PDA

View Full Version : Oldest Steppe Bell Beakers: Saxony-Anhalt, Germany



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8

ffoucart
07-01-2018, 08:48 AM
I think that if R1b P-312 would have been found in Samara valley the news would have filtered out more massively on blogs and newspapers considering that it is really a big nail in the coffin for many discussions about IE. Also many are skeptical about R1b p-312 being that old: last quarter of the Vth millennium :unsure:

Could be more recent, like first quarter of the IVth millenium.

Anyway, to back this possibility, the found of L21>DF13 more early than previously thought around 2300 BC, wich is meaning a far earlier date for L21, perhaps around 3000 BC.

L21 could even been native to the Steppe with such a chronology, and P312 could be found around 4000BC. No big deal.

anglesqueville
07-01-2018, 10:04 AM
I think that if R1b P-312 would have been found in Samara valley the news would have filtered out more massively on blogs and newspapers considering that it is really a big nail in the coffin for many discussions about IE. Also many are skeptical about R1b p-312 being that old: last quarter of the Vth millennium :unsure:

1) On newspapers: do you really think that newspapers from the Samara Valley are so interested in P312?
2) On blogs: Molgen is a forum, isn't it? It indeed has filtered.
3) "that old": many are sceptical about the STR-coalescence based present dating.
Future will say. I don't like Champagne, however I keep cool some Champagne bottles for the P312-Samara-Day.

rms2
07-01-2018, 10:31 AM
I think that if R1b P-312 would have been found in Samara valley the news would have filtered out more massively on blogs and newspapers considering that it is really a big nail in the coffin for many discussions about IE. Also many are skeptical about R1b p-312 being that old: last quarter of the Vth millennium :unsure:

Except this is exactly the way things happened several years ago with the word that Alexei Kovalev had found R1b in Afanasievo and Okunevo remains in the Altai. The rumor spread, we all got excited, some said, "No way!", and we heard nothing.

Time passed, Lazaridis et al and Haak et al came along, and then, not too long ago, we finally got word that the rumor was true.

anglesqueville
07-01-2018, 11:06 AM
Except this is exactly the way things happened several years ago with the word that Alexei Kovalev had found R1b in Afanasievo and Okunevo remains in the Altai. The rumor spread, we all got excited, some said, "No way!", and we heard nothing.

Time passed, Lazaridis et al and Haak et al came along, and then, not too long ago, we finally got word that the rumor was true.

Allow me a little moment of chauvinism (in these matters we, French, don't have too many occasions): not Kovalev, but Kovalev and Hollard, and even perhaps Hollard with Kovalev's samples, as it seems that she was the first who found R1b in the Afanasievo samples that Kovalev gave her access to.

dsm
07-01-2018, 11:15 AM
New set of comments from Generalissimo/Davidski

QUOTE
“Moreover, these results mean that it's no longer plausible to argue that the Yamnaya population, by and large, formed due to recent gene flow from south of the Caucasus, let alone from what is now Iran, into the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Obviously, this is a major problem for anyone arguing that the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) homeland may have been located somewhere south of the Caucasus, such as Paul Heggarty of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History (for instance, see here). But hey, never mind the facts when you have an awesome theory, right?”

The link - Sunday 1st July 2018 ...
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/07/ahead-of-pack.html

D

peternorth
07-01-2018, 11:24 AM
I believe it was T.H. Huxley who said something along the lines that 'the biggest personal tragedy in science is when the most beautiful and exquisitely crafted theory is demolished by the intrusion of a small but contradictory fact'.



New set of comments from Generalissimo/Davidski

QUOTE
“Moreover, these results mean that it's no longer plausible to argue that the Yamnaya population, by and large, formed due to recent gene flow from south of the Caucasus, let alone from what is now Iran, into the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Obviously, this is a major problem for anyone arguing that the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) homeland may have been located somewhere south of the Caucasus, such as Paul Heggarty of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History (for instance, see here). But hey, never mind the facts when you have an awesome theory, right?”

The link - Sunday 1st July 2018 ...
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/07/ahead-of-pack.html

D

anglesqueville
07-01-2018, 11:43 AM
Hem, Huxley's quotation is nice but hardly applies to Gray-Heggarty (and others). Their Bayesian stuff is not at all "beautiful and exquisitely crafted", far from it.

edit: peternorth, are you "supernord", if I may ask?

rms2
07-01-2018, 11:46 AM
Hem, Huxley's quotation is nice but hardly applies to Gray-Heggarty (and others). Their Bayesian stuff is not at all "beautiful and exquisitely crafted", far from it.

True. Aside from interpreting the genetic data, there remains the pesky linguistic data, which no amount of ancient dna can change, one way or the other.

There is just no way Proto-Indo-European arose anywhere but on the Pontic-Caspian steppe.

If one is interpreting genetic data to say that PIE arose south of the Caucasus, then he is misinterpreting the genetic data and pretty obviously doesn't really understand either the linguistic data or the genetic data.

Finn
07-01-2018, 11:47 AM
@angles Especially with such surnames some pattriotism is allowed :biggrin1:

anglesqueville
07-01-2018, 11:59 AM
@angles Especially with such surnames some pattriotism is allowed :biggrin1:

Well, there are some lucky people. Look at this guy (I believe that I'm allowed to post a picture, as he is in the French government: 24360. Believe it or not, his name is "Julien Denormandie". Litteraly "Julien OfNormandy". End of my off-topic :behindsofa:

Finn
07-01-2018, 12:12 PM
:focus:Hahahha yep as the other Holland(e) has already disappeared from government ;)

etrusco
07-01-2018, 12:23 PM
@all

As for new data or confirmations the real business will be the genetic tests of hittites and bronze age southern and central Italy. We already know steppe ancestry is from nihil to negligible in myceneans ( and more important IIRC no R1a/b lineages in them). If the other two regions ( which we know in that period were already inhabited by IE speaking peoples) will give the same results there's no R1b P-312 in Samara that can avoid the steppe theory either to be discarded or reformulated. That R1b in central western europe is from the ( european) steppe is quite mainstream now. Samara won't be a game changer.

If otherwise I will cheer with all the steppists on this forum and buy myself a dacia on the middle Volga.

ffoucart
07-01-2018, 12:34 PM
@all

As for new data or confirmations the real business will be the genetic tests of hittites and bronze age southern and central Italy. We already know steppe ancestry is from nihil to negligible in myceneans ( and more important IIRC no R1a/b lineages in them). If the other two regions ( which we know in that period were already inhabited by IE speaking peoples) will give the same results there's no R1b P-312 in Samara that can avoid the steppe theory either to be discarded or reformulated. That R1b in central western europe is from the ( european) steppe is quite mainstream now. Samara won't be a game changer.

If otherwise I will cheer with all the steppists on this forum and buy myself a dacia on the middle Volga.

Mycenaeans have not negligible Steppe ancestry. Moreover, if you modelize them as part Yamnaya Bulgaria, you'll have something far for negligible. I've already said this, but we don't know Y diversity in the Steppe. Again, we know 3 haplogroups related to Steppe migrations: R1a, R1b L23 derived, and I2a S12195. Likely others will follow. Probably some subclades of J2, either directly from the Steppe or included in a secondary wave.

Generalissimo
07-01-2018, 12:35 PM
@all

As for new data or confirmations the real business will be the genetic tests of hittites and bronze age southern and central Italy. We already know steppe ancestry is from nihil to negligible in myceneans ( and more important IIRC no R1a/b lineages in them). If the other two regions ( which we know in that period were already inhabited by IE speaking peoples) will give the same results there's no R1b P-312 in Samara that can avoid the steppe theory either to be discarded or reformulated. That R1b in central western europe is from the ( european) steppe is quite mainstream now. Samara won't be a game changer.

If otherwise I will cheer with all the steppists on this forum and buy myself a dacia on the middle Volga.

Mycenaeans have a lot of steppe (Sintashta-like) ancestry, and the Crete Armenoi sample has even more. And there's already confirmation of R1b from Iron Age Greece, so there will be R1a and/or R1b in Mycenaeans when more are sampled.

etrusco
07-01-2018, 01:13 PM
Mycenaeans have a lot of steppe (Sintashta-like) ancestry, and the Crete Armenoi sample has even more. And there's already confirmation of R1b from Iron Age Greece, so there will be R1a and/or R1b in Mycenaeans when more are sampled.

IIRC steppe range from 4% to 18%. perhaps we should have a thread about the meaning of "a lot". As for presence of R1b/R1a in Iron age Greece that is another historical period. We know of northern doric invasion that can easily explain the findings.

rms2
07-01-2018, 01:18 PM
IIRC steppe range from 4% to 18%. perhaps we should have a thread about the meaning of "a lot". As for presence of R1b/R1a in Iron age Greece that is another historical period. We know of northern doric invasion that can easily explain the findings.

If you got autosomal test results showing you were, say, 10% Chinese, wouldn't you consider that significant and something requiring an explanation?

So, explain away the steppe dna in the Mycenaeans, if you can. Why did they have any at all, and is it a mere coincidence that they spoke an Indo-European language (unlike the Minoans, who had no steppe dna and spoke a non-IE language)?

Ajeje Brazorf
07-01-2018, 01:25 PM
Mycenaeans have a lot of steppe (Sintashta-like) ancestry, and the Crete Armenoi sample has even more. And there's already confirmation of R1b from Iron Age Greece, so there will be R1a and/or R1b in Mycenaeans when more are sampled.

Crete Armenoi is too low quality and steppe in Mycenaeans was around 12-13% if I'm not mistaken.

ms85
07-01-2018, 01:32 PM
IIRC steppe range from 4% to 18%. perhaps we should have a thread about the meaning of "a lot". As for presence of R1b/R1a in Iron age Greece that is another historical period. We know of northern doric invasion that can easily explain the findings.Mycenaeans were actually more similar to Greece Neolithic or even Anatolian Chalcolithic. With some very minor Eastern European gene flow. Nothing special about Mycenaeans.


NOTHING to do with the Steppes at all!

https://s15.postimg.cc/ezbj1vxi3/image.jpg

ms85
07-01-2018, 01:34 PM
Crete Armenoi is too low quality and steppe in Mycenaeans was around 12-13% if I'm not mistaken.Some very minor steppe ancestry in Mycenaeans was absolutely not directly fromt the Steppes. It has nothing to do with it. They got some of it from a gene flow from Eastern Europe or even Armenia Copper Age or something

Ajeje Brazorf
07-01-2018, 01:37 PM
We know of northern doric invasion that can easily explain the findings.

The historicity of Dorians has never been proven, but probably they will have come down from Greece itself.

ms85
07-01-2018, 01:39 PM
double post

ms85
07-01-2018, 01:52 PM
Mycenaeans cluster between Anatolian Neolithic Farmers and Maykop type of people (CHG/Iranian Neolithic farmers). Very native to their homeland. Read the original recent academic paper on them by Lazaridis.


https://s15.postimg.cc/dcmbgsycr/image.jpg

etrusco
07-01-2018, 02:23 PM
If you got autosomal test results showing you were, say, 10% Chinese, wouldn't you consider that significant and something requiring an explanation?

So, explain away the steppe dna in the Mycenaeans, if you can. Why did they have any at all, and is it a mere coincidence that they spoke an Indo-European language (unlike the Minoans, who had no steppe dna and spoke a non-IE language)?

Yes I agree I consider worthy of an explanation the 10% of steppe ancestry in Myceneans as I consider worthy of an explanation the 15% EEF in Yamnaya and probably a little more of EEF in Sredni Stog. The steppe theory has many indicators that corroborate it. There's no need to be upset about Mycenaeans . But given these figures and taking them "per se" Myceneans are an "outlier" in the steppe hypothesis. There's no need to be angry about that.

Edit: actually we do not know which language family minoan belonged to. It could be like Hittite that was considered non IE for many years but at the end turned out to be IE.

ms85
07-01-2018, 02:30 PM
Samara won't be a game changer.About what era of Samara are you talking about?

There is a difference between Samara before and after Yamnaya. Samara Eneolithic before Yamnaya had more European WHG and less West Asia CHG/Iran_Neolithic auDNA. After Yamnaya (Copper Age) West Asian CHG/Iran_Neolithic auDNA increased drastically in Samara!

West Asia CHG/Iran_Neolithic auDNA in Samara entered that region mostly with R1a and R1b people from the Iranian Plateau.


R1a was the first wave and R1b was the second wave from the Iranian Plateau into the Steppes.


https://s15.postimg.cc/nizidol17/abc.png


https://s15.postimg.cc/sueeygjzf/3-19.jpg

Ajeje Brazorf
07-01-2018, 02:37 PM
Average of 4 Mycenaeans

49.131875% Mediterranean Farmer
25.506875% Anatolian Farmer (peaks in Caucasus)
16.151875% Middle Eastern Herder
9.209375% Baltic Hunter Gatherer

ms85
07-01-2018, 02:49 PM
Average of 4 Mycenaeans

49.131875% Mediterranean Farmer
25.506875% Anatolian Farmer (peaks in Caucasus)
16.151875% Middle Eastern Herder
9.209375% Baltic Hunter GathererCan you check how much 'Baltic Hunter Gatherer' auDNA do 'Greece Neolithics' have? I'm sure similar to Mycenaeans.

https://s15.postimg.cc/ncltat9e3/image.jpg

Ajeje Brazorf
07-01-2018, 02:54 PM
Can you check how much 'Baltic Hunter Gatherer' auDNA do 'Greece Neolithics' have? I'm sure similar to Mycenaeans.

https://s15.postimg.cc/ncltat9e3/image.jpg

Klei10 and Rev5 score around 1%

ms85
07-01-2018, 02:57 PM
Klei10 and Rev5 score around 1%Thanks! Are the same people as I5427, I6420 and I6423?

anglesqueville
07-01-2018, 03:01 PM
24367
Greater Caucasus Monty Python is back and alive, hurrah! And on a thread devoted to the first Beakers! Hurrah again!
edit: ms85 may, of course, report my "double-donald_head_eagle" as insulting, or what he wants. As I'm far from being a champion in photoshop, I'm very proud of this little job...

ms85
07-01-2018, 03:05 PM
24367Greater Caucasus Monty Python is back and alive, hurrah! And on a thread devoted to the first Beakers! Hurrah again!Your post has been reported to the mods.

I didn't start any discussion about the Mycenaeans. I just tried to counter some false arguments about the Mycenaeans.

And like I said, I will stay on this site forever. Next time try to ridicule somebody else!

Ajeje Brazorf
07-01-2018, 03:08 PM
Thanks! Are the same people as I5427, I6420 and I6423?

I do not think so but I'm not sure. I only see what is uploaded on GEDmatch xD that component was about 0-1% among Minoans as well.

pegasus
07-01-2018, 03:11 PM
Your post has been reported to the mods.

I didn't start any discussion about the Mycenaeans. I just tried to counter some false arguments about the Mycenaeans.

And like I said, I will stay on this site forever. Next time try to ridicule somebody else!

He is a mod lol

Ajeje Brazorf
07-01-2018, 03:31 PM
The main difference between Minoans and Mycenaeans is that Minoans are more EEF while the Mycenaeans have more "northern" admixture. Mycenaeans (at least those analyzed so far) do have steppe but it's not "a lot" as in modern Greeks or Bulgarians, I have to admit that people seem to have a fixation or a fetish for the steppes, lol.

ms85
07-01-2018, 04:57 PM
The main difference between Minoans and Mycenaeans is that Minoans are more EEF while the Mycenaeans have more "northern" admixture. Mycenaeans (at least those analyzed so far) do have steppe but it's not "a lot" as in modern Greeks or Bulgarians, I have to admit that people seem to have a fixation or a fetish for the steppes, lol.The most funny thing is that some people say that Steppes ancestry among the Mycenaeans is from Siberia, lol. It is like those people from the Eastern Steppes had airplanes and could fly by skipping all the area in Eastern Europe and went to the Mediterranean Sea , lol.

Sintashta has nothing to do with PIEan. That Siberian/Uralic culture was heavily influenced by folks from BMAC, but later on it died out and was assimilated by the Turks.


Here are some explanations how there was some minor Steppes auDNA among the Mycenaeans. But what we know for sure is that Mycenaeans cluster miles away from the Steppes and are actually a mixture of Neolithic Anatolians and Maykop-type people.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28783727

Ajeje Brazorf
07-01-2018, 06:00 PM
The most funny thing is that some people say that Steppes ancestry among the Mycenaeans is from Siberia, lol. It is like those people from the Eastern Steppes had airplanes and could fly by skipping all the area in Eastern Europe, lol.

Sintashta has nothing to do with PIEan. That Siberian/Uralic culture was heavily influenced by folks from BMAC, but later on it died out and was assimilated by the Turks.


Here are some explanation how there was some minor Steppes auDNA among the Mycenaeans. But what we know for sure is that Mycenaeans cluster miles away from the Steppes and are actually a mixture of Neolithic Anatolians and Maykop-type people.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28783727

We also have the genome of a Greek woman lived 510–530 AD Bavaria which is very similar to the Mycenaeans. It's possible that even in the classical age, the Greeks were similar to these samples. It's not sure though, we'll see what ancient DNA will tell us.

Mycenaean I9041 vs STR_300
28.3025 Anatolian Farmer 24.4025
10.3925 Baltic Hunter Gatherer 13.5925
15.7625 Middle Eastern Herder 14.9825
45.5425 Mediterranean Farmer 47.0225

I9033
1 79.6% Italian_South + 20.4% Sardinian @ 2.58

I9041
1 79.4% Greek_Islands + 20.6% Sardinian @ 3.84

I9006
1 83.6% Greek_Islands + 16.4% Sardinian @ 1.95

STR_300
1 87.3% Sicilian_Center + 12.7% Sardinian @ 4.38

rms2
07-01-2018, 06:09 PM
Some very minor steppe ancestry in Mycenaeans was absolutely not directly fromt the Steppes. It has nothing to do with it. They got some of it from a gene flow from Eastern Europe or even Armenia Copper Age or something

One of the most noticeable aspects of your posts is your constant tendency to make bald assertions.

Steppe dna in the Mycenaeans but missing from their predecessors the Minoans is inconvenient for your irrational, ethnic-pride-inspired viewpoint.

Once again, why did they have any at all, and is it a mere coincidence that they spoke an Indo-European language (unlike the Minoans, who had no steppe dna and spoke a non-IE language)?

Sikeliot
07-01-2018, 06:17 PM
We also have the genome of a Greek woman lived 510–530 AD Bavaria which is very similar to the Mycenaeans. It's possible that even in the classical age, the Greeks were similar to these samples. It's not sure though, we'll see what ancient DNA will tell us.

Mycenaean I9041 vs STR_300
28.3025 Anatolian Farmer 24.4025
10.3925 Baltic Hunter Gatherer 13.5925
15.7625 Middle Eastern Herder 14.9825
45.5425 Mediterranean Farmer 47.0225

I9033
1 79.6% Italian_South + 20.4% Sardinian @ 2.58

I9041
1 79.4% Greek_Islands + 20.6% Sardinian @ 3.84

I9006
1 83.6% Greek_Islands + 16.4% Sardinian @ 1.95

STR_300
1 87.3% Sicilian_Center + 12.7% Sardinian @ 4.38


Basically this person was the equivalent of a slightly "West Med" (yes I know this is a misnomer as the component is really Neolithic Anatolian) shifted Sicilian/Dodecanese ("Greek islands" is Dodecanese). The question is when in Greek history would we have seen the West Med element reduce to its modern day levels in Sicilians/Aegean islanders, and how long did it persist for at that slightly elevated level.

ms85
07-01-2018, 06:30 PM
Once again, why did they have any at all, and is it a mere coincidence that they spoke an Indo-European language (unlike the Minoans, who had no steppe dna and spoke a non-IE language)?
Gene flow from the Neolithic Era until nowadays never stopped!


What we know for sure Steppe auDNA in Mycenaeans was NOT directly from the Steppes at all, but from a different populations. It has nothing to do with the Steppes directly.

Mycenaeans got Steppes auDNA from a non-Steppes population.


We have got evidence that there was some Steppe migration from Yamnaya into Eastern & Central Europe. Modern Europeaans have only for about 33% of Yamnaya ancestry. There has always been a gene flow from Mainland Europe into the Mediterranean Sea. from the Neolithic Era until now, it never ended. It seems to me that after Yamnaya auDNA spread into Central Europe we see increase of the Steppe auDNA around the Mediterranean Sea. Modern Greeks have more Steppes ancestry than ancient proto-Greeks. That's because Greece is within Europe and has close contact with Germanic people from Central Europe and Slavic people from the Eastern Europe.

But once again, it has nothing to do with the Steppes at all, but with different populations who had that Steppes ancestry in them. The fact is that Mycenaeans were West Asian people with predominant West Asian auDNA and cluster between the Anatolian Farmers and the Maykop Type of people!


Speculating is cheap, so I'm not going to speculate. Academics already gave all possible explanations how it ended up in the Mediterranean Sea.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28783727

rms2
07-01-2018, 06:41 PM
What we know for sure Steppe auDNA in Mycenaeans was NOT directly from the Steppes at all, but from a different populations. It has nothing to do with the Steppes directly.

Mycenaeans got Steppes auDNA from a non-Steppes population.

The ultimate source of their steppe dna was a steppe population. You do understand that, right? No one is claiming the Mycenaeans themselves rode right in from the steppe. Their Indo-European-speaking ancestors did, however. The Mycenaeans we know about obviously had other, non-IE ancestors who had already served to dilute their steppe dna. Take, for example, the one, single Mycenaean y-dna result we know about. Its bearer belonged to the same y-dna haplogroup as the Minoans before him. Pretty plainly, that means he was not Indo-European in his y-dna line but was Minoan in his y-dna line.



We have got evidence that there was some Steppe Migration from Yamnaya into Eastern & Central Europe. Modern Europeaans have for about 33% of Yamnaya ancestry. There has always been a gene flow from Mainland Europe into the Mediterranean Sea. from the Neolithic Era until now, it never ended. It seems to me that after Yamnaya auDNA spread into Central Europe we see increase of the Steppe auDNA around the Mediterranean Sea. Modern Greeks have more Steppes ancestry than ancient proto-Greeks. That's because Greece is within Europe and has close contact with Germanic people from Central Europe and Slavic people from the Eastern Europe.

But once again, it has nothing to do with the Steppes at all, but with different populations who had that Steppes ancestry in them. The fact is that Mycenaeans were West Asian people and cluster between the Anatolian Farmers and the Maykop Type of people!


Speculating is cheap, so I'm not going to speculate. Academics already gave all possible explanations how it ended up in the Mediterranean Sea.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28783727

That paper doesn't help your case at all.

If steppe dna was constantly flowing from Europe into the Mediterranean, how did the Minoans miss out on both it and an Indo-European language?

Odd, isn't it, that the Mycenaeans just coincidentally had both steppe dna and an Indo-European language, while the Minoans had neither?

ms85
07-01-2018, 06:56 PM
The ultimate source of their steppe dna was a steppe population. You do understand that, right? No one is claiming the Mycenaeans themselves rode right in from the steppe. Their Indo-European-speaking ancestors did, however. The Mycenaeans we know about obviously had other, non-IE ancestors who had already served to dilute their steppe dna. Take, for example, the one, single Mycenaean y-dna result we know about. Its bearer belonged to the same y-dna haplogroup as the Minoans before him. Pretty plainly, that means he was not Indo-European in his y-dna line but was Minoan in his y-dna line.This is what I'm trying to explain you. Steppes ancestry in Mycenaeans is NOT directly from the Steppes or from Siberia, lol. But it is from a population that was influenced by the Steppes auDNA.

Steppes auDNA ended in the the Mediterranean Sea through many different switches. From which populations is unknown, could be from Central Europe or from West Asian Maykop/Copper Age Armenia (like the academic paper is explaining), but it got never directly from the Steppes at the first place.

Once again, West Asian Mycenaeans are clustered between the Neolithic Anatolian farmers and Maykop type of people.



That paper doesn't help your case at all.

If steppe dna was constantly flowing from Europe into the Mediterranean, how did the Minoans miss out on both it and an Indo-European language?

Odd, isn't it, that the Mycenaeans just coincidentally had both steppe dna and an Indo-European language, while the Minoans had neither?Because Steppes ancestry increased in Mainland Europe AFTER Yamnaya. Before Yamnaya there was not much of Steppes Ancestry in Central Europe.

I read that paper 2 times and that paper emphatically claiming that Mycenaeans were just native to the Mediterranean Sea. Predominately West Asian people with West Asian/Anatolian auDNA.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28783727


At the beginning of the Minoan civilization there was not much of Steppes ancestry in Central Europe. Steppes ancestry in Europe increased only AFTER spread of Corded Ware culture & Beaker culture in Europe. Modern Central Europeans have around 1/3 of Yamnaya influence. That's why it is increasing until now AFTER the Minoan civilization.


Nothing but continuous gene flow!

etrusco
07-01-2018, 06:58 PM
Odd, isn't it, that the Mycenaeans just coincidentally had both steppe dna and an Indo-European language, while the Minoans had neither?

Actually to be fair Minoan is classified as an unknown language. Some say it could even be indoeuropean while some say it is not.

@ms85

Mycenaeans were West Asian people with predominant West Asian auDNA.

Actually to be fair EEF folks were an hybrid between WHG and a basal eurasian population. They were europeans both in language and culture. IE in Anatolia is clearly intrusive.

rms2
07-01-2018, 07:10 PM
Actually to be fair Minoan is classified as an unknown language. Some say it could even be indoeuropean while some say it is not . . .


Do you honestly think the language of the Minoans could have been Indo-European?

Look at what we know of their culture, their physical anthropology, and their lack of steppe dna.

Probably they simply spoke some thus-far-unknown Afro-Asiatic language.

We don't actually know what languages the Neolithic farmers of Old Europe spoke either, but nothing about them is Indo-European, so almost no one but believers in Paleolithic Continuity thinks they spoke Indo-European languages.

Sikeliot
07-01-2018, 07:12 PM
Mycenaeans were West Asian people with predominant West Asian auDNA.

Mycenaeans can be modeled with a mixture of modern Sicilian/Aegean islander and Sardinian (the latter being representative of Anatolian Neolithic migrations of which the purest representatives today are in Sardinia). Do you really class this as full West Asian?

ms85
07-01-2018, 07:15 PM
@ms85

Mycenaeans were West Asian people with predominant West Asian auDNA.

