Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe
- Thread starter motzart
- Start date
Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,842
- Reaction score
- 12,313
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
Since we have been discussing the Caucasus-Gedrosia component in relation to the "Near Eastern" half of the Yamnaya people, and how that relates to the EEF component, I thought that these results for an LBK farmer (Stuttgart of LBK is EEF), which were sent to me earlier today might be interesting.
Dodecad K12b Oracle results:
Kit F999916
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1 Atlantic_Med 54.92
2 Caucasus 30.3
3 Southwest_Asian 10.78
4 Northwest_African 3.79
5 North_European 0.14
6 Southeast_Asian 0.06
Single Population Sharing:
# Population (source) Distance
1 Sardinian (HGDP) 17.48
2 TSI30 (Metspalu) 24.05
3 Tuscan (HGDP) 24.21
4 North_Italian (HGDP) 24.41
5 Andalucia (1000Genomes) 24.7
6 C_Italian (Dodecad) 24.93
7 Murcia (1000Genomes) 25.93
8 Sicilian (Dodecad) 26.56
9 Baleares (1000Genomes) 26.69
10 S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) 26.83
11 Canarias (1000Genomes) 27.05
12 N_Italian (Dodecad) 27.08
13 Morocco_Jews (Behar) 27.9
14 Castilla_La_Mancha (1000Genomes) 28.41
15 Castilla_Y_Leon (1000Genomes) 28.62
16 Spaniards (Behar) 28.69
17 Extremadura (1000Genomes) 28.8
18 Galicia (1000Genomes) 28.86
19 Valencia (1000Genomes) 28.96
20 Sephardic_Jews (Behar) 28.99
Dodecad K12b Oracle results:
Kit F999916
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1 Atlantic_Med 54.92
2 Caucasus 30.3
3 Southwest_Asian 10.78
4 Northwest_African 3.79
5 North_European 0.14
6 Southeast_Asian 0.06
Single Population Sharing:
# Population (source) Distance
1 Sardinian (HGDP) 17.48
2 TSI30 (Metspalu) 24.05
3 Tuscan (HGDP) 24.21
4 North_Italian (HGDP) 24.41
5 Andalucia (1000Genomes) 24.7
6 C_Italian (Dodecad) 24.93
7 Murcia (1000Genomes) 25.93
8 Sicilian (Dodecad) 26.56
9 Baleares (1000Genomes) 26.69
10 S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) 26.83
11 Canarias (1000Genomes) 27.05
12 N_Italian (Dodecad) 27.08
13 Morocco_Jews (Behar) 27.9
14 Castilla_La_Mancha (1000Genomes) 28.41
15 Castilla_Y_Leon (1000Genomes) 28.62
16 Spaniards (Behar) 28.69
17 Extremadura (1000Genomes) 28.8
18 Galicia (1000Genomes) 28.86
19 Valencia (1000Genomes) 28.96
20 Sephardic_Jews (Behar) 28.99
Alan
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,517
- Reaction score
- 450
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Kurdish
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1a1a1
- mtDNA haplogroup
- HV2a1 +G13708A
Thanks Angela, but we already had that, the portion showing up here as "Caucasus", is the part of the Caucasus component which is "Southern". This is why no Gedrosia appears.
Since we both agreed that Caucasus_Gedrosia and EEF are pred. ENF. It is quite logical that they will share some identical genes. Which in some calculators appear like EEF and in other Caucasus.
LeBrok
Elite member
- Messages
- 10,273
- Reaction score
- 1,615
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Calgary
- Ethnic group
- Citizen of the world
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b Z2109
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H1c
Well, you would need to explain more eloquently and a lot to prove existence of Gedrosia in EEF or ENF. This 12b calculator contains Gedrosia as an admixture along Caucasus and others. It is not one and the same as Caucasus and seems to be non-existent during Neolithic in Europe, at least in Stuttgart sample.
As I said before, Gedrosia has pattern of Bronze Age expansion from Central Asia together with R1b IEs.
However, Yamnaya samples are Bronze Age, so who knows, perhaps Gedrosia reached them already? Though I doubt it.
This chart shows Gedrosia on a different branch than Caucasus. Caucasus here is closely related with South Asian, Atlantic Med (all components of EEF I guess) and even closer to North Euro, but not to Gedrosia.
