that agree with a steppe urheimat have the steppe-associated "proto-Greeks" being accompanied to the south with a non-Indo-European Balkan element alongside them. So it's not unlikely that those lineages were just as important or even more important than any R lineage when those groups finally arrived to the south sometime in the 2200-1900 BC period, assuming such a scenario. But I guess we'll see!
This is most likely the case.
Ah. This implies a latter influence of Germanic rather than generative.
We don't have Mycenaean DNA yet. They could certainly be R1a.