Actually to be fair EEF folks were an hybrid between WHG and a basal eurasian population. They were europeans both in language and culture. IE in Anatolia is clearly intrusive.

Bro, Mycenaeans cluster between Neolithic Anatolian Farmers and Maykop type of people. Their auDNA was predominately Anatolian/West Asian. Nothing to do with the Steppes at all!

West Asian Neolithic Anatolian farmers had already a lot WHG in them. Those West Asians from Anatolia migrated into Europe and brought farming with them. Farming was spread by West Asian Neolithic Anatolian farmers into Europe.


https://s15.postimg.cc/ezbj1vxi3/image.jpg
https://s15.postimg.cc/dcmbgsycr/image.jpg

etrusco
07-01-2018, 07:45 PM
Do you honestly think the language of the Minoans could have been Indo-European?



We don't actually know what languages the Neolithic farmers of Old Europe spoke either, but nothing about them is Indo-European, so almost no one but believers in Paleolithic Continuity thinks they spoke Indo-European languages.


I just said that is an unknown language. I have my idea but it doesn't matter. Scientifically is an unclassified language as for now.

as for neolithic farmers you get me wrong. I was not talking about the PIE homeland issue. I was responding to ms85 by saying they neolithic europe developed a culture of its own with its peculiarities. Even tough there was an input from Anatolia they were a civilization of its own.

etrusco
07-01-2018, 07:53 PM
@steppists


In the day of the victory of Russia (GASKA Kurgan Bell Beaker 5- Iberian Bell Beaker 4). A special gift for all the steppist friends from the blog of Carlos. A sign of friendship and good will.


https://indo-european.eu/2018/07/about-scepters-horses-and-war-on-khvalynsk-migrants-in-the-caucasus-and-the-danube/

Nive1526
07-01-2018, 08:03 PM
Probably they simply spoke some thus-far-unknown Afro-Asiatic language.


I don't think that the language of Linear A was either Indoeuropean or Afro-Asiatic because there is no convincing evidence for both. This also applies to the language of Neolithic farmers.

Generalissimo
07-01-2018, 08:42 PM
Crete Armenoi is too low quality and steppe in Mycenaeans was around 12-13% if I'm not mistaken.

Too low quality for what? Not too low quality to see that it has a lot of steppe ancestry.

And the Mycenaeans have as much as 20% Sintashta-like ancestry.

Seems like you don't like the results and you're playing for time. But many more samples are on the way soon.

Ajeje Brazorf
07-01-2018, 10:12 PM
And the Mycenaeans have as much as 20% Sintashta-like ancestry.

:rofl:


Seems like you don't like the results

Seems quite the opposite :noidea:

Generalissimo
07-01-2018, 11:37 PM
Seems quite the opposite :noidea:

Yep, you're totally clueless.


The simulation framework also allows us to compare different models directly. Suppose that there are two models (Simulated1, Simulated2) and we wish to examine whether either of them is a better description of a population of interest (in this case, Mycenaeans). We test f4(Simulated1, Simulated2; Mycenaean, Chimp), which directly determines whether the observed Mycenaeans shares more alleles with one or the other of the two models. When we apply this intuition to the best models for the Mycenaeans (Extended Data Fig. 6), we observe that none of them clearly outperforms the others as there are no statistics with |Z|>3 (Table S2.28). However, we do notice that the model 79%Minoan_Lasithi+21%Europe_LNBA tends to share more drift with Mycenaeans (at the |Z|>2 level). Europe_LNBA is a diverse group of steppe-admixed Late Neolithic/Bronze Age individuals from mainland Europe, and we think that the further study of areas to the north of Greece might identify a surrogate for this admixture event – if, indeed, the Minoan_Lasithi+Europe_LNBA model represents the true history.

Europe_LNBA is the best fit for the ~20% Steppe-related ancestry in the Mycenaeans, closely followed by Steppe_MLBA (Sintashta etc.).

So who's laughing now?

rms2
07-02-2018, 12:16 AM
I just said that is an unknown language. I have my idea but it doesn't matter. Scientifically is an unclassified language as for now . . .

It is unclassified but not without major indicators that it was not Indo-European. Minoan culture was just not Indo-European. Neither was its language.

ms85
07-02-2018, 12:20 AM
:rofl:



Seems quite the opposite :noidea:So true.


According to the paper Steppes auDNA in Mycenaeans is from post-Yamnaya 'Mainland Europe' OR 'Armenian Plateau'. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with Sintashta, Ural or Siberia, lol.

Since Mycenaeans cluster very close to Maykop and miles away from the Steppes, it is a greater chance that Steppes related auDNA in Mycenaeans is from the 'Armenian' Plateau.


Here is how they model it:

https://s15.postimg.cc/6v3vh0cqj/myc.jpg

ms85
07-02-2018, 12:32 AM
As you can see, Mycenaeans are between

EHG: 4.4 % - 6.5 %
CHG/Iran_N: 13.6 % - 17.6%
Anatolian_N: 78 % - 79.9%

Mycenaeans are ONLY between 4.4 % - 6.5 % EHG! They are predominately Anatolian_N (West Asian).

https://s15.postimg.cc/6v3vh0cqj/myc.jpg

rms2
07-02-2018, 12:35 AM
Maybe you all could go talk about the Mycenaeans in some other thread, where you can continue to get their history and genetics bass-ackwards, and leave this thread for discussion of the oldest steppe Bell Beakers.

ffoucart
07-02-2018, 05:19 AM
Maybe you all could go talk about the Mycenaeans in some other thread, where you can continue to get their history and genetics bass-ackwards, and leave this thread for discussion of the oldest steppe Bell Beakers.

Nice try, but if you want to get rid of him, just ignore him. I don't think there is any other way.

Ajeje Brazorf
07-02-2018, 10:51 AM
Yep, you're totally clueless. Europe_LNBA is the best fit for the ~20% Steppe-related ancestry in the Mycenaeans, closely followed by Steppe_MLBA (Sintashta etc.). So who's laughing now?

The one who laughs is me, since you steppists cannot accept the fact that yes, there is steppe in the Mycenaeans, but simply it's not a lot and it's lower than in modern populations of South Europe. The real steppe amount is 13%, and if this percentage increases when other sources are used it is due to the fact they have substantial Anatolian Neolithic-related ancestry. The paper clearly states also that we cannot distinguish whether there was a migration directly from populations related to the Early/Middle/Late Bronze Age steppe, or an indirect migration from steppe-influenced populations that were formed there during the Late/Neolithic Bronze Age. But again, you can ban people from your blog, I do not care, if you want to believe that those Mycenaeans had a lot of steppe, go ahead, just know that does not reflect reality.
This being said, I'll stop talking about Mycenaeans since they have nothing to do with this thread.

Generalissimo
07-02-2018, 11:03 AM
The one who laughs is me, since you steppists cannot accept the fact that yes, there is steppe in the Mycenaeans, but simply it's not a lot and it's lower than in modern populations of South Europe. The real steppe amount is 13%, and if this percentage increases when other sources are used it is due to the fact they have substantial Anatolian Neolithic-related ancestry. The paper clearly states also that we cannot distinguish whether there was a migration directly from populations related to the Early/Middle/Late Bronze Age steppe, or an indirect migration from steppe-influenced populations that were formed there during the Late/Neolithic Bronze Age. But again, you can ban people from your blog, I do not care, if you want to believe that those Mycenaeans had a lot of steppe, go ahead, just know that does not reflect reality.
This being said, I'll stop talking about Mycenaeans since they have nothing to do with this thread.

Blah, Blah, Blah...

Sintashta-like admixture in Mycenaeans is around 20%, and we don't even have any of the remains from the elite warrior shaft graves. You know, the real Mycenaeans.

What are you going to say when they're 50% and up Sintashta, and they will be.

Ajeje Brazorf
07-02-2018, 11:43 AM
Blah, Blah, Blah...

:lalala:


Sintashta-like admixture in Mycenaeans is around 20%

LMAO at Mycenaeans being 20% Sintashta, Sintashta-related ancestry is slightly higher than 13% as the paper itself stated and if steppe still increases, it means those groups have more Anatolian Neolithic-related ancestry.


What are you going to say when they're 50% and up Sintashta, and they will be.

You'd like that eh, wouldn't you ;) Lol I bet they will be 50% and up Sintashta just like these Mycenaeans had to be.

Generalissimo
07-02-2018, 12:00 PM
LMAO at Mycenaeans being 20% Sintashta, Sintashta-related ancestry is slightly higher than 13% as the paper itself stated and if steppe still increases, it means those groups have more Anatolian Neolithic-related ancestry.

It's exactly what the archaeologists predicted.

LINK (https://books.google.com.au/books?id=juivCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA123&lpg=PA123&dq=Mycenaean+Sintashta+swans&source=bl&ots=f0hB5SmsdH&sig=bCfEcx-0mXYyJwYB2VHc4G-gWMY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiArsrhroDcAhVC6bwKHVTCDLUQ6AEIPzAI#v=on epage&q=Mycenaean%20Sintashta%20swans&f=false)

So what's the problem?

Agamemnon
07-02-2018, 12:10 PM
The Mycenaeans are ~17% Steppe_MLBA/Europe_LNBA on average:

https://i.imgur.com/uyFIr5d.png

The above can be replicated on nMonte (G25 scaled) using I2163 (an R1a-Z93 sample from LBA Bulgaria that looks like it arrived straight from Eastern Europe):

[1] "distance%=2.5293"

Mycenaean

Minoan_Lasithi,82.6
Balkans_BA:I2163,17.4

Not sure about the Mycenaean remains from the shaft graves being 50% Sintashta considering the relatively uniform genetic profile and lack of substructure in the Bronze Age Greek samples (which were drawn from the Western Peloponnese to Attica). If true, it would definitely point to the dilution of steppe ancestry within Bronze Age Greece and not in the Balkans (which is a definite possibility when looking at that BA sample from Bulgaria).


Maybe you all could go talk about the Mycenaeans in some other thread, where you can continue to get their history and genetics bass-ackwards, and leave this thread for discussion of the oldest steppe Bell Beakers.

Second that, and here I find myself wondering how these people manage to cite the Mycenaeans as if they somehow proved their point, while in fact they're the samples they should do their very best to ignore... All that in a thread about the Bell Beakers, no less!

jdean
07-02-2018, 12:22 PM
Nice try, but if you want to get rid of him, just ignore him. I don't think there is any other way.

I find the scroll bar app works very well, also it utilises adaptive technology : )

rms2
07-02-2018, 01:52 PM
Since we can't seem to get beyond the Mycenaeans, at least for the moment, what I get from Lazaridis et al (August 2017) is that evidently there was a very late Neolithic or early Bronze Age expansion from Anatolia into the Aegean region and mainland Greece dominated by y-dna haplogroup J lineages. They were non-Indo-European and included the people who would become the Minoans and people like them. They had no steppe dna.

Subsequently, a steppe-derived people speaking an Indo-European language pushed down from the north into Greece. There they combined with the Minoan-like population to become the Mycenaean Greek-speaking Mycenaeans. The steppe element was not large enough to replace the native population, so Mycenaean steppe dna is diluted down to about 13-18% (per Lazaridis et al).

This makes a lot more sense than the goofy idea that first the Minoans came west from Anatolia into the Aegean and were followed later by the Mycenaeans, also from Anatolia, who carried some sort of Armenian admixture that included steppe dna, or something that mimics steppe dna, and who pushed past the Minoans into mainland Greece from the east, which almost no one has ever said of the Mycenaeans.

From what I can see, there are two big differences between the Minoans and the Mycenaeans, and those differences tell the whole story: 1) the Mycenaeans carried steppe dna that the Minoans totally lacked, and 2) the Mycenaeans spoke an Indo-European language (Mycenaean Greek), while the Minoans did not.

Attributing the steppe dna in Mycenaeans to some sort of Armenian or Armenian-like population from eastern Anatolia is special pleading, a last ditch effort to rescue the idea that Indo-European originated south of the Caucasus and was transmitted everywhere by carriers of y-dna haplogroup J.

From pages 216-217 of Lazaridis et al, Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans, Nature, Volume 548, 10 August 2017 (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature23310.epdf?author_access_token=E4JxhmOKVE0Zk 7xCXmpm99RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0OwLzzqUmCLV4d2G6bjGa7 kiPBb7TTVpAsutKGfIQRMrq8WVAMpP-SfGerriklOb5-JK4PQu2o4hKeBf7fel4E9):



To identify more proximate sources of the distinctive eastern European/north Eurasian-related ancestry in Mycenaeans, we included later populations as candidate sources (Supplementary Information section 2), and could model Mycenaeans as a mixture of the Anatolian Neolithic and Chalcolithic-to-Bronze Age populations from Armenia (Table 1). Populations from Armenia possessed some ancestry related to eastern European hunter-gatherers4, so they, or similar unsampled populations of western Asia, could have contributed it to populations of the Aegean. This model makes geographical sense, since a population movement from the vicinity of Armenia could have admixed with Anatolian Neolithic-related farmers on either side of the Aegean. However, Mycenaeans can also be modelled as a mixture of Minoans and Bronze Age steppe populations (Table 1 and Supplementary Information section 2), suggesting that, alternatively, 'eastern' ancestry arrived in both Crete and mainland Greece, followed by 13-18% admixture with a 'northern" steppe population in mainland Greece only. Such a scenario is also plausible: first, it provides a genetic correlate for the distribution of shared toponyms in Crete, mainland Greece, and Anatolia discovered in ref. 21; second, it postulates a single migration from the east; third, it proposes some gene flow from geographically contiguous areas to the north where steppe ancestry was present since at least the mid-third millennium BC (refs 6, 9).

rms2
07-02-2018, 02:08 PM
Nice try, but if you want to get rid of him, just ignore him. I don't think there is any other way.

Only a universal boycott would work, and, as you can see, not everyone is ignoring him or the Mycenaean issue.

ms85
07-02-2018, 02:32 PM
They just modeled them to "proximate sources" before they got auDNA from Maykop. After they analysed Maykop samples I'm sure Mycenaeans can be best modeled with Maykop type of people. Mycenaeans cluster between Anatolian_N and Maykop. They just modeled them to some proxies, nothing special about it. Since they got auDNA from Maykop AFTER this Mycenaean paper, I'm sure that after analysing the Maykop auDNA, Maykop-type of people would be the 'best' proxies for the Mycenaeans


Secondly they just arguing minor gene flow from the northern areas above Greece after the post-Yamnaya era. There was a minor continuous gene flow, that's for sure. Nobody is denying it. This gene flow is part of a long process.


Mycenaeans score only between 4.4 % - 6.5 % of EHG. It is way too low for being out of the Steppes directly. And since when is 13.6 % - 17.6% of CHG/Iran_N Steppe ancestry, lol? There is much more CHG/Iran_N than EHG in Mycenaeans. Only in Siberian Steppes populatins there is more CHG/Iran_N Steppe auDNA than EHG auDNA due to the influences of Neolithic Iranian farmers (R1a) and Eastern Iranian BMAC folks. Those Steppe folks were for a HUGE part West Asian people. But if people from the Siberian Steppes would migrate into the Mediterraen Sea, their CHG/Iran_N would decrease and EHG would increase. There is a HUGE gap between Siberian Steppes and the Mediterraen Sea. So, that was NOT the case. Maykop is geographically much closer to the Med. Sea.


But still there is very minor EHG in Mycenaeans. So, the probability that Mycenaeans evolved most like from Maykop type people is higher than other options.


Magnificent Mycenaeans were still between 93.5 % - 95.6 % West Asia people. So predominately West Asian auDNA among the magnificent West Asian Mycenaeans!

EHG: 4.4 % - 6.5 %
CHG/Iran_N: 13.6 % - 17.6%
Anatolian_N: 78 % - 79.9%

rms2
07-02-2018, 02:42 PM
Marija Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess, pages 388-389:



Ample evidence from the island of Leucas and the northwestern Peloponnese suggests that the Kurgans arriving in Greece at the beginning of the 3rd millennium B.C., perhaps via Albania and the Adriatic, were descendants of the Indo-Europeanized east-central Europeans, i.e., the Baden-Vucedol people.

The cemetery of Steno on the island of Leucas, consisting of 33 kurgans, is a good example of the changed customs in Greece.105 These tumuli belong to several phases, dating from the Early Helladic II and III, c. 2900-2250 B.C., and the buried chieftains and warriors were probably members of the dynasty ruling the island . . .

The takeover in Greece was apparently analogous to that of east-central Europe which entailed a transformation of the basic social structure and administrative system by the establishment of a ruling class in hill forts. A study of the physical type of the population shows that the Kurgan warrior groups were not massive in numbers and did not eradicate the local inhabitants.110 They came in small migrating bands and established themselves forcefully as a small ruling elite.

ms85
07-02-2018, 02:56 PM
Marija Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess, pages 388-389:Bingo! She argues about gene flow from post-Yamnaya Indo-Europeanized Baden-Vucedol culture type people. And not directly from the Steppes!!! She talks about ancient Kurgans (c. 2900 BCE - c. 2250 BCE) that even predate the pinnacle of the Minoan civilisation. So, it doesn't make any sense at all! Gene flow is a long process, but what we know for sure is that Mycenaean ethnicity/people was/were born in Greece and had predominately West Asian auDNA.

Minoan civilisation flourished from about c. 2600 BCE to c. 1600 BCE
Mighty Mycenaean civilization = c. 1600 BCE - c. 1100 BCE

rms2
07-02-2018, 03:06 PM
James Mallory, In Search of the Indo-Europeans, page 69:



Neither the language nor the Linear A script nor the culture of Minoan Crete are regarded as Greek and its population is generally believed to have been thoroughly native at least from the Early Bronze Age, if not from the Neolithic. There is also sufficient evidence to indicate an intrusion of a Mycenaean warrior aristocracy into Crete about 1450 BC to permit archaeologists to postulate a genuine political take-over of the Minoans by the Greek-speaking Mycenaeans. The Mycenaeans appear to have adapted a near relative of the Minoans' Linear A script to suit their own language. The sheer clumsiness in expressing the Greek language by either Linear A or Linear B syllabaries lends support that they were not originally invented by Greek speakers. It is also clear from this that we cannot follow the trail of Greek origins on Crete but must look to southern Greece and the origins of the Mycenaeans.

The great Mycenaean citadels began about 1400 BC, and there is no reason to dissociate the people who built them from those who produced the Linear B texts. The Mycenaeans themselves are normally derived by way of a processual jump in social complexity from the earlier Middle Helladic culture whose roots extend back into Early Helladic III, about 2200 BC. There is, however, a sector of opinion which does not credit the sudden rise of Mycenaean chiefdoms to purely internal evolution but seeks an external stimulus. The stimulus is identified as a small body of warlike intruders who introduced the horse and chariot, new weaponry such as swords and the body shield, and status burials under a tumulus. These appear during the Middle Helladic period and culminate with the tumulus burials at Marathon which include rich burials that extend from the Middle Helladic into the Mycenaean period. Moreover, a horse burial in one of the Marathon tombs has been advanced as further evidence of Indo-European intruders.


Ibid, page 30:



. . . the horse, long known in the Ukraine and south Russia, is not attested in Anatolia prior to the Bronze Age.

ms85
07-02-2018, 03:17 PM
Lol, I don't understand what you are trying to say. Your both sources contradicting each other! Gimbutas is arguing minor gene-flow by post -Yamnaya Indo-Europeanized people from c. 2900 BCE (Minoan Era). While Mallory is talking only about the 'warrior' aristocracy into Crete from about c. 1450 BCE.


Mighty West Asian Mycenaeans were 'Sea People'. Horses are useless around the Aegean Sea with many islands. Crete is an ISLAND and not a Steppe, lol.


Btw, by the time of the Mycenaeans (c. 1600 BCE) horses were already widely spread all over the Eurasia!

rms2
07-02-2018, 03:22 PM
Here is the scenario from Lazaridis et al that makes sense, adapted from page 217:

1. Eastern ancestry arrived in both Crete and mainland Greece in the Early Bronze Age. It was non-Indo-European, had no steppe dna, and its males largely belonged to y-dna haplogroup J. It included the people who would become the Minoans and others like them.

2. Subsequently, an Indo-European-speaking people pushed down into Greece from the north in relatively small bands, establishing themselves as a ruling elite over the native, Minoan-like people, with whom they mixed to become the Greek-speaking Mycenaeans, with a resultant diluted steppe dna of 13-18%. The Mycenaeans would later extend their rule from mainland Greece to Crete and other parts of the Aegean.

This is the only scenario that makes sense. It posits one EBA migration from Anatolia, bringing the Minoan civilization and y-dna haplogroup J but no steppe dna to the region.

The alternative requires two separate migrations, both from Anatolia and both bearing y-dna J: First, the y-dna J but non-Indo-European Minoans, completely lacking steppe dna, push into the Aegean from Anatolia; second, the Mycenaeans, also bearing y-dna J, but this time also with some sort of Armenian-like admixture, push into the Aegean behind the Minoans from the same direction.

One can see that not only is the latter scenario the least parsimonious of the two, but it is also completely ahistorical and therefore ridiculous.

ms85
07-02-2018, 03:39 PM
There were multiple migration waves from West Asia into SouthEast Europe, like there were multiple migration waves from West Asia into the Steppes.


13 % - 18 % steppe auDNA in Mycenaeans is for a huge part contributed by CHG/Iran_N and Anatolian_N like auDNA, since they got only 4.4 % - 6.5 % EHG. That would make those post-Yamnaya Indo-Europeanized people more West Asian than EHG folks, lol. 4.4 / 13 = 33 % and 6.5 / 18 = 36 %. That would make post-Yamnaya Indo-Europeanized people from Europe only between 33 % - 36 % native European and the rest West Asian, lol! This doesn't make any sense at all.

This was the REAL case: One of the first waves belonged to the Neolithic Anatolian farmers, much later migration wave from West Asia was after Maykop folks Indo-Europeanized the Yamnaya Horizon.


wave A = Neolithic Anatolian farmers without EHG
wave X = The post-Maykop 'Armenian Plateau' migration with some minor EHG and much more CHG/Iran_N


Nevertheless, mighty Mycenaeans were predominately West ASIAN people!

rms2
07-02-2018, 03:56 PM
. . .

Mighty West Asian Mycenaeans were 'Sea People' . . . lol.



"Mighty", "lol". I know you must surely not be a kindergartner, but you make it hard to remember that.

Read what Lazaridis et al wrote (p. 217), which you conveniently ignore:



However, Mycenaeans can also be modelled as a mixture of Minoans and Bronze Age steppe populations (Table 1 and Supplementary Information section 2), suggesting that, alternatively, 'eastern' ancestry arrived in both Crete and mainland Greece, followed by 13-18% admixture with a 'northern" steppe population in mainland Greece only. Such a scenario is also plausible: first, it provides a genetic correlate for the distribution of shared toponyms in Crete, mainland Greece, and Anatolia discovered in ref. 21; second, it postulates a single migration from the east; third, it proposes some gene flow from geographically contiguous areas to the north where steppe ancestry was present since at least the mid-third millennium BC (refs 6, 9).


Given the consensus among historical linguists that Proto-Indo-European arose on the Pontic-Caspian steppe, that early Greek was introduced into Greece from the north, and the consensus among historians and archaeologists that the Mycenaeans moved from mainland Greece into the Aegean and not vice versa, that is the only scenario that makes any sense.

Otherwise, you have the Mycenaeans bringing early Greek from Anatolia and doing so behind the Minoans, pushing past them into mainland Greece. Where did the Dorian Greeks come from then? Another Anatolian wave?

ffoucart
07-02-2018, 03:59 PM
Here is the scenario from Lazaridis et al that makes sense, adapted from page 217:

1. Eastern ancestry arrived in both Crete and mainland Greece in the Early Bronze Age. It was non-Indo-European, had no steppe dna, and its males largely belonged to y-dna haplogroup J. It included the people who would become the Minoans and others like them.

2. Subsequently, an Indo-European-speaking people pushed down into Greece from the north in relatively small bands, establishing themselves as a ruling elite over the native, Minoan-like people, with whom they mixed to become the Greek-speaking Mycenaeans, with a resultant diluted steppe dna of 13-18%. The Mycenaeans would later extend their rule from mainland Greece to Crete and other parts of the Aegean.

Two points (as an add-on):
- Balkans were connected to Levant and Mesopotamia through Anatolian by several trade routes till the IVth millenium. Some people probably moved among them, which can explain some cultural changes.
- Steppe people migrated into Balkans since around 4000 BC. The first kurgans near Greece are found in Thrace/Bulgaria around 3300 BC, but are labellised as "Yamnaya" only since 3100 BC. Burials have often some local traits, explaning why not all of them are listed as "kurgans" or "Yamnaya burials". In the last paper about Bulgarian Yamnaya, the authors made a selection to retain only "clear" Yamnayan kurgans, excluding many others as too ambiguous. This diffusion of Steppe admixture with cultural traits is rather clear from Mathieson et al. 2017.

rms2
07-02-2018, 04:36 PM
An Anatolian origin for the Mycenaeans would also mean an Anatolian origin for their form of Greek, and that is simply untenable. Greek is not an Anatolian IE language.

It would also mean either subsequent Greek-speaking waves from Anatolia, or some sort of mysterious separate Proto-Greek migration to the Balkans from Anatolia, whence later Greek speakers like the Dorians and Macedonians could descend on Greece from the north.

ms85
07-02-2018, 05:01 PM
"Mighty", "lol". I know you must surely not be a kindergartner, but you make it hard to remember that.

Read what Lazaridis et al wrote (p. 217), which you conveniently ignore:



Given the consensus among historical linguists that Proto-Indo-European arose on the Pontic-Caspian steppe, that early Greek was introduced into Greece from the north, and the consensus among historians and archaeologists that the Mycenaeans moved from mainland Greece into the Aegean and not vice versa, that is the only scenario that makes any sense.

Otherwise, you have the Mycenaeans bringing early Greek from Anatolia and doing so behind the Minoans, pushing past them into mainland Greece. Where did the Dorian Greeks come from then? Another Anatolian wave?Mycenaeans were mighty warriors, what is wrong about mentioning that?