Alan
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,517
- Reaction score
- 450
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Kurdish
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1a1a1
- mtDNA haplogroup
- HV2a1 +G13708A
Moesan the Cromagnon man is an upper paleolithic man and has died out even by mesolithic, let alone Bronze Age.
And I am pretty convinced you didn't meant the Cromagnon men but the Cromagnon type of the classical anthropology, because CM type is described in classical antrophology, by all means as brachy to mesocephalic (in this case you are right). But Yamna was dolicho-mesocephalic similar to Mediterranean and Nordic types who are often dinarized. And since they were darker pigmented. Nordic is out of choice. The Cromagnon on the other hand is extremely broad faced, broad and concave nosed, usually light eyed.
http://yachts.monacoeye.com/yachtsbyname/mediafiles/2008_amber_fashion_016_david_coulthard.jpg
Borreby is brachycephalic and broud-round faced since it is considered as a sub type of the Alpine race.
see here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_race
And here is a description of borreby.
Just a few borreby charecteristics which don't fit Yamna.
1. Borreby is Brachycephalic, Yamna is meso_dolichocephalic
2. forhead broad and slightly curved (roundish), while Yamna has often a low or sloping forhead.
3. Borreby mostly concave nosed, Yamna almost completely straight or convexed nosed. Convex noses are unthinkable on Borreby.
4. Borreby face short, broad and flattish, Yamna face is average broad, oftern longer and has characteristic depth
5. Borreby hair color is blond to medium brown, Yamna hair color is typically dark.
6. Borreby eye color typicall blue, Yamna eye color typically brown
Thats just a few of many differences.
typical examples of Borreby.
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net...d_Smith.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20111004234245
http://s1d4.turboimagehost.com/t1/4095706_borreby_1.jpg
Kurgan types
http://www.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/yamnaya1z3r2ubptdc.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2b/Yamna_cultdure.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2b/Yamna_culture.jpg
An interesting comment from Razib Khan about the genetic comparaison to Russians/Norwegians with Yamna; you can follow the discussion here:
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-holocen...ium=rss&utm_campaign=the-holocene-alien-years
"well, proportionally it turn out the norwegians have the most yamna. the russians less for two reasons
1) WHG type resurgence it looks like
2) non-trivial siberian admixture via finns who were russified and later turks
the russians are basically lithuanians + the northern finns & tatars"
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-holocen...ium=rss&utm_campaign=the-holocene-alien-years
"well, proportionally it turn out the norwegians have the most yamna. the russians less for two reasons
1) WHG type resurgence it looks like
2) non-trivial siberian admixture via finns who were russified and later turks
the russians are basically lithuanians + the northern finns & tatars"
MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 5,719
- Reaction score
- 1,207
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
Well, very unseasy....
of course when I sepak f 'Cro-Magnon' I speak of the Paleolithic man - in fact the modern derived types are 'cromagnoid' - never was 'Cro-magnon' brachycephalIC, NEVER NEVER NEVER OK? Some of his descendant types can be (Borreby which is not 'alpine ' but MAYBE a cousin type derived (as possibly 'alpine') from 'Cro-magnon'
THAT SAID 'Borreby' face is square as C-M, not round (because to bony for it) -
AND I WAS TRYING TO "CORRECT" YOU ABOUT CRO-MAGNON PARADYGME, NOT TAKING PART (AT LEAST IMMEDIATLY) IN THE YAMNAYA DEBATE
I'll do when I've time - at first sight if I rely on you, the Yamnaya you describes here evocate something where 'cappadocian mediterranean', 'eurafrican', or 'irano-afghan' (not stranger to some 'long barrows types') are present (maybe close to the Poland bronze Age man?): so South to Caucasus (Sumer) or South-East the Caspian? just from what you wrote here...
I hope I've been clear enough formy first post
read you (all) again - good evening
MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 5,719
- Reaction score
- 1,207
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
BTW - here is an interesting paper, which reveals a correlation between genetics and linguistics among Indo-European speakers:
http://www.jolr.ru/files/(105)jlr2013-9(23-35).pdf
A very interesting chart from page 5 (genetic distances of mitochondrial DNA between major IE groups):
We notice that:
1) Generally languages correlate well with genetic distances.