Only LATE PIEan came from Yamnaya Horizon. Early PIEan came from Leyla-Tepe type folks


Lazaridis mentioned ALL possible the scenarios and not THE scenario. Gene flow from northern population is just one of those scenarios! And there was gene flow, I never denied that. Migration is more complex than some people think. It is a process.


But some people on this site believe that Uralic Sintashta kind of people from Siberian Steppes came to Aegean Sea, became miraculously Sea Warriors and Hellenized the Aegeans, lol!


According to the Armenian Model of Ivanov also Dorians came from the Western Anatolia

ms85
07-02-2018, 05:08 PM
An Anatolian origin for the Mycenaeans would also mean an Anatolian origin for their form of Greek, and that is simply untenable. Greek is not an Anatolian IE language.

It would also mean either subsequent Greek-speaking waves from Anatolia, or some sort of mysterious separate Proto-Greek migration to the Balkans from Anatolia, whence later Greek speakers like the Dorians and Macedonians could descend on Greece from the north.Well, if you support the Anatolian Model of Colin Renfrew, PIEan language came from Anatolia and PIEans were therefore predominately Anatolia_N folks.


I believe in the Armenian Model of Ivanov. I'm 100% sure that he was 100% right! Even according to the 'Armenian Plateau Model' of Ivanov early PIEans were more Anatolian_N than CHG/Iran_N folks. The mighty West Asian Hittite warriors were also predominately Anatolian_N folks. Armenians (and even West Iranians) are also more Anatolian_N than CHG/Iran_N. Although, West Iranians like Kurds and Persians are much more CHG/Iran_N than Armenians.


Iron Age started with Hattians and continued with the Hittites! Remember that the Hittites were like Mycenaeans predominately Anatolian_N folks, with some CHG/Iran_N.

https://s22.postimg.cc/ckphvhy3l/3-19.jpg

rms2
07-02-2018, 06:56 PM
Mycenaeans were mighty warriors, what is wrong about mentioning that? . . .

Well, using superlatives like "The Mighty West Asian Mycenaeans" makes one sound like some sort of chauvinist cheerleader, not to mention extraordinarily childish. Throwing in the occasional "lol" adds an element of teenaged girl to that.

Besides, the Mycenaeans were mainly European and barely had a toehold in West Asia.

rms2
07-02-2018, 07:13 PM
Well, if you support the Anatolian Model of Colin Renfrew, PIEan language came from Anatolia and PIEans were therefore predominately Anatolia_N folks.

I don't, and almost no one I know of thinks Greek came in waves from Anatolia, beginning with the Mycenaeans.

Renfrew's idea was neat back in 1987 when it appeared in his book, Archaeology and Language. I bought and read it back then and still have it on my shelf. I can glance to the left from where I am sitting at my computer and see it there right now.

The problem with Renfrew's idea is that it falls apart upon closer examination. There is no way Indo-European is as old as it needs to be to make Renfrew's Neolithic farmer idea work, and an Anatolian origin does not allow for early Indo-European to share the border it must have had with Proto-Uralic.



I believe in the Armenian Model of Ivanov. I'm 100% sure that he was 100% right! Even according to the 'Armenian Plateau Model' of Ivanov early PIEans were more Anatolian_N than CHG/Iran_N folks. The mighty West Asian Hittite warriors were also predominately Anatolian_N folks. Armenians (and even West Iranians) are also more Anatolian_N than CHG/Iran_N. Although, West Iranians like Kurds and Persians are much more CHG/Iran_N than Armenians.


Iron Age started with Hattians and continued with the Hittites! Remember that the Hittites were like Mycenaeans predominately Anatolian_N folks, with some CHG/Iran_N.


I'm no linguist, but as I understand it, the glottalic hypothesis of Ivanov and Gamkrelidze has been discredited. The consensus among historical linguists, whether you like to acknowledge it or not, is that the Indo-European Urheimat was the Pontic-Caspian steppe.

razyn
07-02-2018, 07:27 PM
As has been mentioned a number of times before, Alexei Butin reported from the 14th Samara Archaeological Conference back in January that R1b-P312 has been in found in a number of Khvalynsk skeletons from the last quarter of the 5th millennium at Ekaterinovsky Cape. He attributed that information to a presentation made by Aleksandr Aleksandrevich Khokhlov, a professor and scientist who co-authored a book with David Anthony.

Thus far, that's an unconfirmed report, but I'm trying to get confirmation. My latest attempt was to ask the Russian guys at YFull to try to find out for sure if it is an accurate report.

I have a new Facebook "friend" (via my alternate identity as a kontrabass balalaika player) from the same oblast where Khokhlov teaches. Which is about like saying "they are both in Texas," but, any contact in a storm. May try to interest her in this task.

etrusco
07-02-2018, 07:33 PM
rms2

quotes from a conference of Mallory (2013)

"All models cited above acknowledge that the Proto-Indo-Europeans possessed an economy based on domesticated livestock and domestic cereals."

"As Anthony remarks in this symposium, there is really no serious evidence for arable agriculture (domestic cereals) east of the Dnieper until after c 2000 BCE (see also Ryabo-gina & Ivanov 2011; Mallory, in press:a). This means that there is also no evidence for domestic cereals in the Asiatic steppe until the Late Bronze Age (Andronovo etc)."

Are you aware of any papers that address this problem or if it has been debunked. If that is confirmed we should turn to Sredni Stog ( and its interaction with the CT cultural complex)as the PIE homeland ( in case one supports the steppe/forest theory)?

rms2
07-02-2018, 07:38 PM
. . .

Renfrew's idea was neat back in 1987 when it appeared in his book, Archaeology and Language. I bought and read it back then and still have it on my shelf. I can glance to the left from where I am sitting at my computer and see it there right now . . .

I decided to take my copy of Renfrew's book off the shelf and take a picture of it, along with the Volgograd whiskey flask that was sitting on the shelf, partially blocking my view of it.

24400

jdean
07-02-2018, 07:43 PM
I decided to take my copy of Renfrew's book off the shelf and take a picture of it, along with the Volgograd whiskey flask that was sitting on the shelf, partially blocking my view of it.

24398


Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator

Anthrogenica strikes again : )))

rms2
07-02-2018, 08:01 PM
rms2

quotes from a conference of Mallory (2013)

"All models cited above acknowledge that the Proto-Indo-Europeans possessed an economy based on domesticated livestock and domestic cereals."

"As Anthony remarks in this symposium, there is really no serious evidence for arable agriculture (domestic cereals) east of the Dnieper until after c 2000 BCE (see also Ryabo-gina & Ivanov 2011; Mallory, in press:a). This means that there is also no evidence for domestic cereals in the Asiatic steppe until the Late Bronze Age (Andronovo etc)."

Are you aware of any papers that address this problem or if it has been debunked. If that is confirmed we should turn to Sredni Stog ( and its interaction with the CT cultural complex)as the PIE homeland ( in case one supports the steppe/forest theory)?

No, because Anthony mentions that the Yamnaya people cultivated some grain themselves. Perhaps what he meant is that no one did that in any kind of organized, sedentary way before 2000 BC, or perhaps only western Yamnaya people, west of the Dnieper, did it.

GASKA
07-02-2018, 08:01 PM
@steppists


In the day of the victory of Russia (GASKA Kurgan Bell Beaker 5- Iberian Bell Beaker 4). A special gift for all the steppist friends from the blog of Carlos. A sign of friendship and good will.


https://indo-european.eu/2018/07/about-scepters-horses-and-war-on-khvalynsk-migrants-in-the-caucasus-and-the-danube/

I'm totally depressed, do you see how we have to invade Russia?. If it's finally true that the Basques have blood from the steppes, I'm willing to have a blood transfusion. We will meet the Russians and the Italians in the European Championship (if they are able to clasify).

rms2
07-02-2018, 08:04 PM
Anthrogenica strikes again : )))

Check it now. I edited that post and changed the photo a couple of times, because I noticed my wife had some kind of info on the desk that I needed to make sure no one could see, and it was visible when the photo was magnified. It should work now.

Here it is. (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=429027&viewfull=1#post429027)

jdean
07-02-2018, 08:11 PM
Check it now. I edited that post and changed the photo a couple of times, because I noticed my wife had some kind of info on the desk that I needed to make sure no one could see, and it was visible when the photo was magnified. It should work now.

Here it is. (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=429027&viewfull=1#post429027)

Yep works, cool beer mat BTW : )))

epoch
07-02-2018, 08:20 PM
I decided to take my copy of Renfrew's book off the shelf and take a picture of it, along with the Volgograd whiskey flask that was sitting on the shelf, partially blocking my view of it.

24400

Ah, the Droste Effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droste_effect

rms2
07-02-2018, 08:32 PM
Since I'm taking pics in my computer room, here are three books that are better than Renfrew's, plus a photo of three of my drinking horns from Dagestan (under a pic of Blarney Castle).

24404 24405

;)

I'll stop now, I promise.

etrusco
07-02-2018, 08:55 PM
I'm totally depressed, do you see how we have to invade Russia?. If it's finally true that the Basques have blood from the steppes, I'm willing to have a blood transfusion. We will meet the Russians and the Italians in the European Championship (if they are able to clasify).

Right... if we will able to qualify. I supported Argentina ( the most "italian" team after Italy) now I'm rooting to France or Russia.

rms2
07-02-2018, 08:56 PM
I have a new Facebook "friend" (via my alternate identity as a kontrabass balalaika player) from the same oblast where Khokhlov teaches. Which is about like saying "they are both in Texas," but, any contact in a storm. May try to interest her in this task.

If she could find out for us, that would be fantastic, especially if it turns out to be true.

My wife emailed Khokhlov but never got an answer. That was pretty much all she cared to do in pursuit of the information, however.

jdean
07-02-2018, 09:19 PM
Since I'm taking pics in my computer room, here are three books that are better than Renfrew's, plus a photo of three of my drinking horns from Dagestan (under a pic of Blarney Castle).

24404 24405

;)

I'll stop now, I promise.

Since going off topic is he standard for this thread I thought I'd mention the first time I had bottled Felinfoel (pronounced Vellinvoel) was in Washington DC, over here at the time (late 80s) you could only buy it from the shops in cans.

ms85
07-02-2018, 09:20 PM
Right... if we will able to qualify. I supported Argentina ( the most "italian" team after Italy) now I'm rooting to France or Russia.After Italy I support Uruguay. Italians are the second largest ethnic group in Uruguay!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Uruguayans

anglesqueville
07-02-2018, 09:23 PM
About Mycenean and Sintashta: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?14725-Joys-and-pains-of-qpAdm&p=429079#post429079 . Scroll to the bottom of my post (example 2)

Kopfjäger
07-02-2018, 09:55 PM
Since I'm taking pics in my computer room, here are three books that are better than Renfrew's, plus a photo of three of my drinking horns from Dagestan (under a pic of Blarney Castle).

24404 24405

;)

I'll stop now, I promise.

Brains Beer lol. What is that? I've seen that brand before. Welsh?

jdean
07-02-2018, 10:38 PM
Brains Beer lol. What is that? I've seen that brand before. Welsh?

Yep, old Cardiff brewery and Felinfoel is from Carmarthenshire, they were the first to can beer in the UK.

Kopfjäger
07-03-2018, 12:16 AM
Yep, old Cardiff brewery and Felinfoel is from Carmarthenshire, they were the first to can beer in the UK.

I definitely gotta head to Wales. I'm a cider guy, and I hear that's a West Country thing.

rms2
07-03-2018, 01:00 AM
I definitely gotta head to Wales. I'm a cider guy, and I hear that's a West Country thing.

Thatcher's Gold (https://www.thatcherscider.co.uk/our-cider/) was the cider I drank when I was over there, and it is excellent. That was what my wife stuck with the whole time. She really liked it.

The best beer, IMHO, is Butty Bach (https://www.wyevalleybrewery.co.uk/cask-butty-bach), followed closely by Doombar (https://www.sharpsbrewery.co.uk/our-beers/doom-bar.html) and Brains (https://www.sabrain.com/our-beers/the-classics/).

I had some other beers when I was in Wales, as well, but I can't recall the names of all of them. Felinfoel was one. They were all really good though. No complaints.

Here's a pint of Doombar I consumed very shortly after this photo was taken, at the Lamb and Flag in Rhayader, Powys, Wales (https://goo.gl/maps/Ab7krseRGTn).

24409

razyn
07-03-2018, 03:26 AM
"Oldest Steppe Bell Beakers: Saxony-Anhalt, Germany"

epoch
07-03-2018, 05:37 AM
rms2

quotes from a conference of Mallory (2013)

"All models cited above acknowledge that the Proto-Indo-Europeans possessed an economy based on domesticated livestock and domestic cereals."

"As Anthony remarks in this symposium, there is really no serious evidence for arable agriculture (domestic cereals) east of the Dnieper until after c 2000 BCE (see also Ryabo-gina & Ivanov 2011; Mallory, in press:a). This means that there is also no evidence for domestic cereals in the Asiatic steppe until the Late Bronze Age (Andronovo etc)."

Are you aware of any papers that address this problem or if it has been debunked. If that is confirmed we should turn to Sredni Stog ( and its interaction with the CT cultural complex)as the PIE homeland ( in case one supports the steppe/forest theory)?

But we now know that Andronovo saw an uptick of EEF, quite likely brought in by a CW related ancestry. That was a tad surprising, but it does solve this issue. We have evidence of emmer at Polish CW sites.

jdean
07-03-2018, 06:48 AM
Thatcher's Gold (https://www.thatcherscider.co.uk/our-cider/) was the cider I drank when I was over there, and it is excellent. That was what my wife stuck with the whole time. She really liked it.

The best beer, IMHO, is Butty Bach (https://www.wyevalleybrewery.co.uk/cask-butty-bach), followed closely by Doombar (https://www.sharpsbrewery.co.uk/our-beers/doom-bar.html) and Brains (https://www.sabrain.com/our-beers/the-classics/).

I had some other beers when I was in Wales, as well, but I can't recall the names of all of them. Felinfoel was one. They were all really good though. No complaints.

Here's a pint of Doombar I consumed very shortly after this photo was taken, at the Lamb and Flag in Rhayader, Powys, Wales (https://goo.gl/maps/Ab7krseRGTn).

24409

Doombar's Cornish so you're definitely drawn to Celtic beers, perhaps you should look up Scottish Heavy (http://www.brewerydb.com/style/8) ?

jdean
07-03-2018, 06:58 AM
I definitely gotta head to Wales. I'm a cider guy, and I hear that's a West Country thing.

Yep, Somerset and Herefordshire, see plenty of examples in the shops but if you just drive about either area it doesn't take too long to come across somebody making it in small batches (actually, probably best to be driven rather than driving yourself : )

In days gone by it was common practice to part pay the workforce with cider, farmers still attract help during busy times with it though : ))

etrusco
07-03-2018, 08:00 AM
But we now know that Andronovo saw an uptick of EEF, quite likely brought in by a CW related ancestry. That was a tad surprising, but it does solve this issue. We have evidence of emmer at Polish CW sites.

Nice explanation. It is possible but it seems too complicated. We now know that in Sredni Stog there was the presence of a R1a corded ware like population ( with a good amount of EEF). So it is more parsimonious and easy to explain with SS being PIE. Also because it can more easily explain the presence of these terms also in centum languages.

epoch
07-03-2018, 09:47 AM
Nice explanation. It is possible but it seems too complicated. We now know that in Sredni Stog there was the presence of a R1a corded ware like population ( with a good amount of EEF). So it is more parsimonious and easy to explain with SS being PIE. Also because it can more easily explain the presence of these terms also in centum languages.

That scenario doesn't take away Mallory's problem, which was this: There is no evidence for domestic cereals east of the Dnieper before 2000 BC. However, Indo-Aryan languages, which are supposed to come from PIE groups from east of the Dnieper share a lot of agricultural PIE roots regarding cereals with Western IE languages. The problem is: How can these have been remembered if no agriculture was there for the words to be used? Well, we noticed a back flow in genetics, and that back flow explains both the recurrence of agriculture as well as the reintroduction of PIE roots for cereals.

PS: Funny thing: This sets the perimeter for the Indo-Aryan spread to later than 2000 BC.

etrusco
07-03-2018, 10:04 AM
That scenario doesn't take away Mallory's problem, which was this: There is no evidence for domestic cereals east of the Dnieper before 2000 BC. However, Indo-Aryan languages, which are supposed to come from PIE groups from east of the Dnieper share a lot of agricultural PIE roots regarding cereals with Western IE languages. The problem is: How can these have been remembered if no agriculture was there for the words to be used? Well, we noticed a back flow in genetics, and that back flow explains both the recurrence of agriculture as well as the reintroduction of PIE roots for cereals.

PS: Funny thing: This sets the perimeter for the Indo-Aryan spread to later than 2000 BC.

Well the explanation is simple we need only to drop this presumption " which are supposed to come from PIE groups from east of the Dnieper" and substitute east with west. The case of agricolture simply weakens this supposition. Or at least this is what I get from your post.

etrusco
07-03-2018, 10:10 AM
As a post ( in April I think) on eurogenes stated it could even turn out that Sintashta directly comes from SS without any back migration from Corded Ware.


http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-mystery-of-sintashta-people.html

Also west of the Dnieper is the region were we will likely find the R1b samples that are ancestral to the western european ones. I wonder why put forward the case for having a east of the dnieper IE homeland when west of it we have all the "required equipment" to explain it.

epoch
07-03-2018, 11:06 AM
Well the explanation is simple we need only to drop this presumption " which are supposed to come from PIE groups from east of the Dnieper" and substitute east with west. The case of agricolture simply weakens this supposition. Or at least this is what I get from your post.

But in the same piece Mallory explained very clear why that route - essential for the Anatolian theory - has even more problems. That is, PIE must have somehow traveled through areas where a whole host of non-IE languages was spoken: Hurrian, Hattic, Semitic, Elamite. All these people had agriculture and had it on a far larger scale than anybody else. Why on earth would Indo-Iranians come up with roughly a similar set of roots for agriculture if the dispersed through this route, ending up in an are which had advanced agriculture? The only sensible answer is IE being intrusive. But if it was, how did it skip influencing Hattic, Hurrian, Semitic [1] and Elamite on its way there?

https://www.proto-indo-european.ru/ie-cradle/_pdf/clouds-over-ie-homelands-nallory.pdf

[1] You could state some Semitic influence. However, these pop up in Western IE as well, or, depending on what you consider relevant cognates, sometimes *only* in Western IE languages. So they're not tied to a spread through the Middle East.

etrusco
07-03-2018, 12:03 PM
But in the same piece Mallory explained very clear why that route - essential for the Anatolian theory - has even more problems. That is, PIE must have somehow traveled through areas where a whole host of non-IE languages was spoken: Hurrian, Hattic, Semitic, Elamite. All these people had agriculture and had it on a far larger scale than anybody else. Why on earth would Indo-Iranians come up with roughly a similar set of roots for agriculture if the dispersed through this route, ending up in an are which had advanced agriculture? The only sensible answer is IE being intrusive. But if it was, how did it skip influencing Hattic, Hurrian, Semitic [1] and Elamite on its way there?

https://www.proto-indo-european.ru/ie-cradle/_pdf/clouds-over-ie-homelands-nallory.pdf

[1] You could state some Semitic influence. However, these pop up in Western IE as well, or, depending on what you consider relevant cognates, sometimes *only* in Western IE languages. So they're not tied to a spread through the Middle East.

You are getting me wrong . I'm not in the Renefrew's bandwagon. I never even for a moment believed in Anatolia PIE homeland for the same reasons you perfectly quoted. Above all the reason that if Anatolia is PIE we would have far more typical IE cultural traits in the surroundings area. Which we have not.
I was only saying that SS is a more perfect fit for PIE homeland. It is capable to explain agricultural terms. It has corded ware pottery battle axes the R1a signal and likely will have in its western part the R1b L-51 signal that is so vital to the IEzation of western Europe. I have my pet theory BTW but I was speaking with the presumption of steppe- steppe/forest being the PIE homeland. To me SS is a better fit than Yamanaya.

rms2
07-03-2018, 12:13 PM
IMHO, the five cultures of the final Eneolithic on the Pontic-Caspian steppe formed the milieu in which early Indo-European was spoken.

24419

epoch
07-03-2018, 12:28 PM
You are getting me wrong . I'm not in the Renefrew's bandwagon. I never even for a moment believed in Anatolia PIE homeland for the same reasons you perfectly quoted. Above all the reason that if Anatolia is PIE we would have far more typical IE cultural traits in the surroundings area. Which we have not.
I was only saying that SS is a more perfect fit for PIE homeland. It is capable to explain agricultural terms. It has corded ware pottery battle axes the R1a signal and likely will have in its western part the R1b L-51 signal that is so vital to the IEzation of western Europe. I have my pet theory BTW but I was speaking with the presumption of steppe- steppe/forest being the PIE homeland. To me SS is a better fit than Yamanaya.

OK, but SS disappeared 3500 BC and the area from Bulgaria to the East then was occupied by Yamnaya. So, if Yamnaya and it's later successors weren't the ancestors of Indo-Aryan and Sredny-Stog was, how did that language come in India and Iran? There are basically only two routes. Mallory may discuss the route Anatolia -> Iran because it is a prominent feature of the Anatolian hypothesis, the issues he raises are similar for everything set up which proposes a route that way. Similar thing for the steppe -> Iran, which all require a migration from an area which shows a agriculture gap. If you would suggest something Sredny-Stog-ish migrating East roughly around 2000 BC you are basically agreeing with what I say.

rms2
07-03-2018, 12:46 PM
IMHO, the five cultures of the final Eneolithic on the Pontic-Caspian steppe formed the milieu in which early Indo-European was spoken.

24419

The five steppe cultures of the final Eneolithic listed on Anthony's map above contributed to the formation of the Yamnaya cultural horizon.

From Anthony's The Horse The Wheel and Language, pages 265-267:



Much regional diversity and relatively little wealth existed in the Pontic-Caspian steppes between about 3800 and 3300 BCE (table 12.1). Regional variants as defined by grave and pot types, which is how archaeologists define them, had no clearly defined borders; on the contrary, there was a lot of border shifting and inter-penetration. At least five Final Eneolithic archaeological cultures have been identified in the Pontic-Caspian steppes (figure 12.1). Sites of these five groups are sometimes found in the same regions, occasionally in the same cemeteries; overlap in time; shared a number of similarities; and were, in any case, fairly variable. In these circumstances, we cannot be sure that they all deserve recognition as different archaeological cultures. But we cannot understand the archaeological descriptions of this period without them, and together they provide a good picture of what was happening in the Pontic-Caspian steppes between 3800 and 3300 BCE. The western groups were engaged in a sort of two-pronged death dance, as it turned out, with the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture. The southern groups interacted with Maykop traders. And the eastern groups cast off a set of migrants who rode across Kazakhstan to a new home in the Altai, a subject reserved for the next chapter. Horseback riding is documented archaeologically in Botai-Tersek sites in Kazakhstan during this period (chapter 10) and probably appeared earlier, and so we proceed on the assumption that most steppe tribes were now equestrian.

etrusco
07-03-2018, 01:29 PM
OK, but SS disappeared 3500 BC and the area from Bulgaria to the East then was occupied by Yamnaya. So, if Yamnaya and it's later successors weren't the ancestors of Indo-Aryan and Sredny-Stog was, how did that language come in India and Iran? There are basically only two routes. Mallory may discuss the route Anatolia -> Iran because it is a prominent feature of the Anatolian hypothesis, the issues he raises are similar for everything set up which proposes a route that way. Similar thing for the steppe -> Iran, which all require a migration from an area which shows a agriculture gap. If you would suggest something Sredny-Stog-ish migrating East roughly around 2000 BC you are basically agreeing with what I say.

Following also rms2 post we are dealing with cultural horizons. So Yamnaya is a cultural horizon that after 3300 starts to expand west. But that doesn't mean SS people are erased from the earth's surface. Now I'm trying to "surf" the steppe theory. We have a R1a subclade that moves west forming the Corded Ware ( help me because I do not remember which) and an eastern subclade that forms the Poltavka/Srubna/Sintashta/ Andronovo complex in different time of course ( help me because I do not remember which subclade and I do not have time to do it myself!!) that at the end move to central and then south central asia.
I think I'm summing up roughly the mainstream steppe scenario of people carrying R1a.
However we should not mix the two problems. It can be that Sintashta Andronovo is a direct back migration from more western locations ( Poland Lithuania and Belarus probably).
My case was that agricultural terms have not been picked up "en route" or in the target destination of the migrations but were "incorporated " in the PIE formation stage. That is why a location west of the dnieper is a better fit.

rms2
07-03-2018, 01:34 PM
Bringing this back around to Kurgan Bell Beaker, it's interesting how much the burial rites of Mikhailovka had in common with Kurgan Bell Beaker: burial in pits under round burial mounds; stone cromlechs; stone-lined cists; surrounding ditch; use of anthropomorphic stelae; body in a contracted pose on the side. Budzhak, a Yamnaya subgroup that went north into Malopolska and might be the mysterious pre-Beaker culture, came from the old Mikhailovka stomping grounds on the NW Black Sea coast.

From David Anthony's The Horse The Wheel and Language, pp. 269-271:



Mikhailovka I kurgans were distributed from the lower Dnieper westward to the Danube delta and south to the Crimean peninsula, north and northwest of the Black Sea. Near the Danube they were interspersed with cemeteries that contained Danubian Cernavoda I-III ceramics. Most Mikhailovka I kurgans were low mounds of black earth covered by a layer of clay, surrounded by a ditch and a stone cromlech, often with an opening on the southwest side. The graves frequently were in cists lined with stone slabs. The body could be in an extended supine position or contracted on the side or supine with raised knees, although the most common pose was contracted on the side. Occasionally (e.g., Olaneshti, k. 2, gr. 1, on the lower Dniester) the grave was covered by a stone anthropomorphic stela - a large stone slab carved at the top into the shape of a head projecting above rounded shoulders (see figure 13.11). This was the beginning of a long and important North Pontic tradition of decorating some graves with carved stone stelae.


Leo S. Klejn, Discussion: Are the Origins of Indo-European Languages Explained by the Migration of the Yamnaya Culture to the West?, page 11:



Among Eneolithic steppe cultures classified by Rassamakin and Kotova in the Ukraine, some are very similar to the Lower Danube cultures (Lower Mikhailovka, Kvityana): barrows, oval pit graves, skeletons supine or lying curled on their sides, and cromlechs.