2) There are some sharp exceptions from this rule, including:
a) Hungarians - they are genetically like Slavonic group, yet speak a Non-IE language
b) Romanians - genetically half-way between Slavonic & Germanic, yet speak Romance
b*) Aromuns - genetically (mtDNA) most similar to Slavonic group, yet speak Romance
c) Sicilians - genetically far away from all other groups, yet speak Romance
3) Some other quick observations:
d) Albanians - genetically in the middle between Germanic, Romance, Slavonic, and Baltic
e) Norwegians & Germans - genetically closest to Slavonic & Romance out of all Germanic groups
f) Icelanders and Austrians - relatively close to Celtic group (even closer than English)
g) Slavonic - genetically about half-way between Baltic and Germanic (interesting!)
h) Icelanders - mitochondrial DNA is very Celtic (pretty consistent with other studies).
i) Germanic group - in the middle between Celtic, Romance & Balto-Slavonic (fits with geography)
Remember that this is mitochondrial only (so Y-DNA and autosomal DNA was not compared).
it's only mt DNa: interesting but doesn't do it, so some surprises - I would prefer an autosomes distances calculation - THANKS NEVERTHELESS
MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 5,719
- Reaction score
- 1,207
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
Alan, I need some brain dopping or I misunderstood something?
You say: Yamnaya = 50% EHG like + EHG = 60% WHG, divided /2 = 30% - until there OK I rely on you - divided / 2 to say Norwegians have 50% of Yamnaya? (proxi)
SO how Norwegians who had 25% of WHG before I-Ean (from Yamnaya) can go up to 47% WHG with a similar number of Yamnaya people carrying ONLY 30%
PERCENTAGES DON'T ADD!!! I repeat it !!! -
with 100 men(women): roughly 50 pre-IE with 25% = 12,5% + 50 IE with 30% = 15% result for 100 new Norwegians: 27,5% NOT 47% ...
or ...
just calculation, without theory yet
The region includes Eastern Anatolia, and most proponents of this theory invoke the earliest evidence of cattle domestication found in the Taurus'. More importantly both theories are very problematic for many if not all of the same reasons. Reasons begotten from reasoning, which were contained in my posts.
I never said this. You aren't reading what I wrote dude. And my point is that there isn't really evidence of a "cultural influx", much less an "obvious" one.
I don't doubt this about Maykop, and I believe that this may have been the real "melding zone", but the Yamna horizon exhibits too much continuity from Dneiper-Donets/Samara->Khvalynsk/stredny-stog->Yamna to ascribe an external source of the culture. This is the problem. There seems to be a gradual transition to a more eneolithic culture distributed broadly across the PC region, but envelopment/superimposition from outside did not occur. Yamna is so huge that most archaeologists are reluctant to even call it a single culture. And yes, there were "kurgans" on the steppe by 5000BC in some shape or form. Yamna burials are no doubt related to preceding cultures in the regions. Some say Stredny-Stog and others argue for a volga connections, but regardless there is a clear local development leading up to what we see in Yamna. Pit graves beginning as early as 5000BC that become smaller and richer signaling the stratification and clan/class separation you see in any advancing society.
The earliest evidence of horse domestication for transportation is on the Pontic Steppe, probably by 5000-4000BC. No one disputes this. By 3000BC Mesopotamia would have likely known of horse domestication. It's funny how you would be so quick to cite the earliest evidence of cattle domestication in the Taurus', and that the likely origins of R1b is Iran, but then you deny the consensus origin of horse domestication.
You don't need a migration to learn about horses, or trade for them. Wheeled vehicles are attested very early on in Mesopotamia, there is no doubt. But the horse drawn war chariots that we all imagine when think of a chariot were developed on the steppe, and weren't attested in battle until the Hittites wrote of it in the 2nd mil BC.
Yes I know this.
I don't even know what you think you're saying here. Not only is it wrong, but there's no point to it.
What do you think "Indo" means? Indic = Indo-Aryan.
We know quite a bit about the behavior of horse tribes from the huns and mongols. By 3000BC Mesopotamia would likely already have been over-run several times. Climate change might have been a trigger for large migrations which would have happened about once each millennium. Populations could have changed drastically in a matter of decades.
I would say 4000 BC (whenever temperatures dropped in Siberia) is a good estimate for when horse tribes moved south in large numbers.
Exactly, who's to tell where early IEs may have swept through. The evidence for their expansion is uncontested and encompasses a massive radius. The key here is mobility on a scale never before seen, which is exactly why we see this cultural uniformity over such a massive expanse at such an early date. It's very odd, but can be explained by an epoch in mobility, and it just so happens we see the earliest evidence for horse domestication by the 5th millennium BC, before Yamna. The evidence that Stredny-Stog were horse riders is pretty strong.
Alan
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,517
- Reaction score
- 450
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Kurdish
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1a1a1
- mtDNA haplogroup
- HV2a1 +G13708A
What on the word "roughly" is not understandable? I clearly wrote that the percentage of Yamna varied depending on where it landed.
I also wrote that WHG without the Yamna ancestry in modern Norwegians is around ~25%.
You can look it up on the table. When I write roughly it means roughly. You can't expect Yamna to bring anywhere exactly the same amoung of WHG. In some regions they might have brought only 20% while in other up to 30%.
When they reached Norway they had probably already mixed with EEF.
The point is Norwegians minus Yamna are ~25% WHG. If we consider that modern Norwegians are ~47%. That means Yamna brought roughly ~27%.
And 27% is roughly 30%.
Alan
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,517
- Reaction score
- 450
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Kurdish
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1a1a1
- mtDNA haplogroup
- HV2a1 +G13708A
So called "Southeastern Anatolia" is the crossing place of early farmers and pastoralists. But who said earliest pastrolsim evolved in "Eastern Anatolia"?
Pastoralism evolved on a wide territory from the Zagros to Taurus mountains.
https://anthropologynet.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/animal-domestication-time-frame.jpg
But the major point is the Anatolian hypothesis has not much to do with the highland pastoralist one.
Is it normal for you to ignore scientific papers someone present close the eyes and claim "no there isn't anything like that because I didn't saw anything". It is a well established fact that Kurgan burials evolved in Western Asia. Do you believe the same type of burials (yes burials are a cultural thing) evolved independently in Western Asia and the Steppes. And if you add to that the genetic ancestry and pastoralism. It should be for any person with slight logic obvious. There was a migration into the Steppes from South.
Sorry to be harsh but that's just your opinion and "I doubt" does not work as argument. There is clear evidence of Caucasus influx into Yamna. Maciamo also thought there must be most influence from Dneiper-Donets culture but Yamna had no EEF. This dismisses it and Maciamo aknowledged it also. But how could Samara and Dneiper_Donets influx on Yamna exclude influx from Maykop?
Is there any logical reason to believe that? No there isn't you are simply using your opinion. The whole point is we have pastoralism which is obviously linked to Western Asian ancestry just like farming is because both evolved there and are part of the agricultural system. And we have seen on Early European Farmers that the theory of "cultural exchange" doesn't hold.
It seems like you aren't reading what I wrote. I never claimed horse domestication started anywhere in Western Asia, now did I? But even this is highly disputed. Interesting that you didn't mention this.
I wrote that Already Sumerians knew the Horse (and probably even before them it was known), so what if by that time horse domestication had already become part of pastoralist lifestyle?
But even than who tells that the horse wasn't simply added to Yamna from the H&G.
Horse drawn chariots are attested in Mesopotamia already 3000 BC. I even gave you a source for that didn't you look at it?
As I said a "war chariot" is basically a wagon used for war. And the only difference between Hittite and Sumerian chariot was, 2 vs 4 wheels.
God, very little do you understand of linguism. "Indo" =Indic so conclusion Indic= Indo European.
I am using your "logic". what you simply don't understand the terminology "Indo Aryan" was given because the Indo_Aryan branch is most prominent in India, not because it evolved there. Somewhere Indo_Iranian split into Indo_Aryan and Irano_Aryan. And certanly it wasn't India.
Alan
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,517
- Reaction score
- 450
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Kurdish
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1a1a1
- mtDNA haplogroup
- HV2a1 +G13708A
Thats my last replay in this thread for now. I am tired of repeating the same arguments over and over again.