Mallory, In Search of the Indo-Europeans, pages 203-205:



The third major Ukrainian cultural entity of the earlier Eneolithic is the Lower Mikhaylovka-Kemi Oba culture which spans the region between the lower Dnieper and the Crimea. The lower Dnieper variant, the Lower Mikhaylovka culture, synchronizes roughly with the later part of the Sredny Stog culture, while the Kemi Oba culture of the Crimea extends into the later Eneolithic.

. . . Burials and associated rituals have attracted special attention. The burials are placed in low mounds (kurgans) and the presence of stone rings, cromlechs, is frequently noted. Hearths have been discovered built on top of the kurgans, on their periphery or within the burial pit itself. Grave goods are rare but may include pottery, copper awls or shell ornaments.

One of the more striking recent discoveries of the Lower Mikhaylovka group is the existence of altars or offering places. Beneath a kurgan at Kalanchak was found a circular area on which lay the fractured remains of an anthropomorphic stone stela with traces of ochre; potsherds; and animal bones. Similar deposits have been found elsewhere.
To the south, in the Crimea, are the remains of the Kemi Oba culture which is primarily represented by small cemeteries. Besides those features which are similar to the Lower Mikhaylovka group, for example, kurgans, cromlechs, eastern orientation, and so forth, there are several other features of considerable interest. A number of tombs which have been built as stone cists have included painted ornament on the walls. Of greater representational interest are the carved stone stelae on which are depicted the heads and arms of figures, and which are covered with both geometric and more realistic ornament. A fine example of this is the stone stela that derives from Kernosovka. The stela stood 1.2 metres high and depicts the head, including a face with a moustache and beard; arms; and phallus. On the front surface of the stela are carved images of what have been interpreted as tools such as mattocks, a battle-axe, and animals including two horses. There are about seventy such figures known from the Pontic region. Considerable evidence exists that they were employed in Later Eneolithic burials, especially in the construction of Yamnaya graves where they were used to cover the deceased. This was clearly not their original purpose since they were constructed to stand upright, and Dmitry Telegin suggests that they were originally manufactured by the Lower Mikhaylovka-Kemi Oba culture and later appropriated by Yamnaya tribes who reused them in their own burials.



Beaker pedestalled bowls bore some resemblance to this old Mikhailovka brazier.

24420 24421

epoch
07-03-2018, 01:49 PM
Following also rms2 post we are dealing with cultural horizons. So Yamnaya is a cultural horizon that after 3300 starts to expand west. But that doesn't mean SS people are erased from the earth's surface. Now I'm trying to "surf" the steppe theory. We have a R1a subclade that moves west forming the Corded Ware ( help me because I do not remember which) and an eastern subclade that forms the Poltavka/Srubna/Sintashta/ Andronovo complex in different time of course ( help me because I do not remember which subclade and I do not have time to do it myself!!) that at the end move to central and then south central asia.
I think I'm summing up roughly the mainstream steppe scenario of people carrying R1a.
However we should not mix the two problems. It can be that Sintashta Andronovo is a direct back migration from more western locations ( Poland Lithuania and Belarus probably).
My case was that agricultural terms have not been picked up "en route" or in the target destination of the migrations but were "incorporated " in the PIE formation stage. That is why a location west of the dnieper is a better fit.

I think that, as we speak a Eneolithic time frame here, that idea cannot be proven or dis-proven. Unless they are loans which we can tie to some known language, which becomes harder and harder once you go back in time. May be I'm wrong, though.

etrusco
07-03-2018, 02:47 PM
I think that, as we speak a Eneolithic time frame here, that idea cannot be proven or dis-proven. Unless they are loans which we can tie to some known language, which becomes harder and harder once you go back in time. May be I'm wrong, though.

Ok. I think agricultural terms being possibly PIE could be significant. In the question about PIE homeland we need to be open to new data in order to match theory with reality. But maybe at the end rms2 and others are right. We need to turn to the topic of the thread and let people who believe the steppe hypothesis to write their posts. Otherwise the steppist would lose a lot of time and non steppist lose a lot of patience. Partaking as a "reader only" is enriching anyway.

razyn
07-03-2018, 03:14 PM
In the question about PIE homeland we need to be open to new data in order to match theory with reality.

In the broad sense I applaud your willingness to go away and let us discuss the thread topic. But with regard to this specific statement, I feel a need to clarify that the genetics are not theoretical, in the same way that archaeological horizons and linguistic family trees are theoretical. It is not necessary to harmonize genetic facts with theories from those other disciplines -- both of which have been in flux for two or three centuries, and probably will continue to flux as long as people have breath with which to argue.

Pots aren't people; phylogenetic trees aren't cultures, and languages aren't fatherlines. Sometimes, happily, two or three of these analytical systems seem to coincide, or merge, or proceed in parallel. But they don't have to -- and an effort to reconcile them all in one grand theory probably is a disservice to the genetic, linguistic, and archaeological realities that have woven their complex pattern over the most recent five or six millennia. At the end of which process, we are not all wearing the same plaid, nor speaking the same language.

rms2
07-03-2018, 03:25 PM
Ok. I think agricultural terms being possibly PIE could be significant. In the question about PIE homeland we need to be open to new data in order to match theory with reality. But maybe at the end rms2 and others are right. We need to turn to the topic of the thread and let people who believe the steppe hypothesis to write their posts. Otherwise the steppist would lose a lot of time and non steppist lose a lot of patience. Partaking as a "reader only" is enriching anyway.

This is from Anthony's The Horse The Wheel and Language, page 304:



The most obvious material division within the early Yamnaya horizon was between east and west. The eastern (Volga-Ural-North Caucasian steppe) Yamnaya pastoral economy was more mobile than the western one (South Bug-lower Don). This contrast corresponds in an intriguing way to economic and cultural differences between eastern and western Indo-European language branches. For example, impressions of cultivated grain have been found in western Yamnaya pottery, in both settlements and graves, and Proto-Indo-European cognates related to cereal agriculture were well preserved in western Indo-European vocabularies. But grain imprints are absent in eastern Yamnaya pots, just as many of the cognates related to agriculture are missing from eastern Indo-European languages3.


Remember what Anthony said about the "two-pronged death dance" the western steppe Eneolithic groups were having with the farmers of Cucuteni-Tripolye?

etrusco
07-03-2018, 03:58 PM
This is from Anthony's The Horse The Wheel and Language, page 304:



Remember what Anthony said about the "two-pronged death dance" the western steppe Eneolithic groups were having with the farmers of Cucuteni-Tripolye?

I get the literally meaning of "two-pronged death dance" but I do not get the substantial meaning. Does it mean they were killing the Cucuteni culture ( I guess)?

rms2
07-03-2018, 10:09 PM
I get the literally meaning of "two-pronged death dance" but I do not get the substantial meaning. Does it mean they were killing the Cucuteni culture ( I guess)?

I think it means the Indo-European pastoralists were putting an end to CT at the same time they were learning from it and perhaps mixing with its people.

The important part is what answers your question about agriculture east of the Dnieper.

rms2
07-04-2018, 02:30 PM
IMHO, the five cultures of the final Eneolithic on the Pontic-Caspian steppe formed the milieu in which early Indo-European was spoken.

24419

I updated that graphic from Anthony's book with appropriate quotes from it that show that the five Pontic-Caspian steppe cultures of the Final Eneolithic formed the foundation of the Yamnaya cultural horizon. Those five cultures were:

1. Mikhailovka I
2. Post Mariupol
3. Late Sredni Stog
4. Late Khvalynsk
5. Repin

24432

dsm
07-07-2018, 09:53 AM
Davidski posted a link to this quite interesting interactive map at his Eurogenes blog site.
It has a time base slider bar where the viewer can move forward & backward in time (8200BC to recent)

It is a very interesting work and perhaps some of our talented members here can help flesh out the void
re P312 & U106 that shows around the 2500 timeframe (they suddenly appear but not clear pathway.
IIRC It does appear to sugest L151 appeared in the Carpathian basin(I;ll double check).

This is a wonderful way to visualize the popping in and out of the many cultures in the time span illustrated.

To best view it, scroll down to the symbols table, do a screen grab & print it off, then go back and slide the
bar through time. Crops, Sheep (& wool) & Wheel symbols also pop up in the appropriate places & times.


Usage comments ...

If you click on any of the symbols it will open a window with the details. Try it on the red triangles, sheep
& white wheels. 3000BC is a very interesting point in time (Yamnaya into the Carpathian Basin). You can
also click on labels (i.e. Yamnaya) to see a note.

If the time slider bar is in the way, you can click on the map itself and drag it in any direction. And, you
can expand/shrink the map using the + and - at top left.



http://homeland.ku.dk/

EXTRACT:
The interactive map is one of the outcomes of the research project “The Homeland: In the footprints of the early Indo-Europeans” (2015–2018), funded by the Carlsberg Foundation. The Homeland project is based at the Roots of Europe Centre, Department of Nordic Studies and Linguistics, University of Copenhagen.

Each coloured dot on this map is an ancient individual sampled for DNA (1769 individuals in total from 42 scientific papers). The duration of a dot's presence on the map does NOT reflect the lifetime of an individual, but reflects only the estimated date of the individual's death/burial (from C14-dating or context/stratigraphy). The same goes for wheels and wool/animal bones. Most dates are estimated within a few hundred years (C14), while some (context/stratigraphy) are more broadly estimated. Therefore, some icons/dots on the map with long duration reflect a very broad dating, and their presence on the map should not be taken literally. Click each feature for additional information and references. Many C14 dates have not been corrected for reservoir effect and might be a few hundred years too early, which is why they sometimes predate the time period of their associated culture areas (see below).

The DNA data is collected from supplementary info and tables from various peer-reviewed articles (see bottom of this page). Most of the European Bronze Age wool is extracted and modified (given absolute dates from their reported relative dates) from the CinBA project, and the rest (including all zooarchaeological indications of wool, as well as wheel data) has been mapped manually by Mikkel Nørtoft from various articles.

dsm
07-07-2018, 10:38 AM
In the interactive map:

Our Iberian friends can go to 2500BC to see the 1st L151 (I6588) listed there.

At 2500BC I can see an L51 (RISE564) in Germany and also a P312 (I4132)
showing in Germany.

Also at 2500 they show RISE446 (R1a-M417) in Germany.

Also at 2500 an L151 in Prague - etc: etc: etc:

D

razyn
07-07-2018, 10:45 AM
The Saxony-Anhalt stuff (nominal theme of this thread, at least when it began) starts to get visible when the slider bar hits 2878 BC.

rms2
07-07-2018, 01:04 PM
Davidski posted a link to this quite interesting interactive map at his Eurogenes blog site.
It has a time base slider bar where the viewer can move forward & backward in time (8200BC to recent)

It is a very interesting work and perhaps some of our talented members here can help flesh out the void
re P312 & U106 that shows around the 2500 timeframe (they suddenly appear but not clear pathway.
IIRC It does appear to sugest L151 appeared in the Carpathian basin(I;ll double check).

This is a wonderful way to visualize the popping in and out of the many cultures in the time span illustrated.

To best view it, scroll down to the symbols table, do a screen grab & print it off, then go back and slide the
bar through time. Crops, Sheep (& wool) & Wheel symbols also pop up in the appropriate places & times.


Usage comments ...

If you click on any of the symbols it will open a window with the details. Try it on the red triangles, sheep
& white wheels. 3000BC is a very interesting point in time (Yamnaya into the Carpathian Basin). You can
also click on labels (i.e. Yamnaya) to see a note.

If the time slider bar is in the way, you can click on the map itself and drag it in any direction. And, you
can expand/shrink the map using the + and - at top left.



http://homeland.ku.dk/

EXTRACT:
The interactive map is one of the outcomes of the research project “The Homeland: In the footprints of the early Indo-Europeans” (2015–2018), funded by the Carlsberg Foundation. The Homeland project is based at the Roots of Europe Centre, Department of Nordic Studies and Linguistics, University of Copenhagen.

Each coloured dot on this map is an ancient individual sampled for DNA (1769 individuals in total from 42 scientific papers). The duration of a dot's presence on the map does NOT reflect the lifetime of an individual, but reflects only the estimated date of the individual's death/burial (from C14-dating or context/stratigraphy). The same goes for wheels and wool/animal bones. Most dates are estimated within a few hundred years (C14), while some (context/stratigraphy) are more broadly estimated. Therefore, some icons/dots on the map with long duration reflect a very broad dating, and their presence on the map should not be taken literally. Click each feature for additional information and references. Many C14 dates have not been corrected for reservoir effect and might be a few hundred years too early, which is why they sometimes predate the time period of their associated culture areas (see below).

The DNA data is collected from supplementary info and tables from various peer-reviewed articles (see bottom of this page). Most of the European Bronze Age wool is extracted and modified (given absolute dates from their reported relative dates) from the CinBA project, and the rest (including all zooarchaeological indications of wool, as well as wheel data) has been mapped manually by Mikkel Nørtoft from various articles.

Neat toy.

One thing I have noticed among all the results over the last few years is that the scientific papers will report a y-dna haplogroup, and then some of the more computer-adept among us will attempt to refine them, with more or less accuracy.

It's hard to keep track of all of it and to know which results to trust and which to regard with suspicion.

Pylsteen
07-07-2018, 02:20 PM
So many sheep :-)

rms2
07-07-2018, 02:57 PM
So many sheep :-)

They sure are tasty.

To me, woolen clothing is too itchy, but probably ancient people weren't as spoiled as I am.

rms2
07-07-2018, 06:07 PM
Here is some pretty big news.

I emailed Dr. Khokhlov myself in English. He answered me and said that what Alexei Butin reported is true ("Это правда") but that the results are preliminary and we should wait for the published scientific paper.

I am not going to post the full text of his email, since I did not ask for permission to do that.

Kopfjäger
07-07-2018, 06:42 PM
Here is some pretty big news.

I emailed Dr. Khokhlov myself in English. He answered me and said that what Alexei Butin reported is true ("Это правда") but that the results are preliminary and we should wait for the published scientific paper.

I am not going to post the full text of his email, since I did not ask for permission to do that.

Fantastic! Thanks again for sharing that, Rich. So, we can reasonably assume that P312 was found in the Steppe, based on preliminary results.

rms2
07-07-2018, 06:50 PM
Fantastic! Thanks again for sharing that, Rich. So, we can reasonably assume that P312 was found in the Steppe, based on preliminary results.

Yes, it looks that way, but since his initial email to me (about an hour after it), Dr. Khokhlov sent me a subsequent email in which he said, "This A. Butin had no right to spread other people's information. In his account there are errors."

So, that kind of takes the shine off his initial response, which led off with "Здравствуйте. Это правда" (Greetings. This is true [- referring to what Butin wrote]). In his first email he made no mention of errors.

I get the impression he had second thoughts about letting me know about those results, since they are unpublished.

etrusco
07-07-2018, 06:55 PM
Anyway I do not think the overall report is inaccurate. maybe the timing will be a little bit different from the initial report ( early Vth millennium)

Kopfjäger
07-07-2018, 06:57 PM
Yes, it looks that way, but since his initial email to me (about an hour after it), Dr. Khokhlov sent me a subsequent email in which he said, "This A. Butin had no right to spread other people's information. In his account there are errors."

So, that kind of takes the shine off his initial response, which led off with "Здравствуйте. Это правда" (Greetings. This is true [- referring to what Butin wrote]). In his first email he made no mention of errors.

I get the impression he had second thoughts about letting me know about those results, since they are unpublished.

Yeah, he sounds peeved. I wonder to which errors he is referring? Either way, I am more eager to find out now.

Where was this postulated P312 found? Saratov, right?

rms2
07-07-2018, 07:03 PM
Anyway I do not think the overall report is inaccurate. maybe the timing will be a little bit different from the initial report ( early Vth millennium)

Butin said last quarter of the 5th millennium (4250-4000 BC), as I recall.

It seems to me Butin was more likely to have gotten the long version of that U106 clade ("R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2") wrong than the simple "R - P 312/ S 116" he reported, but maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.

Dr. Khokhlov's first email simply said of Butin's report, "This is true" (or "That's true") - Это правда, without qualification or equivocation except to say the results are preliminary and we should wait for the published report.

rms2
07-07-2018, 07:18 PM
Yeah, he sounds peeved. I wonder to which errors he is referring? Either way, I am more eager to find out now.

Where was this postulated P312 found? Saratov, right?

Middle Volga somewhere near Samara, I think.

jdean
07-07-2018, 07:28 PM
Here is some pretty big news.

I emailed Dr. Khokhlov myself in English. He answered me and said that what Alexei Butin reported is true ("Это правда") but that the results are preliminary and we should wait for the published scientific paper.

I am not going to post the full text of his email, since I did not ask for permission to do that.

Hats off Rich, hopefully the paper's not long coming : ))))

MitchellSince1893
07-07-2018, 08:48 PM
I will be shocked if P312 is over 1000 years older than current estimate made by Iain McDonald of ~3100 BC.

The current yfull P312 formed date is 2850 BC. P312>U152 RISE563 is dated to 2542 BC.

etrusco
07-07-2018, 09:11 PM
An interesting paper about Bell Beakers in Saxony Anhalt and their interaction with old europe culture....as I see sun cult in IE historical cultures comes likely from the farmers.

Pretty much stunning how genetics and archeology are telling quite different stories.....a real mystery.

https://indo-european.eu/2018/07/when-bell-beakers-mixed-with-eneolithic-europeans-pommelte-and-the-europe-wide-concept-of-sanctuary/

dsm
07-07-2018, 09:54 PM
I will be shocked if P312 is over 1000 years older than current estimate made by Iain McDonald of ~3100 BC.

The current yfull P312 formed date is 2850 BC. P312>U152 RISE563 is dated to 2542 BC.

I tend to agree with you. Last qtr of 5th millennium BC seems far too old so am back to considering this a red herring. If P312 were really that much older than SNP dating methods tell us, I'll go with it being an error with no other substantive evidence to support it.

That age suggests there would be a lot more P312 finds between Samara and the Carpathians.

And as you imply, if P312 is as old as the Butin stories are telling us, it appears to make a mockery of the claims for SNP ages being made by some organisations (i.e. P312 4800 ybp or 2800BC)

dsm
07-07-2018, 10:05 PM
Neat toy.

One thing I have noticed among all the results over the last few years is that the scientific papers will report a y-dna haplogroup, and then some of the more computer-adept among us will attempt to refine them, with more or less accuracy.

It's hard to keep track of all of it and to know which results to trust and which to regard with suspicion.

I had been very interested in the deeper analysis efforts done by various people. But we S1194 got led up a garden path by GENETIKER claiming one of the finds near Bohemia was S1194. When asked for more detail he clammed up and that left myself somewhat cynical of the reassesments being done.

I am in no doubt that some researchers are able to delve so much deeper as it does rely on leading edge algorithms that impute many of the assessed SNPs rather than actually finding a hard and fast mutation at a given location. So, I will go along with Mikkel Nørtoft who is saying that the only additions he will make to the interactive chart are when the results are published in scientific peer reviewed journals and I have to agree with him. GENETIKER IMHO, made it a necessity to take this position.

It would be good to get Richard's views on this issue.

rms2
07-07-2018, 10:38 PM
I tend to agree with you. Last qtr of 5th millennium BC seems far too old so am back to considering this a red herring. If P312 were really that much older than SNP dating methods tell us, I'll go with it being an error with no other substantive evidence to support it . . .

Except that such estimates are based largely on modern dna testing.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if P312 were a thousand years older than current guesstimates make it.

Khokhlov's initial email to me was unreserved and simply indicated that what Butin reported was true. Only after an hour's consideration did Khokhlov express some reserve, as if he was concerned that he had let the cat out of the bag and perhaps his colleagues might not be happy about it.

I'm guessing P312 among Late Khvalynsk skeletons wasn't the erroneous part of what Butin posted, if any of it was in error.

ffoucart
07-08-2018, 12:05 AM
I will be shocked if P312 is over 1000 years older than current estimate made by Iain McDonald of ~3100 BC.

The current yfull P312 formed date is 2850 BC. P312>U152 RISE563 is dated to 2542 BC.

Why? This is only roughly estimated. And nobody expected to found a subclade of L21 already around 2300BC. It's clear that P312 around 3100BC means little time for L21 to emerge and to have subclade, so it doesn't surprise me to find P312 around 4000BC.

rms2
07-08-2018, 12:08 AM
An interesting paper about Bell Beakers in Saxony Anhalt and their interaction with old europe culture....as I see sun cult in IE historical cultures comes likely from the farmers.

Pretty much stunning how genetics and archeology are telling quite different stories.....a real mystery.

https://indo-european.eu/2018/07/when-bell-beakers-mixed-with-eneolithic-europeans-pommelte-and-the-europe-wide-concept-of-sanctuary/

What makes you think that? There is every indication that Neolithic farmers primarily worshiped the earth mother goddess, and it was the early Indo-Europeans who worshiped the sun in the guise of the Shining Father (Dyaus Piter).

Bollox79
07-08-2018, 12:16 AM
I'm pretty sure I saw all the ancient U106 in there - RISE98 then Mr. Unetice DF98 near Prague and then Oostwoud, West Frisia in the transition to middle BA... but off the top of my head I can't think of any others in those time frames... we need more U106 from that time period - and we need more samples for all groups for the BA into the Iron age... many U106+ in my list other than the truly ancient samples and the two Gladiators from the Roman period are Germanic migration period or later... (which that observation may indeed mean we got really movin' when the Migration period kicked off... but that is why we need more BA and IA samples to see what the distribution looks like).

Bollox79
07-08-2018, 12:25 AM
Butin said last quarter of the 5th millennium (4250-4000 BC), as I recall.

It seems to me Butin was more likely to have gotten the long version of that U106 clade ("R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2") wrong than the simple "R - P 312/ S 116" he reported, but maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.

Dr. Khokhlov's first email simply said of Butin's report, "This is true" (or "That's true") - Это правда, without qualification or equivocation except to say the results are preliminary and we should wait for the published report.

Yeah what's the story with that U106 clade - probably an error right?

rms2
07-08-2018, 12:27 AM
Butin mentioned a subclade of U106 in his Molgen post. Maybe he got the subclade wrong but the major branch right. Maybe there was U106 among the R1b-P312 guys in those Late Khvalynsk skeletons at Ekaterinovsky Cape.

alexfritz
07-08-2018, 12:30 AM
What makes you think that? There is every indication that Neolithic farmers primarily worshiped the earth mother goddess, and it was the early Indo-Europeans who worshiped the sun in the guise of the Shining Father (Dyaus Piter).

difficult to say about the sun worship it does goes hand in hand with agriculture, a witness of time are the rock engravings in the val camonica and during the remedello period IIIA1 (pre-beaker IIIA2) there is already signs of sun worship; both phases are difficult to set apart though, but dagger types help indicate which;

http://www.rupestre.net/valcamonica_records/bagnolo2.htm
http://www.rupestre.net/valcamonica_records/borno1A.htm

rms2
07-08-2018, 01:11 AM
Yeah what's the story with that U106 clade - probably an error right?

I was thinking that might be an error only because Butin used the long version of the subclade nomenclature. It's a lot easier to make a mistake with that than it is to make a mistake with something as simple as R-P312/S116.

Saetro
07-08-2018, 01:25 AM
Since I'm taking pics in my computer room, here are three books that are better than Renfrew's, plus a photo of three of my drinking horns from Dagestan (under a pic of Blarney Castle).

24404 24405

;)

I'll stop now, I promise.

The David Anthony book "The Horse ..." includes a discussion of the saddle pommels mentioned a little earlier.
As an overview to populations and chronology under discussion here and with some great maps, it is a great vademecum.
Although obviously subsequent papers have superseded some of its contents.
And larger public library systems tend to carry it.

Re beermats.
Like Felinfoel.
Frequenters of Brains told me the name probably had something to do with the loss of little grey cells, but that whatever the origins, consumption thereof was enjoyable.

dsm
07-08-2018, 02:31 AM
Except that such estimates are based largely on modern dna testing.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if P312 were a thousand years older than current guesstimates make it.

Khokhlov's initial email to me was unreserved and simply indicated that what Butin reported was true. Only after an hour's consideration did Khokhlov express some reserve, as if he was concerned that he had let the cat out of the bag and perhaps his colleagues might not be happy about it.

I'm guessing P312 among Late Khvalynsk skeletons wasn't the erroneous part of what Butin posted, if any of it was in error.

RMS2, It will be really intriguing if this gets validated. Great that you made the approach and asked.

D

ADW_1981
07-08-2018, 03:10 AM
I was thinking that might be an error only because Butin used the long version of the subclade nomenclature. It's a lot easier to make a mistake with that than it is to make a mistake with something as simple as R-P312/S116.

Wasn't this asked like weeks ago? Odd still no response? Not even a, "Please wait for the full paper"?

dsm
07-08-2018, 03:43 AM
Why? This is only roughly estimated. And nobody expected to found a subclade of L21 already around 2300BC. It's clear that P312 around 3100BC means little time for L21 to emerge and to have subclade, so it doesn't surprise me to find P312 around 4000BC.

Surely though, there would be enough time then for a 4000BC P312 who lived around Samara to produce enough progeny to have left a lot more traces of their existence. Take Z2103 as the model.

However, we here are tending to haggle over the dating of the find rather than the actual DNA being P312. The living proof will be if the true age of this potential P312 sample in Butin's published report, if he does indeed report it.

An interesting potential !

MitchellSince1893
07-08-2018, 04:04 AM
Why? This is only roughly estimated. And nobody expected to found a subclade of L21 already around 2300BC. It's clear that P312 around 3100BC means little time for L21 to emerge and to have subclade, so it doesn't surprise me to find P312 around 4000BC.

I will be shocked because it's outside the 95% confidence interval for the SNP dating methods of Iain McDonald (~3800 to 2500 BC), yfull (3450 to 2350 BC) and ytree.net (3274 BC to 2197 BC). Shocked that all these SNP dating methods would have underestimated the age by so much. Not saying that I won't believe it...just that I will be surprised.

Per your comment that "nobody expected to found a subclade of L21 already around 2300BC"

Not sure what you mean by "nobody" as 2300 BC for L21>DF13 is in the 95 CI range for all three of the above methods

McDonald L21>DF13 (3100 BC - 2152 BC)
Yfull L21>DF13 (2750 BC - 1850 BC)
Ytree.net L21>DF13 (2636 BC - 1741 BC)

dsm
07-08-2018, 06:49 AM
Heard from Mikkel that his interactive map has been in such high demand that it broke the server.

It seems it went viral. My bet is it will get worse. It may be an idea to host it on a scaleable cloud server that can dynamically increase compute power and bandwidth. My org runs one server that can do this (runs at an IBM data centre).

Undobtably there will be a surge of interest in the tool then a dropping off to a more steady transaction arrival rate.

So, we cant expect to get access for a while until this issue is resolved.

D

rms2
07-08-2018, 10:29 AM
Wasn't this asked like weeks ago? Odd still no response? Not even a, "Please wait for the full paper"?

My wife tried an email address awhile back and got no response. Someone at YFull came up with another email address. That's the one I tried and got a response.

faulconer
07-08-2018, 01:49 PM
Having just returned from Kyiv and Warsaw, I want to thank everyone here for the interesting posts. Reading about the genetic history of the steppe while being there was truly a treat.


Cheers!
24493

etrusco
07-08-2018, 02:31 PM
difficult to say about the sun worship it does goes hand in hand with agriculture, a witness of time are the rock engravings in the val camonica and during the remedello period IIIA1 (pre-beaker IIIA2) there is already signs of sun worship; both phases are difficult to set apart though, but dagger types help indicate which;

http://www.rupestre.net/valcamonica_records/bagnolo2.htm
http://www.rupestre.net/valcamonica_records/borno1A.htm


as for more ancient connections between different part of old europe in relation with sun worship, megalithism and ( likely) cremation rituals see this paper.
https://www.google.it/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiPqMHS2o_cAhWGSBQKHdRRBs4QFggpMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rockartscandinavia.com%2Fimag es%2Farticles%2Fa16kaulmfl.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0-SWKGRSjWxwFVtg-LAU6D

Interesting links between Lombardy - Middle Saale region of Germany- Southern Scandinavia ( Bornholm rock art).
As for the passage grave of megalithic Europe I do not know if there is a connection with the catacomb culture in the north pontic region during the III millennium.

rms2
07-08-2018, 05:01 PM
Having just returned from Kyiv and Warsaw, I want to thank everyone here for the interesting posts. Reading about the genetic history of the steppe while being there was truly a treat.


Cheers!
24493

Excellent photo! Makes me thirsty.

alan
07-08-2018, 08:29 PM
I like this thread. Yes it’s probably the most off topic thread ever but it’s like a comfortable lounge bar where your u can pop in and share random thoughts!

epoch
07-08-2018, 08:38 PM
I like this thread. Yes it’s probably the most off topic thread ever but it’s like a comfortable lounge bar where your u can pop in and share random thoughts!

Bloody good name for a lounge bar, if I ever saw one: "Off Topic"

rms2
07-08-2018, 10:43 PM
Bloody good name for a lounge bar, if I ever saw one: "Off Topic"

The only requirement is that all drinks be served in bell beakers.

24515

My youngest son drew that picture.

rms2
07-09-2018, 12:04 AM
Here's something interesting I came across in looking back through Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans for something else. This is from page 122:



With regard to Proto-Indo-European weaponry, the most unequivocal reconstructions concern the bow, bowstring and arrow, all of which support the existence of archery within the Proto-Indo-European community.

ADW_1981
07-09-2018, 02:58 AM
My wife tried an email address awhile back and got no response. Someone at YFull came up with another email address. That's the one I tried and got a response.

To paraphrase - What was said? Thx

rms2
07-09-2018, 11:29 AM
To paraphrase - What was said? Thx

This (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=432980&viewfull=1#post432980) is my description of his initial email to me.

Here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=433012&viewfull=1#post433012) is what he emailed me about an hour later.

I now have a third email from Dr. Khokhlov to report on this morning, but from my perspective the news is not good, although I do appreciate his kindness in answering my emails.



Dear Richard.

В могильнике Ekaterinovsky Cape точно есть R1b, но я не вижу субклад - P312 (S116).
Здесь нужно быть осторожным.

Respectfully,
Aleksandr.

Translation:

In the cemetery Ekaterinovsky Cape, there is exactly R1b, but I do not see the subclade - P312 (S116).
You have to be careful here.

Needless to say, that is a big letdown, but the truth is always best in the long run.

etrusco
07-09-2018, 12:13 PM
This (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=432980&viewfull=1#post432980) is my description of his initial email to me.

Here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=433012&viewfull=1#post433012) is what he emailed me about an hour later.

I now have a third email from Dr. Khokhlov to report on this morning, but from my perspective the news is not good, although I do appreciate his kindness in answering my emails.



Needless to say, that is a big letdown, but the truth is always best in the long run.


It could be that Khokhlov didn't get the importance of the difference between a generic eastern european subclades of R1b and the crucial R1b P-312 issue which is vital for the western european debate? I mean is he aware of the implications of the problem or not? I'm just asking....

GASKA
07-09-2018, 12:18 PM
This (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=432980&viewfull=1#post432980) is my description of his initial email to me.

Here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=433012&viewfull=1#post433012) is what he emailed me about an hour later.

I now have a third email from Dr. Khokhlov to report on this morning, but from my perspective the news is not good, although I do appreciate his kindness in answering my emails.



Needless to say, that is a big letdown, but the truth is always best in the long run.

You are in too much a hurry, the game has only just begun, we also expect good news.

It's interesting the information you have got, but I also think, it's a very early date to find P312.

Thanks to our Croatians friends (who are also Catholics), we have stopped the invasion of the steppes, and Putin will have to wait many years to win a World Football Championship.

rms2
07-09-2018, 12:23 PM
It could be that Khokhlov didn't get the importance of the difference between a generic eastern european subclades of R1b and the crucial R1b P-312 issue which is vital for the western european debate? I mean is he aware of the implications of the problem or not? I'm just asking....

I'm not sure. In my email before his third email to me, I specifically asked if he could confirm the presence of R1b-P312 in the Ekaterinovsky Cape skeletons. He says he doesn't see it - "но я не вижу субклад - P312 (S116)" -, so I have to think they have found R1b-M269 but didn't get any further downstream.

I had my hopes up, especially after his first email, but I'll take the facts over hope.

rms2
07-09-2018, 12:28 PM
You are in too much a hurry, the game has only just begun, we also expect good news . . .

I don't think I am in a hurry. I heard a rumor and attempted to confirm it. Those in too much of a hurry would run with the rumor.

GASKA
07-09-2018, 12:40 PM
I don't think I am in a hurry. I heard a rumor and attempted to confirm it. Those in too much of a hurry would run with the rumor.

You are right. We are in a hurry. Long Live San Fermín. Hemingway was right is the best party in the world. This morning a North-american has been about to meet our Bell Beakers ancestors.

24523

rms2
07-09-2018, 12:48 PM
You are in too much a hurry, the game has only just begun, we also expect good news . . .

It seems to me the game is pretty far along already, and expect might be too strong a word for those who think as you do.

R.Rocca
07-09-2018, 05:26 PM
It seems to me the game is pretty far along already, and expect might be too strong a word for those who think as you do.

After more than 10 years of debate, this seems to be the unbiased consensus:

The Front Runners:

Yamnaya > Steppe Bell Beaker (highly likely)
Yamnaya > Vucedol (moderately likely)
Yamnaya > Corded Ware > Steppe Bell Beaker (moderately likely)

Barely Breathing:

Yamnaya > Remedello/Rinaldone/Gaudo > Iberian Copper Age > Iberian Bell Beaker > Steppe Bell Beaker (aka Jean Manco's "Stelae People")

Six Feet Under:

Franco-Cantabrian Glacial Refuge > Iberian Neolithic > Iberian Copper Age > Bell Beaker
Caucasus > North African Route > Iberian Neolithic > Bell Beaker (aka AA Klyosov's Arbins)
Italian Alpine Glacial Refuge > Cardial Ware Neolithic > Iberian Copper Age > Bell Beaker (only ever proposed by one ultra-nationalist whose's name is best not mentioned)

GASKA
07-09-2018, 06:15 PM
After more than 10 years of debate, this seems to be the unbiased consensus:

The Front Runners:

Yamnaya > Steppe Bell Beaker (highly likely)
Yamnaya > Vucedol (moderately likely)
Yamnaya > Corded Ware > Steppe Bell Beaker (moderately likely)

Barely Breathing:

Yamnaya > Remedello/Rinaldone/Gaudo > Iberian Copper Age > Iberian Bell Beaker > Steppe Bell Beaker (aka Jean Manco's "Stelae People")

Six Feet Under:

Franco-Cantabrian Glacial Refuge > Iberian Neolithic > Iberian Copper Age > Bell Beaker
Caucasus > North African Route > Iberian Neolithic > Bell Beaker (aka AA Klyosov's Arbins)
Italian Alpine Glacial Refuge > Cardial Ware Neolithic > Iberian Copper Age > Bell Beaker (only ever proposed by one ultra-nationalist whose's name is best not mentioned)

So the front runners are the ones who think that the Yamnaya culture (3.300-2600 BC) is highly likely to result in what you call Steppe Bell Beakers?
Do you have anthropological, linguistic or archaelogical evidence that we don't Know, and that can sustain this theory?
All opinions are respectable, but since you don't have L11/P312 in the Yamnaya culture, I think it's risky to say so.
According to you, six feet under, is the Franco-Cantabrian refuge, a theory that, as everyone should Know, only indicates that the geographical area with the greatest potential to be the source of P312 is the South-Western part of France/ and North of Spain.

I wonder how it's possible that if P312 originated in the steppes, how it's possible that all of it's subclades are western?. U106, Df27, U152, L21 also came from the steppes?

Human mind is prodigious, and is capable of elaborating complicated theories with the minimum arguments. Sometimes these theories have turned out to be true, I hope that after 10 years fighting for them, you are right and we all have to congratulate you. I also hope that if we find P312 in Iberia or France (Pre 2.500 BC), you do the same.

En español hay un refrán muy bonito "Hasta el rabo, todo es toro", y ya que estamos celebrando San Fermín resulta apropiado.

R.Rocca
07-09-2018, 07:05 PM
Do you have anthropological, linguistic or archaelogical evidence that we don't Know, and that can sustain this theory?

You'll have to spend a few months reading my 3,000 posts.


All opinions are respectable, but since you don't have L11/P312 in the Yamnaya culture, I think it's risky to say so.

L23(xL51, xZ2103) and L23+Z2103 exists in Yamnaya. You cannot say the same about any other Copper Age culture anywhere else at the moment. So if you can stop kidding yourself for a minute, you are the one who is in a much riskier position.


According to you, six feet under, is the Franco-Cantabrian refuge, a theory that, as everyone should Know, only indicates that the geographical area with the greatest potential to be the source of P312 is the South-Western part of France/ and North of Spain.

The work "glacial" is there for a reason and is a very well known archaeological term known to all.


I wonder how it's possible that if P312 originated in the steppes, how it's possible that all of it's subclades are western?. U106, Df27, U152, L21 also came from the steppes?

Like I said U152+L2+ was 100% of Czech Bronze Age samples, today it is less than 1%. Just because the a Y-DNA group is not frequent now in Central Europe does not mean it wasn't in the past. And for the record, I didn't say P312 originated on the steppe, you did. I could see its expansion anywhere from the Upper Danube to the Low Countries.


Human mind is prodigious, and is capable of elaborating complicated theories with the minimum arguments. Sometimes these theories have turned out to be true, I hope that after 10 years fighting for them, you are right and we all have to congratulate you. I also hope that if we find P312 in Iberia or France (Pre 2.500 BC), you do the same.

Like I said, read my 3,000 posts and then find the same from prior forums where I went from being a proponent of the Franco-Cantabrian Glacial Refuge to the Italian Copper Age > Iberian Bell Beaker > Central European Bell Beaker to my current thinking. Fortunately I don't let me genetics influence me decisions and rather have them move with ancient DNA data which is the only thing that matters. It is something you fail to produce time and time again.

rms2
07-09-2018, 07:49 PM
Here are a few points to consider:

1. No R1b-M269 in Europe west of the Dniester prior to the Late Neolithic/Copper Age and the advent of Indo-European groups.

2. R1b-M269 and steppe dna arrive in Europe west of the Dniester at the same time and in apparent close association. In some places where Corded Ware prevailed, the association is between R1a-M417 and steppe dna.

2a. In Britain this correlation between R1b-M269 and steppe dna is so utterly striking and obvious at the close of the Neolithic as to be irrefutable and was evidently connected to a population replacement of 90% or more.

3. Europe west of the Dniester went from non-Indo-European in language, religion and culture in the Neolithic period to overwhelmingly Indo-European in language, religion and culture by the end of the Bronze Age (i.e., something BIG happened in the interim).

4. Number 3 above happened at the same time that R1b-M269 and steppe dna were introduced to Europe west of the Dniester and became prevalent there.

5. The simple, straightforward Spanish Model of Bell Beaker, in which that culture was said to have been born in Iberia and expanded eastward from there, proved to be false, as both the genetic and archaeological data have demonstrated.

R.Rocca
07-09-2018, 07:51 PM
The only requirement is that all drinks be served in bell beakers.

24515

My youngest son drew that picture.

Awesome! How is that not your new avatar?!?

rms2
07-09-2018, 08:01 PM
The early cultures in which R1b-M269 and its subclades have been found thus far are all of steppe Indo-European origin or steppe derived and accompanied by steppe dna:

Yamnaya
Vucedol
Corded Ware
Proto-Nagyrev
Kurgan Bell Beaker

rms2
07-09-2018, 08:02 PM
Awesome! How is that not your new avatar?!?

Thanks! I was thinking of switching to it.

GASKA
07-09-2018, 08:25 PM
You'll have to spend a few months reading my 3,000 posts.



L23(xL51, xZ2103) and L23+Z2103 exists in Yamnaya. You cannot say the same about any other Copper Age culture anywhere else at the moment. So if you can stop kidding yourself for a minute, you are the one who is in a much riskier position.



The work "glacial" is there for a reason and is a very well known archaeological term known to all.



Like I said U152+L2+ was 100% of Czech Bronze Age samples, today it is less than 1%. Just because the a Y-DNA group is not frequent now in Central Europe does not mean it wasn't in the past. And for the record, I didn't say P312 originated on the steppe, you did. I could see its expansion anywhere from the Upper Danube to the Low Countries.



Like I said, read my 3,000 posts and then find the same from prior forums where I went from being a proponent of the Franco-Cantabrian Glacial Refuge to the Italian Copper Age > Iberian Bell Beaker > Central European Bell Beaker to my current thinking. Fortunately I don't let me genetics influence me decisions and rather have them move with ancient DNA data which is the only thing that matters. It is something you fail to produce time and time again.

I have not read your 3.000 posts, but many of them, and I was asking you "if you have any new evidence that we don't know" (we already know the rest of old arguments)

L23 and Z2103 are not L11/P312 etc...... I'm glad you don't think that P312 originated on the steppes, many people in this thread believe it, and I sincerely believe that your opinion is more reliable.

Upper Danube is Baden-Württemberg, not too far from Saxony-Anhalt, nor from Alsace (Rhine valley). Currently it takes 15 hours from the Central Pyrenees to Baden-Württemberg (30 days walking in the chalcolitic). Determining the EXACT place of origin of P312 will be a practically impossible task.

People get confused if you talk about a "Glacial refuge" because the Würm Ice Age (last glacial period in the Alpine and Pyrenean regions) can be dated to the time about 115.000 to 11.700 years ago, long before P312 existed. Here we are talking about the European chalcolithic (3.200-2.000 BC), not about the paleolithic. So that Franco-Cantabrian refuge has nothing to do with the old Anglo-saxon theory of the Iberian refuge (R1b).

Everyone is influenced by their own genetics, race, prejudices...... we just have to see that in this thread, most people identify with their own flags and symbols.

etrusco
07-09-2018, 08:28 PM
Here are a few points to consider:

1. No R1b-M269 in Europe west of the Dniester prior to the Late Neolithic/Copper Age and the advent of Indo-European groups.

2. R1b-M269 and steppe dna arrive in Europe west of the Dniester at the same time and in apparent close association. In some places where Corded Ware prevailed, the association is between R1a-M417 and steppe dna.

2a. In Britain this correlation between R1b-M269 and steppe dna is so utterly striking and obvious at the close of the Neolithic as to be irrefutable and was evidently connected to a population replacement of 90% or more.

3. Europe west of the Dniester went from non-Indo-European in language, religion and culture in the Neolithic period to overwhelmingly Indo-European in language, religion and culture by the end of the Bronze Age (i.e., something BIG happened in the interim).

4. Number 3 above happened at the same time that R1b-M269 and steppe dna were introduced to Europe west of the Dniester and became prevalent there.

5. The simple, straightforward Spanish Model of Bell Beaker, in which that culture was said to have been born in Iberia and expanded eastward from there, proved to be false, as both the genetic and archaeological data have demonstrated.

I basically agree with points number 1-2-4-5 ( even if as for the bell beaker package it is not all connected with r1b folks and was present in copper age cultures in mainland europe before 2800/2700 BC)

I would be more cautious as for point 3. West of the Dnieper went from non IE to IE………hmmm well Sredni Stog is considered even by many steppist to be PIE ( many place the homeland there) and it was a culture more strictly connected with CT…
I remind you that the world of the "steppe" and the world of farmers west of them were deeply connected for at least 1500 years and the farmers triggered most of the cultural genesis of the steppe. I think you can read also my posts and the papers I linked that as for now quite nobody has questioned AFAIK. So the Dneper was not a border that was " dramatically" crossed by a hoard of invaders willing to destroy and erase everything on their path. I think we are too much influenced by movies and epic romances. Reality is the cultural package the steppe people show while reaching mainland europe was already present in the farmers world. We have Ydna connected with steppe that after 2800/2700 starts to take the lead.
But in archeology and culture we do not see as for now a dramatic change. Also I'm much curious to know how much time it took for steppe Ydna to became majority in europe because that is crucial ( 100, 200, 500 years ?). So steppe people could have changed the language but also not or IE was born as a blending of the two.
We'll see what happens.

GASKA
07-09-2018, 08:54 PM
I basically agree with points number 1-2-4-5 ( even if as for the bell beaker package it is not all connected with r1b folks and was present in copper age cultures in mainland europe before 2800/2700 BC)

I would be more cautious as for point 3. West of the Dnieper went from non IE to IE………hmmm well Sredni Stog is considered even by many steppist to be PIE ( many place the homeland there) and it was a culture more strictly connected with CT…
I remind you that the world of the "steppe" and the world of farmers west of them were deeply connected for at least 1500 years and the farmers triggered most of the cultural genesis of the steppe. I think you can read also my posts and the papers I linked that as for now quite nobody has questioned AFAIK. So the Dneper was not a border that was " dramatically" crossed by a hoard of invaders willing to destroy and erase everything on their path. I think we are too much influenced by movies and epic romances. Reality is the cultural package the steppe people show while reaching mainland europe was already present in the farmers world. We have Ydna connected with steppe that after 2800/2700 starts to take the lead.
But in archeology and culture we do not see as for now a dramatic change. Also I'm much curious to know how much time it took for steppe Ydna to became majority in europe because that is crucial ( 100, 200, 500 years ?). So steppe people could have changed the language but also not or IE was born as a blending of the two.
We'll see what happens.

If the BB package was present in copper age cultures in mainland Europe before 2.800-2.700 BC, means that it has nothing to do with the steppes.

You and other steppists need to explain why is L11/P312 missing from Ukraine (4.000-2.500 BC), when Latvia is full of R1b P297 lines dating 7.000-5.000 BC.
How exactly is it impossible for Baltic hunter gatherers to give rise to the r1b in Yamnaya culture or Bell Beaker culture?
How might this be consistent (Latvian P297 samples), with Gimbutas hypothesis of people moving out from the steppe into Europe after 4.400 BC?

etrusco
07-09-2018, 09:34 PM
If the BB package was present in copper age cultures in mainland Europe before 2.800-2.700 BC, means that it has nothing to do with the steppes.

You and other steppists need to explain why is L11/P312 missing from Ukraine (4.000-2.500 BC), when Latvia is full of R1b P297 lines dating 7.000-5.000 BC.
How exactly is it impossible for Baltic hunter gatherers to give rise to the r1b in Yamnaya culture or Bell Beaker culture?
How might this be consistent (Latvian P297 samples), with Gimbutas hypothesis of people moving out from the steppe into Europe after 4.400 BC?

I'm not a steppist GASKA ( nor I'm an "anatolist" or a south caucasian) but you are right if R1b P-312 is in Ekaterinovsky cape why we do not see its offsprings in the steppe so far. Why no clear trail of its subclades from the Volga till central europe. But anyway one can say the western steppe so far has not been sampled enough . I do not know much about the baltic hunter gathers.

rms2
07-09-2018, 11:09 PM
I basically agree with points number 1-2-4-5 ( even if as for the bell beaker package it is not all connected with r1b folks and was present in copper age cultures in mainland europe before 2800/2700 BC)

I would be more cautious as for point 3 . . .

Surely you jest. That Europe west of the Dniester went from non-Indo-European to Indo-European by the end of the Bronze Age is one of the surest points I posted.

Let's see anyone explain that one away.

rms2
07-09-2018, 11:14 PM
If the BB package was present in copper age cultures in mainland Europe before 2.800-2.700 BC, means that it has nothing to do with the steppes.

But clearly it wasn't, especially not in Iberia.

If one adds to the package R1b-P312 and steppe dna, it becomes even clearer that it wasn't.



You and other steppists need to explain why is L11/P312 missing from Ukraine (4.000-2.500 BC), when Latvia is full of R1b P297 lines dating 7.000-5.000 BC.
How exactly is it impossible for Baltic hunter gatherers to give rise to the r1b in Yamnaya culture or Bell Beaker culture?
How might this be consistent (Latvian P297 samples), with Gimbutas hypothesis of people moving out from the steppe into Europe after 4.400 BC?

The P297 in Latvia probably came down Russian river valleys to arrive there.

Thus far we have very very little ancient y-dna from Ukraine. We have loads of ancient y-dna from Iberia, however. No R1b-P312 there before the arrival of Kurgan Bell Beaker. All the ancient R1b-P312 anywhere has steppe dna.

rms2
07-09-2018, 11:35 PM
I'm not a steppist GASKA ( nor I'm an "anatolist" or a south caucasian) but you are right if R1b P-312 is in Ekaterinovsky cape why we do not see its offsprings in the steppe so far. Why no clear trail of its subclades from the Volga till central europe. But anyway one can say the western steppe so far has not been sampled enough . I do not know much about the baltic hunter gathers.

Why aren't you asking yourself why we don't see R1b-P312 in Neolithic farmers anywhere then? We have hardly any ancient dna from the western steppe and none from the thousands of kurgans in the Carpathian basin but an accumulating boatload of stuff from elsewhere in Europe. Where's the P312?

It first shows up in Kurgan Bell Beaker with steppe dna, not in early Iberian Bell Beaker, where it should have been if the geniuses who believe in the Spanish Model were right.

We also have R1b-L11xP312,U106 in Proto-Nagyrev in Hungary, and Proto-Nagyrev represents the transition period from Vucedol to Nagyrev.

Then we have a friggin' crapload of R1b-P312 and steppe dna in Kurgan Bell Beaker, which is clearly derived from Yamnaya, just as Gimbutas said it was.

Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess, p. 104:



The Bell Beaker complex, an offshoot of the Vucedol bloc (more precisely of the Zok-Mako group in Hungary) continued Kurgan characteristics. The Bell Beaker of the second half of the 3rd millennium BC were vagabondic horse riders and archers in much the same way as their uncles and cousins, the Corded people of northern Europe and Catacomb-grave people of the North Pontic region. Their spread over central and western Europe to the British Isles and Spain as well as the Mediterranean islands terminates the period of expansion and destruction . . .

Ibid, page 390:



The Bell Beaker culture of western Europe which diffused between 2500 and 2100 B.C. between central Europe, the British Isles, and the Iberian Peninsula, could not have arisen in a vacuum. The mobile horse-riding and warrior people who buried their dead in Yamna type kurgans certainly could not have developed out of any west European culture. We must ask what sort of ecology and ideology created these people, and where are the roots of the specific Bell Beaker equipment and their burial rites. In my view, the Bell Beaker cultural elements derive from Vucedol and Kurgan (Late Yamna) traditions.


Hard to read that quote above and not realize that Gimbutas was totally vindicated by Olalde et al.

Ibid, page 391:



The striking similarity of burial practices ties the Bell Beaker complex to the Kurgan (Late Yamna) tradition.

Ibid, page 401:



4. The warlike and horse-riding Bell Beaker people of the middle and second half of the third millennium B.C., who diffused over western Europe, are likely to have originated from an amalgam of remnants of the Vucedol people with the Yamna colonists (after Wave No. 3) in Yugoslavia and Hungary. Their parent culture is called Vinkovci-Samogyvar. This was the largest and last outmigration, from east-central Europe into western Europe, up to the west Mediterranean and the British Isles, before the onset of a more stable period, and the formation of Bronze Age cultural units.


There's more, but I'll stop there.

Here are a couple of KBB kurgans, which are hardly distinguishable from Yamnaya kurgans.

24539 24541

rms2
07-09-2018, 11:48 PM
One thing to remember about Gimbutas is that she wasn't an armchair warrior sitting in front of a computer with a beer at her elbow. She was an archaeologist who actually participated in many of the digs she refers to in her writings.

dsm
07-09-2018, 11:52 PM
I don't think I am in a hurry. I heard a rumor and attempted to confirm it. Those in too much of a hurry would run with the rumor.

Know how it feels - am just off to rework the main page of a FTDNA project to remove all my hints that a 'researcher' had pinpointed what could be the oldest S1194 find, in an ancient burial around Bohemia. Am regretting taking the data that 'researcher' published as having any usefulness at all. Now have had to back away from it. :(

D

dsm
07-10-2018, 12:07 AM
So the front runners are the ones who think that the Yamnaya culture (3.300-2600 BC) is highly likely to result in what you call Steppe Bell Beakers?
Do you have anthropological, linguistic or archaelogical evidence that we don't Know, and that can sustain this theory?
All opinions are respectable, but since you don't have L11/P312 in the Yamnaya culture, I think it's risky to say so.
According to you, six feet under, is the Franco-Cantabrian refuge, a theory that, as everyone should Know, only indicates that the geographical area with the greatest potential to be the source of P312 is the South-Western part of France/ and North of Spain.