Just let us wait for more samples from Western Asia, South_Central Asia and Yamna.
Just let us wait for more samples from Western Asia, South_Central Asia and Yamna.
Ancient cow DNA suggests migration from North Africa into Iberia before 1700 BC. Would be interesting if this could be pin-pointed to 3000 BC. Assuming we're still talking about PIE. Things would be a lot clearer if we had more accurate mtdna maps for women, kind of pointless to look at maps of lineages that go back more than 12000 years to find out what happened 5000 years ago.
Do you mean the Middle East with West Asia? The Steppes and the Caucasus border each other, and the Kurgan could have domesticated the horse and moved into the Middle East by 4000 BC. I don't see anything about Kurgan burials south of the Caucasus on Wikipedia. If you have sources I'd suggest including them on Wikipedia kurgan articles.
Wouldn't that mean an influx of haplogroup G? More likely that Yamna juveniles spent a month on horseback to get themselves some southern brides. Wherever horse tribes went there was widespread genocide, if the huns and mongols are an indication.
Sumerians had limited influence outside their cities which means they had no access to horses. Like the Chinese they may have build walls to keep the horsemen out. Alternatively the walls were there to keep slaves in (a Berlin wall of sorts) but I think a Chinese wall makes more sense. It's hard to imagine war and needing defensive walls without the horse. This also explains where the Indo-Europeans got bronze technology from, assuming they moved south before moving into Europe.
Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,842
- Reaction score
- 12,313
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
Anyone who wishes to really understand the implications of this paper, and the interplay between the statistics and admixture etc., should really read the comments of RK in this Eurogenes thread. Someone directed me to them, and they did not disappoint.
http://www.eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/02/ancient-r1a1-and-n1c-from-western-russia.html
http://www.eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/02/ancient-r1a1-and-n1c-from-western-russia.html
Alan
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,517
- Reaction score
- 450
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Kurdish
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1a1a1
- mtDNA haplogroup
- HV2a1 +G13708A
Wikipedia shouldn't be the ultimate source. But I already provided few times in this thread scientific papers from 2013 to 2014 about this matter. And I thought it was already widely known that the oldest Kurgans are found in the Middle East (South Caucasus, Mesopotamia, Iran and Anatolia).
Why G? J2 is as widespred in the North Caucasus as G. It is not even clear when G arrived there. But the fact that G2a is widespred in the regions once under Alanic control. (basically NW Caucasus) and we found G2a in Alanic burials. Makes me wonder if G2a was not brought into that region by Alans themselves. Or at least made it more widespred.
However take in mind modern distrbution does not equal ancient distribution we should know this by now.
Sumerians was just an example for an old population in Western Asia already knew the horse. Than others might have known it also earlier. However I don't believe Sumerians had no influence on other groups.
Last edited:
Alan
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,517
- Reaction score
- 450
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Kurdish
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1a1a1
- mtDNA haplogroup
- HV2a1 +G13708A
I am just going to wait for more samples instead of taking the mascism from them, just like the nonsense some of them were spreading about Yamna genes. At the end of the day when it turns out like I am saying the same people will act like : "OH we didn't see that coming "
Mark my words. R1a* came either through the South_central Asia route or directly through the Caucasus and they had already picked up various female lineages such as H, U and T it's not like this mixture does not exist in this region already.
LeBrok
Elite member
- Messages
- 10,273
- Reaction score
- 1,615
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Calgary
- Ethnic group
- Citizen of the world
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b Z2109
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H1c
Let's make sure we are talking about R1a1a or even M417, the ones implicated in IE culture, and not any 20 ky old R1a who went up and down central Asia couple of times before neolithic.I am just going to wait for more samples instead of taking the mascism from the just like the bullcrap they were spreading with Yamna genes. At the end of the day when it turns out exactly like I said the same people will again just be like : "OH we didn't see that coming "
I wouldn't give too much into the comments They have been wrong in the past and they will be again.
Mark my words. R1a* came either through the South_central Asia (more likely that) route or directly through the Caucasus and they had already picked up various female lineages such as H, U and T it's not like this mixture does not exist in this region already.
This thread has been viewed 358003 times.