I wonder how it's possible that if P312 originated in the steppes, how it's possible that all of it's subclades are western?. U106, Df27, U152, L21 also came from the steppes?

Human mind is prodigious, and is capable of elaborating complicated theories with the minimum arguments. Sometimes these theories have turned out to be true, I hope that after 10 years fighting for them, you are right and we all have to congratulate you. I also hope that if we find P312 in Iberia or France (Pre 2.500 BC), you do the same.

En español hay un refrán muy bonito "Hasta el rabo, todo es toro", y ya que estamos celebrando San Fermín resulta apropiado.



The human mind is prodigious - Amen!

Some people apply logic and analysis to available evidence and reach conclusions. Some people always understand that a conclusion is only as good as the current and available evidence. As new evidence and data arrives, evaluate it and its credibility then asses it and if required revise existing conclusions. Adapt.

People who have conclusions then seek to adjust, or only seek conforming, evidence to match their conclusions are inevitably going nowhere.

rms2
07-10-2018, 12:11 AM
Remember too what I posted from page 122 of Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans a few posts back:



With regard to Proto-Indo-European weaponry, the most unequivocal reconstructions concern the bow, bowstring and arrow, all of which support the existence of archery within the Proto-Indo-European community.


Kurgan Bell Beaker came by its emphasis on archery naturally. No need to look to Iberia for that.

Harrison and Heyd, The Transformation of Europe in the Third Millennium BC: the example of ‘Le Petit-Chasseur I + III’ (Sion, Valais, Switzerland), page 187:



There are no wrist-guards found with early Beaker graves in northern Italy, southern France, or the early maritime beaker contexts in Iberia (see chapter 9.3). Only in the Bell Beaker East Group do they occur in a few early graves (Heyd 2001).


Budzhak burial (Yamnaya subculture, perhaps the Pre-Beaker culture) with archery equipment:

24542

Notice the stone-lined cist (like Beaker, the crouched posture on the left side, like Beaker, and the archery equipment, like Beaker).

Budzhak beakers and Bell Beaker beakers. Ignore the obvious similarities, if you can.

24543 24544

dsm
07-10-2018, 12:50 AM
Here are a few points to consider:

1. No R1b-M269 in Europe west of the Dniester prior to the Late Neolithic/Copper Age and the advent of Indo-European groups.

2. R1b-M269 and steppe dna arrive in Europe west of the Dniester at the same time and in apparent close association. In some places where Corded Ware prevailed, the association is between R1a-M417 and steppe dna.

2a. In Britain this correlation between R1b-M269 and steppe dna is so utterly striking and obvious at the close of the Neolithic as to be irrefutable and was evidently connected to a population replacement of 90% or more.

3. Europe west of the Dniester went from non-Indo-European in language, religion and culture in the Neolithic period to overwhelmingly Indo-European in language, religion and culture by the end of the Bronze Age (i.e., something BIG happened in the interim).

4. Number 3 above happened at the same time that R1b-M269 and steppe dna were introduced to Europe west of the Dniester and became prevalent there.

5. The simple, straightforward Spanish Model of Bell Beaker, in which that culture was said to have been born in Iberia and expanded eastward from there, proved to be false, as both the genetic and archaeological data have demonstrated.


Excellent core points and very concise. One might argue self-evident when we add in the PIE evidence.

Even if someone at some time manages to convince us that prior to PIE evolving in the Steppes, it had originated in Anatolia or Armenia or Nth Iran. If (a big if) the latter were to be accepted - IMHO, it wouldn't in anyway change the sequence of events we understand today as simply put in these very helpful points.

rms2
07-10-2018, 12:58 AM
Excellent core points and very concise. One might argue self-evident when we add in the PIE evidence.

Thanks. Seems pretty obvious to me, as well.



Even if someone at some time manages to convince us that prior to PIE evolving in the Steppes, it had originated in Anatolia or Armenia or Nth Iran. If (a big if) the latter were to be accepted - IMHO, it wouldn't in anyway change the sequence of events we understand today as simply put in these very helpful points.

There is no way the IE Urheimat is south of the Caucasus. The evidence from historical linguistics is totally against it, and the IE Urheimat is a linguistic issue, not a genetic issue. If at any time the genetics appear to be against the Pontic-Caspian steppe Urheimat, it only means we are either misinterpreting the genetic evidence or we just don't yet have enough of it from the right sources.

Bas
07-10-2018, 02:32 AM
An interesting paper about Bell Beakers in Saxony Anhalt and their interaction with old europe culture....as I see sun cult in IE historical cultures comes likely from the farmers.

https://indo-european.eu/2018/07/when-bell-beakers-mixed-with-eneolithic-europeans-pommelte-and-the-europe-wide-concept-of-sanctuary/

I also wonder how much the Celtic worship of water, water sacrifices, depositing weapons in water comes from the TRB culture-who are said to have done the same.

dsm
07-10-2018, 04:17 AM
I also wonder how much the Celtic worship of water, water sacrifices, depositing weapons in water comes from the TRB culture-who are said to have done the same.

Etrusco,
That is a good read. Thanks (I hadn't seen your original post but managed to find it in the above reply from Bas).

Thanks D

dsm
07-10-2018, 05:01 AM
My new motto.

"For those of us who love eating Curros (Churros), we must always remember to stuff them in our mouths and not our ears".

peternorth
07-10-2018, 05:22 AM
Here are a few points to consider:

1. No R1b-M269 in Europe west of the Dniester prior to the Late Neolithic/Copper Age and the advent of Indo-European groups.

2. R1b-M269 and steppe dna arrive in Europe west of the Dniester at the same time and in apparent close association. In some places where Corded Ware prevailed, the association is between R1a-M417 and steppe dna.

2a. In Britain this correlation between R1b-M269 and steppe dna is so utterly striking and obvious at the close of the Neolithic as to be irrefutable and was evidently connected to a population replacement of 90% or more.

3. Europe west of the Dniester went from non-Indo-European in language, religion and culture in the Neolithic period to overwhelmingly Indo-European in language, religion and culture by the end of the Bronze Age (i.e., something BIG happened in the interim).

4. Number 3 above happened at the same time that R1b-M269 and steppe dna were introduced to Europe west of the Dniester and became prevalent there.

5. The simple, straightforward Spanish Model of Bell Beaker, in which that culture was said to have been born in Iberia and expanded eastward from there, proved to be false, as both the genetic and archaeological data have demonstrated.



Love the graphic!

Romilius
07-10-2018, 06:25 AM
Why aren't you asking yourself why we don't see R1b-P312 in Neolithic farmers anywhere then? We have hardly any ancient dna from the western steppe and none from the thousands of kurgans in the Carpathian basin but an accumulating boatload of stuff from elsewhere in Europe. Where's the P312?

It first shows up in Kurgan Bell Beaker with steppe dna, not in early Iberian Bell Beaker, where it should have been if the geniuses who believe in the Spanish Model were right.

We also have R1b-L11xP312,U106 in Proto-Nagyrev in Hungary, and Proto-Nagyrev represents the transition period from Vucedol to Nagyrev.

Then we have a friggin' crapload of R1b-P312 and steppe dna in Kurgan Bell Beaker, which is clearly derived from Yamnaya, just as Gimbutas said it was.

Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess, p. 104:



Ibid, page 390:



Hard to read that quote above and not realize that Gimbutas was totally vindicated by Olalde et al.

Ibid, page 391:



Ibid, page 401:



There's more, but I'll stop there.

Here are a couple of KBB kurgans, which are hardly distinguishable from Yamnaya kurgans.

24539 24541

Have we got any Y-DNA result from those kurgans in pictures?

GASKA
07-10-2018, 08:08 AM
I'm not a steppist GASKA ( nor I'm an "anatolist" or a south caucasian) but you are right if R1b P-312 is in Ekaterinovsky cape why we do not see its offsprings in the steppe so far. Why no clear trail of its subclades from the Volga till central europe. But anyway one can say the western steppe so far has not been sampled enough . I do not know much about the baltic hunter gathers.

Caro amico Lombardo- One of the reasons why I started participating in this thread was because I didn't agree with the way you were being treated for saying such OBVIOUS things like "What you call Yamnaya package does not from the steppe.....it was already in late neolithic copper age in Central Europe" or "Just we have to free ourselves from the mental prison that lead us to think that everything must come from the east and the steppe". I guess you have not changed your mind because it's absolutely true what you said . They will try to deny it repeatedly but they will never have enough arguments to prove otherwise.

I also think that you are the person who knows the most about linguistics in this thread and I think you should explain more in detail what you think about expansion of IE.

Our friends know that the existence of P297 in the Baltic countries (7.000-5.000 BC), is incompatible with the theory of Gimbutas, and that is why they never mention it, but the truth is that R1B (in its most varied forms) expanded throughout Europe at least 12.000 BC. R1b P297 appears to have born further north (within Europe).

A direct Yamnaya to BB east scenario is UNLIKELY, because the Hungarian BBs were not P312. Vucedol and Baden culture are too genetically diverse to have been the origin of P312.

The idea of that a massive open space like the steppe was somehow hermetically sealed or fenced off with NO Dna at all getting in or out is a grossly mistake.
A compact migration of R1b L23 (L51) from the steppes to Central Europe is totally impossible.
R1b-L23-Nomadic steppe people? They were in the steppe for 1.300 years or more (since the formation of L23) and never moved in any direction?

Un saludo

jeanL
07-10-2018, 09:17 AM
But clearly it wasn't, especially not in Iberia.

If one adds to the package R1b-P312 and steppe dna, it becomes even clearer that it wasn't.



The P297 in Latvia probably came down Russian river valleys to arrive there.

Thus far we have very very little ancient y-dna from Ukraine. We have loads of ancient y-dna from Iberia, however. No R1b-P312 there before the arrival of Kurgan Bell Beaker. All the ancient R1b-P312 anywhere has steppe dna.

That's a false statement! We have well over 25 ancient sequences from Ukraine within a timespan of over 3000 years covering the early Neolithic to the timeframe of 2800 BC. In fact; we have far more ancient y-DNA sequenced from Ukraine that from Iberia and far more than from France. That doesn't mean that R1b-P312 is likely to be found in Iberia; but at least let's not go around making false statements.

ffoucart
07-10-2018, 09:21 AM
Just a few points:
- an origin 12000 years ago has nothing to do with the question at hand, nor to the origin of P312,
- P297 falls in the same remark: far too old to have any significance on P312,
- L51 is present in BBs from Hungary at an early stage.

rms2
07-10-2018, 11:25 AM
That's a false statement! We have well over 25 ancient sequences from Ukraine within a timespan of over 3000 years covering the early Neolithic to the timeframe of 2800 BC. In fact; we have far more ancient y-DNA sequenced from Ukraine that from Iberia and far more than from France. That doesn't mean that R1b-P312 is likely to be found in Iberia; but at least let's not go around making false statements.

It wasn't a false statement. It was an error. What I meant was we have very little ancient y-dna from Ukraine in the fourth and third millennia BC, only one from Yamnaya in Ukraine, as I recall, and none from other relevant cultures there like Mikhailovka, Kemi Oba, Budzhak, etc.

Almost all the ancient y-dna we have from Ukraine comes from one site, Dereivka, c. 5500-4800 BC.

We have five from Cucuteni-Tripolye, as well: four G2a and one E.

For Iberia, in addition to the ancient dna we have from papers published before 2017, we have the evidence from Olalde et al, Lipson et al, and the unpublished samples from both Reich's and Bradley's labs mentioned by Reich in his recent book, which he cited to support his contention that Iberia experienced a 30% population turnover and a 90% y-dna replacement between the end of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age.

I realize those kinds of things induce powerful butt hurts that predispose some to leap on any little thing I say, exaggerations and exclamation points flying. I am grateful for the reminder to be more meticulous and careful in my posts.

rms2
07-10-2018, 11:32 AM
Have we got any Y-DNA result from those kurgans in pictures?

I don't believe so.

Webb
07-10-2018, 12:40 PM
24558

An example of my brother’s work. He said he would make the beakers but it may not be until later this year as he accepted a position teaching art at a school in Virginia Beach and has to report mid August.

rms2
07-10-2018, 12:40 PM
Caro amico Lombardo- One of the reasons why I started participating in this thread was because I didn't agree with the way you were being treated for saying such OBVIOUS things like "What you call Yamnaya package does not from the steppe.....it was already in late neolithic copper age in Central Europe" or "Just we have to free ourselves from the mental prison that lead us to think that everything must come from the east and the steppe". I guess you have not changed your mind because it's absolutely true what you said . They will try to deny it repeatedly but they will never have enough arguments to prove otherwise.

The Yamnaya package does not come from the steppe? Because it was already in late neolithic copper age in Central Europe?

When do you think many western Yamnaya people moved from the steppe to Europe west of the Dniester?

And what person not currently confined to a mental institution thinks "the Yamnaya package does not come from the steppe"?



I also think that you are the person who knows the most about linguistics in this thread and I think you should explain more in detail what you think about expansion of IE.

Excuse me if I am mistaken, but, as I recall, etrusco has expressed a preference for Renfrew's Neolithic farmer hypothesis. If he actually still believes that, his grasp of IE linguistics is doubtful.

I am no linguist and have never claimed to be, but I know enough to know Renfrew was wrong.



Our friends know that the existence of P297 in the Baltic countries (7.000-5.000 BC), is incompatible with the theory of Gimbutas, and that is why they never mention it, but the truth is that R1B (in its most varied forms) expanded throughout Europe at least 12.000 BC. R1b P297 appears to have born further north (within Europe).

I've mentioned it a number of times. As ffoucart said above, it's not really relevant, so it doesn't come up all that often.

Paleolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers wandered widely across Eurasia in search of game. If R1b-P297 was born in Europe west of the Dniester (and Latvia is actually east of the Dniester), it doesn't show up there subsequently until the Late Neolithic/Copper Age with steppe and steppe-derived people and accompanied by steppe dna. It doesn't show up in the Neolithic farmers of Old Europe or in Iberia during the Neolithic or among early Iberian Bell Beaker people.

Some Stone Age hunter-gatherers in western Europe like La Braña and Cheddar Man belonged to y-dna haplogroup C. In subsequent ages C practically vanished from Europe. Instead, it became associated with peoples in northern and eastern Asia, the Americas, and Oceania.

Similarly, upstream R1b not ancestral to P297 has turned up in a couple of old European hunter-gatherers - Villabruna, Iboussières. Some R1b-V88, which is L389-, has turned up at the Iron Gates and in a few Neolithic samples; but R1b-P297 is missing from Europe west of the Dniester until it shows up in groups thought to be responsible for the spread of Indo-European language and culture.



A direct Yamnaya to BB east scenario is UNLIKELY, because the Hungarian BBs were not P312. Vucedol and Baden culture are too genetically diverse to have been the origin of P312.

I won't behave like jeanL and leap upon that, froth foaming from my rabid lips, to exclaim, "That's a false statement!"

Instead, I will merely say that you are mistaken. I2365 from the Budapest-Békásmegyer site was R1b-L2, and a number of the other Hungarian BB's were R1b-M269. In addition, two Proto-Nagyrev samples from Hungary were R1b-M269, one of them, I7043, R1b-L11xP312,U106.



The idea of that a massive open space like the steppe was somehow hermetically sealed or fenced off with NO Dna at all getting in or out is a grossly mistake.

Who is claiming that? Obviously some ENF got in, some CHG got in, and a whole lot of steppe dna and R1b-M269 got out.

It is well known that Gimbutas posited three Kurgan waves of immigration into Europe west of the Dniester:

From The Civilization of the Goddess, page 352:



The Kurgan tradition became manifest in Old European territories during three waves of infiltration: I at c. 4400-4300 BC, II at c. 3500 BC, and III soon after 3000 BC. This chronology does not represent the evolution of a single group but of a number of various steppe peoples who shared a common tradition, extending over broad temporal and spacial parameters. Kurgan I people were from the Volga steppe; Kurgan II, who were culturally more advanced, developed in the North Pontic area between the Lower Dniester and the Caucasus mountains; Kurgan III people were again from the Volga steppe.

Russian archeologists use the terms "early Yamna" for Kurgan I; "Mikhailovka I" or "Maikop" culture for Kurgan II; and "late Yamna" for Kurgan III.


I am not saying Gimbutas was right in everything she said, but she was mostly right, and it is generally known there are steppe pastoralist kurgans in the Carpathian basin and elsewhere that predate Yamnaya.

In his part of the article, Discussion: Are the Origins of Indo-European Languages Explained by the Migration of the Yamnaya Culture to the West? (https://tinyurl.com/y7rxhu59), Russian archaeologist Leo Klejn mentions those early steppe arrivals that predate Yamnaya:



The cultural affinities of barrow burials in the Danube basin

I have read the outstanding archaeological works by Volker Heyd with great interest. In a recent work in co-authorship with Frı̑nculeasa and Preda (Frı̑nculeasa et al., 2015) he summarizes the results of many years’ excavations of barrows in the basin of the Danube. The results are extremely important. The early date of some burials on the steppe (last third of the fourth millennium BC) is substantiated. Yet Heyd and his co-authors have shown that these early barrow burials (as distinct from those of the third millennium, similar in some ways to Yamnaya burials) are significantly different: pit graves are not rectangular but oval, skeletons are not on their backs with bent legs but curled up on their sides or supine, ochre is scanty, and ceramics are not round-bottomed (as on the Dnieper or Don) but are of Balkan type.

By contemporary Russian standards, this must be characterized as another, separate culture, not Yamnaya. Among Eneolithic steppe cultures classified by Rassamakin and Kotova in the Ukraine, some are very similar to the Lower Danube cultures (Lower Mikhailovka, Kvityana): barrows, oval pit graves, skeletons supine or lying curled on their sides, and cromlechs. The culture in question was one of these, and its possible connection with Yamnaya (kurgan, what else?) is too limited.





A compact migration of R1b L23 (L51) from the steppes to Central Europe is totally impossible.

I'm not sure what you mean by "compact", but it is pretty obvious that R1b-L51 (rubric for whichever of its subclades were extant) came from the steppe.

Think about how often you and those who think like you have been wrong since the days when the FC LGM Refuge was the consensus. Shouldn't that give you pause in this case, as well?



R1b-L23-Nomadic steppe people? They were in the steppe for 1.300 years or more (since the formation of L23) and never moved in any direction?

. . .

See what I wrote about Gimbutas' three waves above. In addition, Afanasievo evidently split off from Repin about 3700 BC and headed for the Altai, perhaps giving rise to the Tocharians and their language.

R1b-L23 had plenty to do spreading out on the vast steppe, perfecting their steppe pastoralist way of life, and building sufficient numbers to be able to expand into Europe when the time came.

Webb
07-10-2018, 12:44 PM
24559

A few more examples. Please open the photos in a new window!!! I had to make the smaller to upload them and they look distorted until you open them up in a new window!!!!

rms2
07-10-2018, 01:43 PM
Speaking of Latvia and its R1b-P297 hunter-gatherers of about ten thousand years ago, which those of us who think R1b-L51 came from the steppe supposedly avoid discussing, please note where Latvia is on a map of Europe. Also note the river (at least one) running northwest into the Baltic from what is currently Belarus through Latvia. Of course, no prehistoric hunter-gatherers ever wandered northwest down a river valley hunting for game and catching fish along the way.

24560

Suppose for a moment P297 was actually born in Latvia (according to YFull at least 13,300 years ago). How would that stop P297+ men from making it onto the Pontic-Caspian steppe, not all that far to the south, by about 4500 BC, when PIE was coming into being?

Of course, I don't think P297 was actually born in Latvia. I don't know where it was born, but I suspect someplace on the Eurasian steppe.

rms2
07-10-2018, 03:21 PM
YFull shows P297 as formed about 15,600 years ago with a tmrca of 13,300 years ago. The oldest of those P297 Latvian hunter-gatherers dates to about 9,000 years ago, so well after the tmrca of P297.

It's not hard to imagine P297 being born on the Eurasian steppe circa 13,300 years ago, then some of its wandering hunter-gatherer representatives migrating north up the Volga River valley (or the Dnieper) and west down the Zapadnaya Dvina-Daugava River valley into Latvia in time to be there over 4,000 years later.

24564

GASKA
07-10-2018, 04:30 PM
The Yamnaya package does not come from the steppe? Because it was already in late neolithic copper age in Central Europe?

When do you think many western Yamnaya people moved from the steppe to Europe west of the Dniester?

And what person not currently confined to a mental institution thinks "the Yamnaya package does not come from the steppe"?



Excuse me if I am mistaken, but, as I recall, etrusco has expressed a preference for Renfrew's Neolithic farmer hypothesis. If he actually still believes that, his grasp of IE linguistics is doubtful.

I am no linguist and have never claimed to be, but I know enough to know Renfrew was wrong.



I've mentioned it a number of times. As ffoucart said above, it's not really relevant, so it doesn't come up all that often.

Paleolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers wandered widely across Eurasia in search of game. If R1b-P297 was born in Europe west of the Dniester (and Latvia is actually east of the Dniester), it doesn't show up there subsequently until the Late Neolithic/Copper Age with steppe and steppe-derived people and accompanied by steppe dna. It doesn't show up in the Neolithic farmers of Old Europe or in Iberia during the Neolithic or among early Iberian Bell Beaker people.

Some Stone Age hunter-gatherers in western Europe like La Braña and Cheddar Man belonged to y-dna haplogroup C. In subsequent ages C practically vanished from Europe. Instead, it became associated with peoples in northern and eastern Asia, the Americas, and Oceania.

Similarly, upstream R1b not ancestral to P297 has turned up in a couple of old European hunter-gatherers - Villabruna, Iboussières. Some R1b-V88, which is L389-, has turned up at the Iron Gates and in a few Neolithic samples; but R1b-P297 is missing from Europe west of the Dniester until it shows up in groups thought to be responsible for the spread of Indo-European language and culture.



I won't behave like jeanL and leap upon that, froth foaming from my rabid lips, to exclaim, "That's a false statement!"

Instead, I will merely say that you are mistaken. I2365 from the Budapest-Békásmegyer site was R1b-L2, and a number of the other Hungarian BB's were R1b-M269. In addition, two Proto-Nagyrev samples from Hungary were R1b-M269, one of them, I7043, R1b-L11xP312,U106.



Who is claiming that? Obviously some ENF got in, some CHG got in, and a whole lot of steppe dna and R1b-M269 got out.

It is well known that Gimbutas posited three Kurgan waves of immigration into Europe west of the Dniester:

From The Civilization of the Goddess, page 352:



I am not saying Gimbutas was right in everything she said, but she was mostly right, and it is generally known there are steppe pastoralist kurgans in the Carpathian basin and elsewhere that predate Yamnaya.

In his part of the article, Discussion: Are the Origins of Indo-European Languages Explained by the Migration of the Yamnaya Culture to the West? (https://tinyurl.com/y7rxhu59), Russian archaeologist Leo Klejn mentions those early steppe arrivals that predate Yamnaya:






I'm not sure what you mean by "compact", but it is pretty obvious that R1b-L51 (rubric for whichever of its subclades were extant) came from the steppe.

Think about how often you and those who think like you have been wrong since the days when the FC LGM Refuge was the consensus. Shouldn't that give you pause in this case, as well?



See what I wrote about Gimbutas' three waves above. In addition, Afanasievo evidently split off from Repin about 3700 BC and headed for the Altai, perhaps giving rise to the Tocharians and their language.

R1b-L23 had plenty to do spreading out on the vast steppe, perfecting their steppe pastoralist way of life, and building sufficient numbers to be able to expand into Europe when the time came.

1.- What some archaelogists call "Yamnaya package" existed in Central and Western Europe rather than in the steppes.I think we have already shown it enough times: for example, can you tell me which is the oldest wristguard found in the steppes?. You think it's older than those found in Iberia?
2.- I think etrusco knows more about linguistics than we do.
3.-In other words, you have Europe full of R1b from at least the mesolithic (12.000 BC)- Italy (Villabruna), France (Iboussieres), Spain (Els Trocs, Bisaurri, Cerdanyola), Balkans (Iron Gates), Germany (Blatterhole), Latvia....... Even P297, who is the father of R1b-M269 is documented outside the steppes, and yet you want us to agree that M269-L23-L51-L11 and P312 have their origin in the steppes?. And that they remained hidden there until P312 decide to leave and became a Bell Beaker? You know that the odds of that happening are minimal.
4.- You also know that the Hungarian Bell Beakers are not exactly an example of R1b, because they are mostly I2a and G2, which is surprising being so close to the steppes. And do not ever tell us that the steppe bell beakers recruited natives farmers because no one can believe it. And, they are NO OLDER than Bavarian BB samples. Don't you think it should be the other way around? And, if they came from the steppes the bavarians should be younger?
5.- If the steppe was not a closed place, you sincerely believe that the 3 waves of Gimbutas were made up of men with the same Y-haplogroup? I think the answer is in the CW culture.
6.- You also know that Yamnaya was not genetically uniform and that has not been found L51 L11 or p312. What happened with Yamnaya R1b Z2013 and Q ?. They stayed in the steppes?. Does that mind that if we finally find L51 in Yamnaya, only he traveled to the West?

rms2
07-10-2018, 06:01 PM
1.- What some archaelogists call "Yamnaya package" existed in Central and Western Europe rather than in the steppes.I think we have already shown it enough times: for example, can you tell me which is the oldest wristguard found in the steppes?. You think it's older than those found in Iberia?

You seem to think the Yamnaya package is limited to wristguards. It's not.

24566

The Yamnaya Package did not come from central and/or western Europe, just as Yamnaya itself did not come from central or western Europe.

As far as wristguards go, this is from page 17 of the Olalde et al Supplementary Information, describing the very Yamnaya-like Kurgan Bell Beaker mound of El Virgazal:



El Virgazal is a non-megalithic burial mound built in the later third millennium BCE, well into the Copper Age. It is located in the margin of a highland, 300 m above the Rudrón river, one of the tributaries of the Ebro, offering an extensive view and a 360º panorama. The mound is circular; 12 m in diameter and 1 m high. A massive limestone block in the eastern area of the mound stands upright as a milestone or a stela.

The burial contained three stone wristguards. Archer's wristguards are relatively uncommon in Iberian BB and much more common in non-Iberian BB burials.


This is from page 187 of Harrison and Heyd (2007):



There are no wrist-guards found with early Beaker graves in northern Italy, southern France, or the early maritime beaker contexts in Iberia (see chapter 9.3). Only in the Bell Beaker East Group do they occur in a few early graves (Heyd 2001). Otherwise, we see many of them from the middle Bell Beaker period onwards, spreading widely in the EBA to Italy, France and Spain.



2.- I think etrusco knows more about linguistics than we do.

Not trying to put him down, but if he still thinks Renfrew is right, then evidently he knows a lot that isn't true.



3.-In other words, you have Europe full of R1b from at least the mesolithic (12.000 BC)- Italy (Villabruna), France (Iboussieres)

L754 and not L389 at a time when L389 and perhaps even P297 were already in existence, so not ancestral to M269. Dead ends.

Europe was hardly "full of R1b". Other than R1b-V88, which is L389- and separated from the line leading to M269 17,000 years ago, where is it in Neolithic Europe west of the Dniester?



Spain (Els Trocs, Bisaurri, Cerdanyola), Balkans (Iron Gates), Germany (Blatterhole),

V88, which, as has been mentioned many times already, is L389- and separated from the line leading to M269 and its descendants 17,000 years ago.



Latvia....... Even P297, who is the father of R1b-M269 is documented outside the steppes,

You do know where Latvia is on the map, do you not? It's not on the steppe, but it's not far north of it. As has been mentioned, even if P297 originated in Latvia, there was plenty of time for men carrying it to have reached the steppe by 4500 BC, which is about when PIE was forming.

The oldest of those P297 Latvian hunter-gatherers was about 9,000 years old. YFull estimates the tmrca of P297 at 13,300 years. So P297 had already been around for over 4,000 years before the oldest of those Latvian hunter-gatherers was born.

It isn't likely any of them was the ancestor of M269.



and yet you want us to agree that M269-L23-L51-L11 and P312 have their origin in the steppes?.

Yes, ultimately. I don't want to get off into the weeds trying to pick out the exact spot where each was born and when, but they all derive from a steppe y-dna lineage.

There is plenty of evidence that is the case. It has been repeated over and over and over again in this thread and others here. There is little point in repeating it yet again. You're either not reading it when it is posted, failing to understand it if you are reading it, and/or ignoring it in favor of your preferred scenario.



And that they remained hidden there until P312 decide to leave and became a Bell Beaker? You know that the odds of that happening are minimal.

You seem to think P312 revealing itself in Kurgan Bell Beaker in the mid-third millennium BC with loads of steppe dna and evidence of horseback riding is a small thing. It's not. It's very telling. Almost as telling is its absence in Europe west of the Dniester before Kurgan Bell Beaker. It's not in early Iberian Bell Beaker. It's not there in the Iberian Neolithic. It's not in Britain during the Neolithic. It's not anywhere in Europe west of the Dniester before Kurgan Bell Beaker.

And there is R1b-L11xP312,U106 in Proto-Nagyrev in the Carpathian basin, and Proto-Nagyrev represents the transition from Late Vucedol to Nagyrev.

P312 or L11 or L51 will turn up on the steppe or in Yamnaya west of the steppe eventually.



4.- You also know that the Hungarian Bell Beakers are not exactly an example of R1b, because they are mostly I2a and G2, which is surprising being so close to the steppes.

It's a fact that most of the Hungarian samples from Olalde et al were R1b. I've pointed that out to you before.

As far as Hungarian Bell Beaker samples go, there were four that were R1b-M269 and four that were not:

I2364 Y-DNA: H2 (H2-L279)

I2365 Y-DNA: R1b-L2

I2741 Y-DNA: I2a1a1 (I2-L158)

I2786 Y-DNA: I2a2a (I2-M223)

I2787 Y-DNA: R1b-Z2103

I3528 Y-DNA: G2a2a1a2a1 (G2-Z6277)

I4178 Y-DNA: R1b-M269

I7044 Y-DNA: R1b-Z2109




And do not ever tell us that the steppe bell beakers recruited natives farmers because no one can believe it. And, they are NO OLDER than Bavarian BB samples. Don't you think it should be the other way around? And, if they came from the steppes the bavarians should be younger?

Those non-R1b Kurgan Bell Beakers from Hungary were obviously recruits from among the native farmers, because, with but one exception (I2786), they all lacked steppe dna, which all the Bell Beaker R1b's from Hungary and elsewhere outside Iberia possessed.



5.- If the steppe was not a closed place, you sincerely believe that the 3 waves of Gimbutas were made up of men with the same Y-haplogroup? I think the answer is in the CW culture.

We were discussing R1b, and Gimbutas did not include CW in her Kurgan waves. I don't want to go off on a CW tangent.



6.- You also know that Yamnaya was not genetically uniform and that has not been found L51 L11 or p312. What happened with Yamnaya R1b Z2013 and Q ?. They stayed in the steppes?. Does that mind that if we finally find L51 in Yamnaya, only he traveled to the West?

We have three R1b-Z2103 men in Kurgan Bell Beaker from Olalde et al: I2787, I4253, and I7044. R1b-Z2103 has been found in Vucedol, as well.

The fact that Z2103 has been found in a culture (Kurgan Bell Beaker) believed to have been derived from Yamnaya, along with R1b-L11 and steppe dna, is indicative that in fact KBB was derived from Yamnaya and that ultimately L11 will be found in Yamnaya, as well.

Z2103 and L51 are brother clades under L23. Why would we think that one (Z2103) was born on the steppe while the other (L51) was born somewhere in central or western Europe among - what? - Neolithic farmers? Then somehow they held a family reunion in Kurgan Bell Beaker in the mid-third millennium BC, miraculously making sure everyone got a good dose of steppe dna? Pony rides all round?

etrusco
07-10-2018, 07:32 PM
1.- What some archaelogists call "Yamnaya package" existed in Central and Western Europe rather than in the steppes.I think we have already shown it enough times: for example, can you tell me which is the oldest wristguard found in the steppes?. You think it's older than those found in Iberia?
2.- I think etrusco knows more about linguistics than we do.
3.-In other words, you have Europe full of R1b from at least the mesolithic (12.000 BC)- Italy (Villabruna), France (Iboussieres), Spain (Els Trocs, Bisaurri, Cerdanyola), Balkans (Iron Gates), Germany (Blatterhole), Latvia....... Even P297, who is the father of R1b-M269 is documented outside the steppes, and yet you want us to agree that M269-L23-L51-L11 and P312 have their origin in the steppes?. And that they remained hidden there until P312 decide to leave and became a Bell Beaker? You know that the odds of that happening are minimal.
4.- You also know that the Hungarian Bell Beakers are not exactly an example of R1b, because they are mostly I2a and G2, which is surprising being so close to the steppes. And do not ever tell us that the steppe bell beakers recruited natives farmers because no one can believe it. And, they are NO OLDER than Bavarian BB samples. Don't you think it should be the other way around? And, if they came from the steppes the bavarians should be younger?
5.- If the steppe was not a closed place, you sincerely believe that the 3 waves of Gimbutas were made up of men with the same Y-haplogroup? I think the answer is in the CW culture.
6.- You also know that Yamnaya was not genetically uniform and that has not been found L51 L11 or p312. What happened with Yamnaya R1b Z2013 and Q ?. They stayed in the steppes?. Does that mind that if we finally find L51 in Yamnaya, only he traveled to the West?



Thank you for calling me a good linguist but honestly it is not so deserved….I 'm not even near to be a beginner in linguistics. But I tell you one thing. When experts say the PC steppe is from a linguistical point of view the most likely PIE homeland they often do not realize they the greatest playmaker in terms of civilization and culture in that big region is the Cucuteni-Trypolie complex above all if you consider the big impact it had on the Sredni stog culture. So from a linguistically point of view CT could be the PIE homeland because it is close to a possible source of uralic ( the steppe cultural complex) and also very close to the caucasian languages ( the world south of CT).
Rms2 still calls me a Renefrewian …..I told many times I'm not.

etrusco
07-10-2018, 07:40 PM
It is funny someone says that central western europe has not a yamnaya package. Then why Gimbutas called Remedello a "kurganized" culture ( not Etrusco said that I said GIMBUTAS) . Why kurganized? Well because it had a kurgan-like package ( but not the kurgans themselves BTW) so what…. we cannot call that a steppe-like package ( 200 years before Yamna) only because they ( for now) turned out to be I2a? Funny

etrusco
07-10-2018, 07:42 PM
Double post

alan
07-10-2018, 09:10 PM
YFull shows P297 as formed about 15,600 years ago with a tmrca of 13,300 years ago. The oldest of those P297 Latvian hunter-gatherers dates to about 9,000 years ago, so well after the tmrca of P297.

It's not hard to imagine P297 being born on the Eurasian steppe circa 13,300 years ago, then some of its wandering hunter-gatherer representatives migrating north up the Volga River valley (or the Dnieper) and west down the Zapadnaya Dvina-Daugava River valley into Latvia in time to be there over 4,000 years later.

24564

Your picture of a sensible looking beaker reminded me of the crazy 'giant beaker' I helped excavate nearly 25 years ago in a wedge tomb of c. 2200BC in Ireland. it was something not far off 2 feet high - a type usually only seen in Germany (they seem to have liked outsized beer glasses forever!). Apparently it is the biggest beaker ever found - beating the previous claim to that record. Weirdly though I can find no references to it on the internet. I can only imagine it was used like a punch bowl at a feast to dip your normal sized beaker into!

jeanL
07-10-2018, 09:34 PM
The original statement was:


Thus far we have very very little ancient y-dna from Ukraine. We have loads of ancient y-dna from Iberia,

Which is indeed a false statement. As we can quantify the amount of ancient DNA lines that have been typed for Y-DNA Haplogroups from Ukraine and Iberia. Now the statement has been changed to:


What I meant was we have very little ancient y-dna from Ukraine in the fourth and third millennia BC, only one from Yamnaya in Ukraine, as I recall, and none from other relevant cultures there like Mikhailovka, Kemi Oba, Budzhak, etc.

However by the fourth (i.e 3000 BC) and third (i.e. 2000 BC) millenia BC it is far too late to postulate the origin of R1b-L51. In fact had R1b-L51 originated in the Steppes with the Yamnaya culture, or its Western portions; then we need its precursor R1b-L23 to be found in Ukraine(Western Steppe) or Samara(Eastern Steppe) in the timeframe preceding Yamnaya. We happen to have some 29 Y-DNA lines from Ukraine spanning a time history from 5500 BC down to 2800 BC; yet not a single R1b-M269 or R1b-L51 or even R1b-L23? So it begs the question:

Where is the precursor R1b-L23? We have a single R1b-L23(xL51,Z2103) in eastern Yamnaya; yet given its age(even at the oldest most range 3300 BCE), this line likely is a less successful sibling line of R1b-L51 and R1b-Z2103. Thus far Yamnaya in its eastern(Samara) and southern(Caucasus/Kamylkia(sic)) appears to be a dominated by R1b-Z2103, and the sole lineage from Western Yamnaya in Ukraine happens to be R1b-Z2103. It is entirely possible and in fact probable that R1b-L51 will pop up somewhere in the region, simply by doing Ocam's Razor and assuming simplicity. Yet this is not supported by any evidence thus far. Ergo we are obligated to take a step back in the phylogenetics and time and see we the most ancestral lineage to the R1b-L51 line lies? This takes us to the cousin lineage of R1b-P297(xM269) in the Latvians Hunter Gatherers. Obviously there is massive hole in temporal evidence that needs to be filled. For a bit it seemed that the discovery of a possible R1b-P312 in Samara circa 4250 BCE might have indeed solved the puzzle; and even pushed some of the dates back. But that seems to be a largely preliminary and unconfirmed result which one of the authors appears to lament that it was disclosed to the public. I don't go around "roth foaming from my rabid lips" as some people seem to like to project here; but I do not like apparent inconsistencies. For example:

Absence of evidence is no evidence of absence. Indeed R1b-L51 might pop up in the thousands of yet unsampled Kurgans from Western Yamnaya. How about the thousands of yet unsampled genomes from France; in the time period spanning 5000 BC-2000 BC? We have ATP-3 with a "preliminary" R1b result; which was discarded due to poor quality or low sampling rate. Yet we are happy to accept R1b-P312 from unconfirmed rumors if it is placed in Samara! Even while knowing that the methodology used was the same one that produced outlandish(i.e. R1b-U106 in Iron Gates; R1b-P312 in Afghanistan) results for a series of samples in a pre-print paper not even a month before. Why? I see data and I see a differential treatment of the data? Then why is the data being treated differently? Why is a lack of R1b-P312 in say the 40 samples from Iberia spanning from 5500 BC-3000 BC taking as evidence of its absence in the area in spite of the low sample size and ATP-3? Yet at the same time the absence of R1b-P312 from some 29 sample in Ukraine(a region vital to the origin of R1b-M269 and R1b-L23 according to the Steppe hypothesis) is discarded as not having simply enough samples?

There are those who just want to close the chapter, pass the page, even request the creation of a sub-forum where the Steppe origen of R1b-P312 is a given and the little details are worked out. They are free to do that, anyone is free to speculate, well in my eyes the Steppe origin of R1b-P312 does not passed the "Beyond a Reasonable doubt" standard of evidence; nor does it pass the "Clear and convincing evidence" standard of evidence. Therefore it is at best out of all the hypotheses the one with the "preponderance of evidence" standard of evidence. However, given the wild nature of ancient DNA and the demonstrable record of everything being anything but simple, I think is very sane and healthy to keep a degree of Skepticism with respect to the Steppe hypothesis until it starts producing clean data or at least cleaner data that what we are seeing right now.

Let's at the very least admit that in a scale of 0%-100% where 0% is no evidence at all and 100% is well (a fact); the Steppe hypothesis for the origin of R1b-P312 is the top contender with perhaps some 49% of the likelihood; whereas all the other ones might stand at below 10%. Yet being the best of a bunch of poor hypothesis isn't exactly prize worthy. Until we get conclusive evidence(i.e. The presence of R1b-L51 in Yamnaya or even R1b-L23 in the Ukraine-Belarus-Western Russia region in the timespan of 5500 BC-3000 BC) then it is all educated guesses (aka assumptions). Notice that the previous statement is easily falsifiable with the presence of R1b-L51 in Yamnaya or R1b-L23 in the aforementioned regions and timespan. Now if R1b-L51 or its ancestor R1b-L23 pops up in the Baltic region devout of CHG dna (aka the Yamnaya package) then I will say there goes the Steppe hypothesis for the origin of R1b-P312; this applies to it if is it found anywhere outside of the Steppe in a pre-Yamnaya time period and it is devout of "Steppe" dna.

glentane
07-10-2018, 09:56 PM
I can only imagine it was used like a punch bowl at a feast to dip your normal sized beaker into!
The rise of competive drinking? Sounds like a yard of ale.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-4iFTVooU0

dsm
07-10-2018, 10:05 PM
You seem to think the Yamnaya package is limited to wristguards. It's not.

24566

The Yamnaya Package did not come from central and/or western Europe, just as Yamnaya itself did not come from central or western Europe.

As far as wristguards go, this is from page 17 of the Olalde et al Supplementary Information, describing the very Yamnaya-like Kurgan Bell Beaker mound of El Virgazal:



This is from page 187 of Harrison and Heyd (2007):





Not trying to put him down, but if he still thinks Renfrew is right, then evidently he knows a lot that isn't true.



L754 and not L389 at a time when L389 and perhaps even P297 were already in existence, so not ancestral to M269. Dead ends.

Europe was hardly "full of R1b". Other than R1b-V88, which is L389- and separated from the line leading to M269 17,000 years ago, where is it in Neolithic Europe west of the Dniester?



V88, which, as has been mentioned many times already, is L389- and separated from the line leading to M269 and its descendants 17,000 years ago.



You do know where Latvia is on the map, do you not? It's not on the steppe, but it's not far north of it. As has been mentioned, even if P297 originated in Latvia, there was plenty of time for men carrying it to have reached the steppe by 4500 BC, which is about when PIE was forming.

The oldest of those P297 Latvian hunter-gatherers was about 9,000 years old. YFull estimates the tmrca of P297 at 13,300 years. So P297 had already been around for over 4,000 years before the oldest of those Latvian hunter-gatherers was born.

It isn't likely any of them was the ancestor of M269.



Yes, ultimately. I don't want to get off into the weeds trying to pick out the exact spot where each was born and when, but they all derive from a steppe y-dna lineage.

There is plenty of evidence that is the case. It has been repeated over and over and over again in this thread and others here. There is little point in repeating it yet again. You're either not reading it when it is posted, failing to understand it if you are reading it, and/or ignoring it in favor of your preferred scenario.



You seem to think P312 revealing itself in Kurgan Bell Beaker in the mid-third millennium BC with loads of steppe dna and evidence of horseback riding is a small thing. It's not. It's very telling. Almost as telling is its absence in Europe west of the Dniester before Kurgan Bell Beaker. It's not in early Iberian Bell Beaker. It's not there in the Iberian Neolithic. It's not in Britain during the Neolithic. It's not anywhere in Europe west of the Dniester before Kurgan Bell Beaker.

And there is R1b-L11xP312,U106 in Proto-Nagyrev in the Carpathian basin, and Proto-Nagyrev represents the transition from Late Vucedol to Nagyrev.

P312 or L11 or L51 will turn up on the steppe or in Yamnaya west of the steppe eventually.



It's a fact that most of the Hungarian samples from Olalde et al were R1b. I've pointed that out to you before.

As far as Hungarian Bell Beaker samples go, there were four that were R1b-M269 and four that were not:

I2364 Y-DNA: H2 (H2-L279)

I2365 Y-DNA: R1b-L2

I2741 Y-DNA: I2a1a1 (I2-L158)

I2786 Y-DNA: I2a2a (I2-M223)

I2787 Y-DNA: R1b-Z2103

I3528 Y-DNA: G2a2a1a2a1 (G2-Z6277)

I4178 Y-DNA: R1b-M269

I7044 Y-DNA: R1b-Z2109




Those non-R1b Kurgan Bell Beakers from Hungary were obviously recruits from among the native farmers, because, with but one exception (I2786), they all lacked steppe dna, which all the Bell Beaker R1b's from Hungary and elsewhere outside Iberia possessed.



We were discussing R1b, and Gimbutas did not include CW in her Kurgan waves. I don't want to go off on a CW tangent.



We have three R1b-Z2103 men in Kurgan Bell Beaker from Olalde et al: I2787, I4253, and I7044. R1b-Z2103 has been found in Vucedol, as well.

The fact that Z2103 has been found in a culture (Kurgan Bell Beaker) believed to have been derived from Yamnaya, along with R1b-L11 and steppe dna, is indicative that in fact KBB was derived from Yamnaya and that ultimately L11 will be found in Yamnaya, as well.

Z2103 and L51 are brother clades under L23. Why would we think that one (Z2103) was born on the steppe while the other (L51) was born somewhere in central or western Europe among - what? - Neolithic farmers? Then somehow they held a family reunion in Kurgan Bell Beaker in the mid-third millennium BC, miraculously making sure everyone got a good dose of steppe dna? Pony rides all round?

Amen !

"The fact that Z2103 has been found in a culture (Kurgan Bell Beaker) believed to have been derived from Yamnaya, along with R1b-L11 and steppe dna, is indicative that in fact KBB was derived from Yamnaya and that ultimately L11 will be found in Yamnaya, as well.

Z2103 and L51 are brother clades under L23. Why would we think that one (Z2103) was born on the steppe while the other (L51) was born somewhere in central or western Europe among - what? - Neolithic farmers? Then somehow they held a family reunion in Kurgan Bell Beaker in the mid-third millennium BC, miraculously making sure everyone got a good dose of steppe dna? Pony rides all round? "

RMS2, I admire your ability to keep replying. A lesson in persistent patience.

D

alan
07-10-2018, 10:17 PM
Speaking of Latvia and its R1b-P297 hunter-gatherers of about ten thousand years ago, which those of us who think R1b-L51 came from the steppe supposedly avoid discussing, please note where Latvia is on a map of Europe. Also note the river (at least one) running northwest into the Baltic from what is currently Belarus through Latvia. Of course, no prehistoric hunter-gatherers ever wandered northwest down a river valley hunting for game and catching fish along the way.

24560

Suppose for a moment P297 was actually born in Latvia (according to YFull at least 13,300 years ago). How would that stop P297+ men from making it onto the Pontic-Caspian steppe, not all that far to the south, by about 4500 BC, when PIE was coming into being?

Of course, I don't think P297 was actually born in Latvia. I don't know where it was born, but I suspect someplace on the Eurasian steppe.

I think (I should check this) from memory a permanent human presence in most of Latvia only commences with Kunda c. 8500BC and that is younger by several thousand years than P297. I think the south fringes of Latvia had a scatter of developed Swiderian c. 9500-8500BC but even they are too young for P297 to have arisen in situ in Latvia and given the Ahrenburgian roots of the Swiderian, any link with P297 seems lunatic fringe to say the least. Its much more likely that P297 is linked to Kunda and the contacts that the latter shows with groups in Russia. Latvia is a natural destination to reach following the Volga upstream. Certainly the origin point of P297 has to be in an area that already had a human presence around 11500BC so that rules out large areas. The Younger Dryas then hit around 11000-9500BC and that could have had a dramatic effect on the early P297 people's location too, as could the reforestation just after the YD.

Joe B
07-11-2018, 12:34 AM
Amen !

"The fact that Z2103 has been found in a culture (Kurgan Bell Beaker) believed to have been derived from Yamnaya, along with R1b-L11 and steppe dna, is indicative that in fact KBB was derived from Yamnaya and that ultimately L11 will be found in Yamnaya, as well.

Z2103 and L51 are brother clades under L23. Why would we think that one (Z2103) was born on the steppe while the other (L51) was born somewhere in central or western Europe among - what? - Neolithic farmers? Then somehow they held a family reunion in Kurgan Bell Beaker in the mid-third millennium BC, miraculously making sure everyone got a good dose of steppe dna? Pony rides all round? "

RMS2, I admire your ability to keep replying. A lesson in persistent patience.

D Although I think it's likely we'll find that Z2103 was "born" in the Eurasian steppe, we're still lacking that decisive evidence for that conclusion. The majority of the ancient R1b-Z2103 samples from the Russia - Kazakhstan steppe have been Z2103>Z2106>Z2109+. Finding more Z2103+, Z2106- ancients from the steppe is needed for that claim. Please, somebody correct me if I'm misguided.
I2787 is interesting. I just wonder if it's too young and far west to make any claim.

dsm
07-11-2018, 06:20 AM
Although I think it's likely we'll find that Z2103 was "born" in the Eurasian steppe, we're still lacking that decisive evidence for that conclusion. The majority of the ancient R1b-Z2103 samples from the Russia - Kazakhstan steppe have been Z2103>Z2106>Z2109+. Finding more Z2103+, Z2106- ancients from the steppe is needed for that claim. Please, somebody correct me if I'm misguided.
I2787 is interesting. I just wonder if it's too young and far west to make any claim.

Joe,

I guess we have all been fired up by the flood of new ancient burial finds and analysis this year (2018). I know I am really keen to find evidence of L51 & L151 & L11 anywhere between the Steppes and what seems the focal area that may have been a point in Europe - the Unetice culture.

Did P312, U106 & S1194 all mutate back on the Steppes then go different ways to Western Europe ? (say P312 up the Danube & U106 up the Dniester / Prut rivers. Did S1194 travel with U106 wherever they went (seems to me they did - I will bet on it). If the 3 were common to Unetice then maybe there wasn't a split of them before getting there to that region. But, the dates being estimated by those who know best are enigmatic as to the Steppe migration period. I read 3100BC as a date for U106 & thus the others have to be similar (P312 & thus S1194 etc)

I want to believe that enough finds have occured there in the narea we associate with Unetice to at least nail the Bohemia-Silesia-(&Moravia) regions as where L11 began its explosive spurt. Pity we can't yet pinpoint S1194 in that area. Am hoping it will happen.

P312 in UK 2500BC in such numbers and intensity as to take out 90% of the existing Y-DNA lines is also a challenge. Halstatt & La Tene matured 800-1000 years later !.

So as long as we realise that we have only got tantalising titbits, and what now seems like a slow-down in good aDNA finds. Perhaps we can treat much of this debate as coffee room chatting. But Z2103 *has* to have a near Samara origin. And as RMS2 points out, L51 could not have been that far away - just like S1194 has to have been close to U106 wherever U106 expanded from.

D

GASKA
07-11-2018, 08:26 AM
Amen !

"The fact that Z2103 has been found in a culture (Kurgan Bell Beaker) believed to have been derived from Yamnaya, along with R1b-L11 and steppe dna, is indicative that in fact KBB was derived from Yamnaya and that ultimately L11 will be found in Yamnaya, as well.

Z2103 and L51 are brother clades under L23. Why would we think that one (Z2103) was born on the steppe while the other (L51) was born somewhere in central or western Europe among - what? - Neolithic farmers? Then somehow they held a family reunion in Kurgan Bell Beaker in the mid-third millennium BC, miraculously making sure everyone got a good dose of steppe dna? Pony rides all round? "

RMS2, I admire your ability to keep replying. A lesson in persistent patience.

D

Congratulations for your great reasoning.

Df27, L21 and U152 are brother clades under P312. Why would we think that one (Df27) was born on Iberia (for example), while the other (L21) or (U152) was born somewhere in central or Western Europe among what? Steppe bell beaker's? The somehow they held a family reunion in Saxony in the mid-third millenium BC.

You mean that the brothers have always had to be born in the same place? Are you sure of what you are saying ? Imagine that it shows that Df27 originated in Iberia, I suppose you would inmediately defend that L21 was born there too.

Of course not, someone would say that the two are children of P312, but it does not have to be the same P312 neither in time nor in place. That's exactly what happens with L23 and it's subclades.

I admire your insistance to praise rms2. The problem of having to repeat things so many times, is because he ignores the evidence that we try to contribute to the debate.

It seems that there is only one truth and jeanL has explained very well that it is not the case.

In any case, we would also like to hear your opinions about it.

jdean
07-11-2018, 09:21 AM
Why would we think that one (Df27) was born on Iberia

Do wish you would stop substituting we for I, anyway why would you think DF27 was born in Iberia ?

GASKA
07-11-2018, 09:29 AM
Do wish you would stop substituting we for I, anyway why do you think DF27 was born in Iberia ?

This is not the right thread to discuss that topic.

I said "imagine that Df27 originated in Iberia"

If that were true you would also think that L21 and U152 were born in Iberia?

GASKA
07-11-2018, 09:40 AM
Do wish you would stop substituting we for I, anyway why would you think DF27 was born in Iberia ?

By the way you have to read the dsm post. He said "Why would WE think that one (z2103)....." and I simply copy what he said. It seems that I'm not the only one who writes in the plural. In any case, it's a pity not being able to write in Spanish, surely I would express myself much better.

jdean
07-11-2018, 09:47 AM
By the way you have to read the dsm post. He said "Why would WE think that one (z2103)....." and I simply copy what he said. It seems that I'm not the only one who writes in the plural. In any case, it's a pity not being able to write in Spanish, surely I would express myself much better.

I'd say we have pretty good evidence Z2103 came from the Steppes but where is yours for DF27's origin in Spain ?

dsm
07-11-2018, 09:56 AM
Congratulations for your great reasoning.

Df27, L21 and U152 are brother clades under P312. Why would we think that one (Df27) was born on Iberia (for example), while the other (L21) or (U152) was born somewhere in central or Western Europe among what? Steppe bell beaker's? The somehow they held a family reunion in Saxony in the mid-third millenium BC.

You mean that the brothers have always had to be born in the same place? Are you sure of what you are saying ? Imagine that it shows that Df27 originated in Iberia, I suppose you would inmediately defend that L21 was born there too.

Of course not, someone would say that the two are children of P312, but it does not have to be the same P312 neither in time nor in place. That's exactly what happens with L23 and it's subclades.

I admire your insistance to praise rms2. The problem of having to repeat things so many times, is because he ignores the evidence that we try to contribute to the debate.

It seems that there is only one truth and jeanL has explained very well that it is not the case.

In any case, we would also like to hear your opinions about it.

Very difficult to have a rational discussion with someone who puts words in others mouths then critiques the concocted statements.

Sorry, but unlike RMS2, I lack the patience to join in such game playing.

D

jdean
07-11-2018, 10:11 AM
This is not the right thread to discuss that topic.

I said "imagine that Df27 originated in Iberia"

If that were true you would also think that L21 and U152 were born in Iberia?


Curious, why would this be the wrong thread to discus the origin of DF27 but not the myriad of other topics brought up ?

ffoucart
07-11-2018, 10:12 AM
By the way you have to read the dsm post. He said "Why would WE think that one (z2103)....." and I simply copy what he said. It seems that I'm not the only one who writes in the plural. In any case, it's a pity not being able to write in Spanish, surely I would express myself much better.

Nevertheless try to use "I", it would sound better.

To answer about where L51 subclades could be born, DF27 could have a different origin of U152, which are more or less "brothers". L21 is another story, as it is an "uncle" to DF27 and U152, not a brother. In any case, P312 was already diffused in Central Europe at the birth of DF27, and could already be present in Southern Europe. This is not the most parsimonious explanation, but who knows for sure?

But, in any case, older subclades can't be from Western Europe (including P312, L238 and L21). They diffused from Central/Eastern Europe with Steppe autosomal admixture when no such admixture could be found in Western Europe.

By the way, don't put to much hope on S.O.M. or other French results: from archeology, the mid-IIId millenium was clearly Late Neolithic.

GASKA
07-11-2018, 10:33 AM
Curious, why would this be the wrong thread to discus the origin of DF27 but not the myriad of other topics brought up ?

Because there is a thread that deals with this topic "Where did df27 originated..." If you are interested you can participate.

Curious, why don't you answer my question?

I'm going to ask the question backwards. If it is shown that L21 originated in the British isles, would you think that Df27 was born there?

If it is shown that U152 originated in Saxony, would you think that Df27 was born there?

If z2103 was born in the steppes, would you think that his "brother" L51 was born there?

GASKA
07-11-2018, 10:40 AM
Nevertheless try to use "I", it would sound better.

To answer about where L51 subclades could be born, DF27 could have a different origin of U152, which are more or less "brothers". L21 is another story, as it is an "uncle" to DF27 and U152, not a brother. In any case, P312 was already diffused in Central Europe at the birth of DF27, and could already be present in Southern Europe. This is not the most parsimonious explanation, but who knows for sure?

But, in any case, older subclades can't be from Western Europe (including P312, L238 and L21). They diffused from Central/Eastern Europe with Steppe autosomal admixture when no such admixture could be found in Western Europe.

By the way, don't put to much hope on S.O.M. or other French results: from archeology, the mid-IIId millenium was clearly Late Neolithic.

We'll see what the results are in France. I believe that the key of this discussion is there, and I hope they advanced in the research. There are many BBs sites on the French Mediterranean coast that have not been analyzed.

rms2
07-11-2018, 11:25 AM
The original statement was:

Which is indeed a false statement . . .

And here is your "statement" in response:




That's a false statement!

Complete with exclamation point. In other words, you were accusing me of lying.

I was not lying.

rms2
07-11-2018, 11:28 AM
It is funny someone says that central western europe has not a yamnaya package. Then why Gimbutas called Remedello a "kurganized" culture ( not Etrusco said that I said GIMBUTAS) . Why kurganized? Well because it had a kurgan-like package ( but not the kurgans themselves BTW) so what…. we cannot call that a steppe-like package ( 200 years before Yamna) only because they ( for now) turned out to be I2a? Funny

The implication was that central and western Europe had the Yamnaya Package before Yamnaya did and therefore it originated there and not on the steppe.

That is ridiculous.

jdean
07-11-2018, 11:35 AM
Because there is a thread that deals with this topic "Where did df27 originated..." If you are interested you can participate.

Nothing stopping us dipping into the same topic, it's more germane than a lot of the stuff this thread has got bogged down with.


I'm going to ask the question backwards. If it is shown that L21 originated in the British isles, would you think that Df27 was born there?

If it is shown that U152 originated in Saxony, would you think that Df27 was born there?

perhaps it would be more useful to rephrase the original point from born to originated from ?


If z2103 was born in the steppes, would you think that his "brother" L51 was born there?

Yes in fact I do and would be a little surprised if this turned out to be wrong, as should most sentient beings who have been following the bread crumbs : )

rms2
07-11-2018, 12:55 PM
. . .
However by the fourth (i.e 3000 BC) and third (i.e. 2000 BC) millenia BC it is far too late to postulate the origin of R1b-L51.

I thought we were looking for R1b-L51 among likely Indo-European steppe pastoralists, not trying to pinpoint its origin. Besides, "L51" is simply the rubric for L51 itself and any of its subsequent descendants.



In fact had R1b-L51 originated in the Steppes with the Yamnaya culture,

If it didn't, it's odd that it first shows up only in cultures believed to have been derived from Yamnaya and to have been involved in the spread of Indo-European language and culture, and paired with steppe dna.

If it didn't originate on the steppe, where is it among the Neolithic farmers of Old Europe? Where was it before Kurgan Bell Beaker, Proto-Nagyrev, and Nordic Battle Axe?



or its Western portions; then we need its precursor R1b-L23 to be found in Ukraine(Western Steppe) or Samara(Eastern Steppe) in the timeframe preceding Yamnaya.

You know we're not likely to get a complete recapitulation of the phylogenetic history of L51 and its descendants in the ancient dna record anytime soon. All we really need is some kind of R1b-L51 to show up in Yamnaya or one of its precursors. It could easily show up in one of the earlier waves of steppe pastoralists in the Carpathian basin, in the kurgans there that predate Yamnaya.

Where is the precursor to L23 in Europe west of the Dniester? In fact, where is any L23 in Europe west of the Dniester before Vucedol, Proto-Nagyrev, and Kurgan Bell Beaker?

Why does it first appear only in those kinds of cultures, and what is it they all have in common beyond the presence of L23 and steppe dna in every one of them?



We happen to have some 29 Y-DNA lines from Ukraine spanning a time history from 5500 BC down to 2800 BC; yet not a single R1b-M269 or R1b-L51 or even R1b-L23?

Now reword that question, substitute a much higher number than 29 and a much greater time span, and ask it about Europe west of the Dniester.

Then think for a minute. No R1b-M269 or its descendants or steppe dna in Europe west of the Dniester before Vucedol, Proto-Nagyrev, Kurgan Bell Beaker, and Nordic Battle Axe. Evidently no Indo-European language or culture before then either.

Meanwhile, L23 is found on the steppe, and the brother clade of L51 under L23, Z2103, is also found on the steppe.

Suddenly, with the advent of the aforementioned steppe-derived cultures, steppe dna, Indo-European language and culture, and R1b-M269 (rubric for it and its descendants) appear in Europe west of the Dniester.

What would a reasonable person conclude about the origin of R1b-M269 and, in particular, its descendant L23 and L23's chief offspring, Z2103 and L51?



So it begs the question:

Where is the precursor R1b-L23? We have a single R1b-L23(xL51,Z2103) in eastern Yamnaya; yet given its age(even at the oldest most range 3300 BCE), this line likely is a less successful sibling line of R1b-L51 and R1b-Z2103. Thus far Yamnaya in its eastern(Samara) and southern(Caucasus/Kamylkia(sic)) appears to be a dominated by R1b-Z2103, and the sole lineage from Western Yamnaya in Ukraine happens to be R1b-Z2103. It is entirely possible and in fact probable that R1b-L51 will pop up somewhere in the region, simply by doing Ocam's Razor and assuming simplicity.

Your last sentence is the conclusion that most reasonable people come to.

One thing that helps us arrive at it is the fact that there is evidence in addition to ancient dna: archaeology, linguistics, history which shows us that Indo-European language, culture and religion spread throughout Europe subsequent to the Copper Age arrival of steppe pastoralists, etc.



Yet this is not supported by any evidence thus far.

You go far astray there, after a brief flirtation with the right answer.

We don't have the smoking gun, it is true, but there is plenty of evidence that points to the steppe as the likely place of origin of R1b-L51. No need to repeat it all.



Ergo we are obligated to take a step back in the phylogenetics and time and see we the most ancestral lineage to the R1b-L51 line lies? This takes us to the cousin lineage of R1b-P297(xM269) in the Latvians Hunter Gatherers. Obviously there is massive hole in temporal evidence that needs to be filled.

Obviously.

Why you seem to think the presence of those P297 Latvian hunter-gatherers somehow argues against a steppe origin for L51 is baffling.

I know you know where Latvia is on the map of Europe, that it is not far from the steppe, and that all wandering hunter-gatherers had to do to wind up there was to head up the Volga and/or Dnieper river valleys and then down the nearby Zapadnaya Dvina-Daugava river valley (same river, different names for it in two different languages).



For a bit it seemed that the discovery of a possible R1b-P312 in Samara circa 4250 BCE might have indeed solved the puzzle; and even pushed some of the dates back. But that seems to be a largely preliminary and unconfirmed result which one of the authors appears to lament that it was disclosed to the public.

Yes, and I was the one who chased that particular author down and got an answer from him, which I reported on in its unvarnished entirety as it unfolded over the course of his three emails to me.

Were I in the habit of intentionally making false statements, I would not have done that. I would have stopped with his initial email to me, the one he began with "Это правда" ("That's true").



I don't go around "roth foaming from my rabid lips" as some people seem to like to project here;

Froth. And you do when you accuse me of making false statements, capped off with an exclamation point to imply I was lying.



but I do not like apparent inconsistencies.

I think what you really don't like is the way things have been going for the past few years.



For example:

Absence of evidence is no evidence of absence.

Have you no sense of irony?

I'd like to leave it at that sentence, but some people might require an explanation.

You complain about the lack of L51 on the steppe thus far and then roll out the tired old aphorism that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence?

Funny.

Besides, it seems to me, when it comes to ancient dna, "absence of evidence" might be the best we can hope for, since it isn't likely we'll ever be able to test every old skeleton secreted somewhere in the soil of the Eurasian continent.

The best we can do is test a lot of them, then, after awhile, when we have enough, absence of evidence indeed begins to be evidence of absence.



Indeed R1b-L51 might pop up in the thousands of yet unsampled Kurgans from Western Yamnaya. How about the thousands of yet unsampled genomes from France; in the time period spanning 5000 BC-2000 BC? We have ATP-3 with a "preliminary" R1b result; which was discarded due to poor quality or low sampling rate.

Groan! Not the phony ATP3 thing again!



Yet we are happy to accept R1b-P312 from unconfirmed rumors if it is placed in Samara! Even while knowing that the methodology used was the same one that produced outlandish(i.e. R1b-U106 in Iron Gates; R1b-P312 in Afghanistan) results for a series of samples in a pre-print paper not even a month before.

Bullsh*t. I tracked that rumor down and reported on it with what I heard from the source.

I never ran hog wild with it as you and your compatriots have done with the completely worthless insistence that ATP3 was something it in fact wasn't.



Why? I see data and I see a differential treatment of the data? Then why is the data being treated differently? Why is a lack of R1b-P312 in say the 40 samples from Iberia spanning from 5500 BC-3000 BC taking as evidence of its absence in the area in spite of the low sample size and ATP-3? Yet at the same time the absence of R1b-P312 from some 29 sample in Ukraine(a region vital to the origin of R1b-M269 and R1b-L23 according to the Steppe hypothesis) is discarded as not having simply enough samples?

First, ATP3 is a non-argument. That has been demonstrated repeatedly and even came up again in this thread not too long ago, brought up by your fellow Basque, GASKA. I believe it was anglesqueville who most recently dispensed with it via analysis of the raw data.

Second, Iberia is part of Europe. Its lack of R1b-M269 and steppe dna prior to the arrival of Kurgan Bell Beaker is part of the pattern repeated elsewhere in Europe and consistent with it. Same thing in Britain.

In his recent book, Reich mentions unpublished Iberian samples from his lab and that of Dan Bradley that he cites to support his contention that Iberia experienced a 30% population turnover and a 90% y-dna replacement.

We expect R1b-L51 (and/or its descendants) to turn up on the steppe because:

1) it hasn't shown up in Europe west of the Dniester before the advent of cultures believed to be steppe-derived and responsible for the spread of Indo-European languages and culture; and

2) when it does finally appear, it does so only in those aforementioned cultures and accompanied by the advent of another genetic factor brand new to Europe west of the Dniester: steppe dna.

Surely you realize this.



There are those who just want to close the chapter, pass the page, even request the creation of a sub-forum where the Steppe origen of R1b-P312 is a given and the little details are worked out . . .

Those are the people who would like to be able to discuss the original topic of a thread without being diverted into never-ending tedious arguments with those inspired by offended ethno-nationalistic pride, like some of our recent south-of-the-Caucasus arrivals and others.



Let's at the very least admit that in a scale of 0%-100% where 0% is no evidence at all and 100% is well (a fact); the Steppe hypothesis for the origin of R1b-P312 is the top contender with perhaps some 49% of the likelihood; whereas all the other ones might stand at below 10% . . .

I agree that the Steppe Hypothesis is clearly the top contender, but I don't agree that the likelihood is just 49%, because that would mean it is actually unlikely. After all, 51% unlikely is unlikely, and the Steppe Hypothesis is actually very likely.



Yet being the best of a bunch of poor hypothesis isn't exactly prize worthy. Until we get conclusive evidence(i.e. The presence of R1b-L51 in Yamnaya or even R1b-L23 in the Ukraine-Belarus-Western Russia region in the timespan of 5500 BC-3000 BC) then it is all educated guesses (aka assumptions). Notice that the previous statement is easily falsifiable with the presence of R1b-L51 in Yamnaya or R1b-L23 in the aforementioned regions and timespan. Now if R1b-L51 or its ancestor R1b-L23 pops up in the Baltic region devout of CHG dna (aka the Yamnaya package) then I will say there goes the Steppe hypothesis for the origin of R1b-P312; this applies to it if is it found anywhere outside of the Steppe in a pre-Yamnaya time period and it is devout of "Steppe" dna.

That's not exactly true. It depends on the circumstances. It only takes about 150 years to completely alter an autosomal profile, so a lot depends on the circumstances of a find. One skeleton devoid of CHG or steppe dna cannot erase a mountain of contrary evidence.

rms2
07-11-2018, 01:46 PM
Your picture of a sensible looking beaker reminded me of the crazy 'giant beaker' I helped excavate nearly 25 years ago in a wedge tomb of c. 2200BC in Ireland. it was something not far off 2 feet high - a type usually only seen in Germany (they seem to have liked outsized beer glasses forever!). Apparently it is the biggest beaker ever found - beating the previous claim to that record. Weirdly though I can find no references to it on the internet. I can only imagine it was used like a punch bowl at a feast to dip your normal sized beaker into!

Here's Andrew Sherratt with an outsized beaker, although not as big as the one you describe above:

24570

I think the smaller, pint-sized individual drinking beakers were more common, like those from Wick Barrow in Somerset, whose dimensions are listed in the photos below:

24571

Here they are in color:

24572

rms2
07-11-2018, 02:12 PM
. . .

I admire your insistance to praise rms2. The problem of having to repeat things so many times, is because he ignores the evidence that we try to contribute to the debate.

I don't ignore it. In fact, I go through it line by line and answer it.

The real problem is that you are wrong, probably already suspect it, but are unable for various reasons to accept it.



It seems that there is only one truth and jeanL has explained very well that it is not the case.
. . .

JeanL's posts are ponderously long and just as ponderously wrong, except, in rare moments of candor, when he occasionally admits that L51 probably came from the steppe.

GASKA
07-11-2018, 02:39 PM
1.- R1b1a1a-P297- Formed (14.800 BC) TMRCA (11.300 BC)- Hunter gatherers- Latvia (9.000-4.500 BC)- If everyone agrees that the ancient dna is the best indicator of the origin of a haplogroup, then there is no doubt that the oldest origin of our Y-haplogroup is in the Baltic countries. Everyone knows were Latvia is on the map of Europe, and certainly has nothing to do with the steppes (Samara hunter gatherer is much younger than the Latvian samples).

2.- P297 could move towards the east (steppes), or west (Poland, Germany).

3.- R1b1a1a2- M269- Formed (11.300 BC) TMRCA (4.300 BC)- The late TMRCA of M269 means a slow growth of hunter -gatherers lineages R1b P297 in Europe.
ATP3- El Portalón (3.516.3362 BC)- R1b M269- Formed positive for SNP-PF6518. This marker is one out of 105 that are phylogenetically equivalent to M269 (all living males M269 are also positive for PF6518 and 104 more markers). The mutations typical of this clade started to evolve (11.300 BC). Hence it is perfectly possible and logical that ATP3 may have had any marker between 1 and 105 of the markers that are equivalent to M269 (everyone knows that it has little amount of dna).

4.- R1b1a1a2a-L23- Formed (4.300 BC) TMRCA (4.200 BC)- Lopatino (3.000 BC). It's origin is not clear, because the Yamnaya culture is mostly formed by R1b Z2103 and Q2.

5.- R1b1a1a2a1-L51- Formed (4.200 BC) TMRCA (3.900 BC)- Hipothetically it expanded succesfully with the Yamnaya culture but later and more marginally than it's brother Z2103. However, and following the thought of the supporters of Gimbutas, I think it must have a Central European origin since it is there, where their children P312 and U106 are born. Remember NO L51 in Great Caucasus papers.

6.- R1b-L11- R. Rocca "the founder effects (L2 in BB east group, L21 in Britain, Df27 in Iberia), almost calls for a centralized R1b P312/L11 ONLY GROUP, WITH NO OTHER HAPLOGROUPS (R1a-R1b-Z2103- Non R1b). A place were U106 was not too far to the east."

7.- R1b-P312- Formed (2.850 BC) TMRCA (2.600 BC)- Antiquity in Europe-

Kromsdorf (2.550 BC)- 1 sample M269 (xU106), 1 sample M343 (M269 not clear)
Osterhofen (2.540 BC)- 1 sample P312 (U152)
Sierentz (2.430 BC)- 1 sample P312.
Yeseras (Iberia- 2.275 BC)- 1 sample P312
Humanejos (Iberia- 2.250 BC)- 1 sample P312.

Were was P312 hidden between 2.850-2.550 BC? in the steppes? Is there any genetic evidence of that?

jdean
07-11-2018, 02:45 PM
Am oddly reminded of my childhood : )


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cUwVLx8K9s

R.Rocca
07-11-2018, 05:29 PM
It is funny someone says that central western europe has not a yamnaya package. Then why Gimbutas called Remedello a "kurganized" culture ( not Etrusco said that I said GIMBUTAS) . Why kurganized? Well because it had a kurgan-like package ( but not the kurgans themselves BTW) so what…. we cannot call that a steppe-like package ( 200 years before Yamna) only because they ( for now) turned out to be I2a? Funny

The point of this thread is to find where the first Bell Beaker with L51 and the autosomal steppe component (EHG+CHG) came from. Following a "package" is useful, but only to a certain extent. Harping on the fact that some individual aspects of the kurgan package were found in the Europe prior to Yamanay may of may not be useful. Heck, some are not even Remedello innovations. For example, flexed burials with axes are as old as Linearbandkeramik... several thousand years earlier than Remedello!

See here: http://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/styles/article_main_large/public/images/sn-farmer.jpg?itok=roxer-AS

So, what do we know for sure about the packages relevant to this thread (which I think most here have lost sight of):

Innovative R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Horse riding: There is clear osteopathic evidence for horse riding in a Czech Bell Beaker R-L2 male.
2. Yersinia pestis: Some may argue that this should be first, but its spread would not have been as sudden if not for horse riding. Also, the Bronze Age strain was not one that could be carried by fleas.
3. Bronze: It is often overlooked that Bronze is an alloy metal that is much harder than copper. In places like Britain, the Copper Age may have been skipped altogether.
4. Brachycephalic, with flattened occiput skulls: Brachycephalic skulls are know in Copper Age Europe (Rinaldone, Seine–Oise–Marne etc.) but I've never seen them described as having flat occiputs like those found in Central European Bell Beaker skulls. If cradle boarding was to blame, I haven't seen it explained outside of the Central Bell Beaker context.
5. Bow Shaped Pendants made of Boar's Tusks: Yes, boars tusk pendants are found in Early and Middle Neolithic Europe, but I haven't seen any that are made to look like bows like those found in Central European Bell Beaker.

Horse riding and Yersinia pestis alone could have caused the major toppling of Copper Age Y-DNA groups from the Balkans all the way to Ireland.

Borrowed R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Flexed single grave, gender oriented burials
2. Corded decoration on pottery: While not a Bell Beaker innovation, it could be that both Iberian Bell Beaker copied and Steppe Bell Beaker inherited the technique from Steppe derived groups. Iberian Bell Beaker could have copied it from Swiss and Alsacian Corded Ware groups and Steppe Bell Beaker from Corded Ware or Danubian Yamnaya.

Unknown R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Archer's wrist guards: Harrison & Heyd see is as a Central Bell Beaker innovation, but I don't know if that's just based on frequency or real radiocarbon dating. Yes, a couple of wrist guards do show up in Copper Age Iberian graves, but I don't know what their dating is either, and certainly Bell Beaker and non-Bell Beaker groups were contemporary in Iberia for quite some time.
2. V-perforated buttons: If memory serves me correctly, pre-Bell Beaker v-perforated buttons existed in places as far away from each other as Iberia, Sicily and the Baltic. Again, no idea what the dating says.

rms2
07-11-2018, 07:12 PM
. . .

Innovative R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Horse riding: There is clear osteopathic evidence for horse riding in a Czech Bell Beaker R-L2 male . . .


Actually, two. There's the R1b-L2 you mentioned above (I6581), and the following from Quedlinburg, Germany, I have listed as R1b-M269 (but I think you or somebody else may have refined to R1b-L2, as well):



• I0805 / QLB26 Feature 19614. This 35-45 year-old individual is osteologically and genetically male. The body was buried in NO-SW orientation with the head in the north facing east. Grave goods are scarce and include three silex arrowheads, a few potsherds, and animal bones. A notable observation from the physical anthropological examination is traits at the acetabulum and the femur head suggesting that the individual frequently rode horses.


You know you have to ride horses a lot for it to show up in your bones.

R.Rocca
07-11-2018, 08:08 PM
Actually, two. There's the R1b-L2 you mentioned above (I6581), and the following from Quedlinburg, Germany, I have listed as R1b-M269 (but I think you or somebody else may have refined to R1b-L2, as well):

You know you have to ride horses a lot for it to show up in your bones.

You are right, I forgot about I0805. He was PF6543+ which is a known L11 equivalent. He might also be PF6658+, but that is less certain.

rms2
07-11-2018, 08:40 PM
. . .

ATP3- El Portalón (3.516.3362 BC)- R1b M269- Formed positive for SNP-PF6518. This marker is one out of 105 that are phylogenetically equivalent to M269 (all living males M269 are also positive for PF6518 and 104 more markers). The mutations typical of this clade started to evolve (11.300 BC). Hence it is perfectly possible and logical that ATP3 may have had any marker between 1 and 105 of the markers that are equivalent to M269 (everyone knows that it has little amount of dna) . . .

ATP3 was not R1b-M269.

That has been said time and time again.

Apparently you missed anglesqueville's post here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=416033&viewfull=1#post416033), in which he analyzed ATP3's bam file.

Now think for a minute.

At the very best the claim that ATP3 was R1b-M269 is controversial (false, actually).

If ATP3 were really M269+, shouldn't some more R1b-M269 be showing up in Iberia in subsequent samples from the period before the advent of Kurgan Bell Beaker and steppe dna?

The fact that it's not is consistent with the fact that ATP3 was not M269.

rms2
07-11-2018, 09:12 PM
You are right, I forgot about I0805. He was PF6543+ which is a known L11 equivalent. He might also be PF6658+, but that is less certain.

Thanks. I've updated my entry for I0805 to R1b-PF6543 (L11).

I wish researchers would examine all the Kurgan Bell Beaker and other skeletons from steppe and steppe-derived cultures for osteological evidence of horseback riding.

dsm
07-11-2018, 10:07 PM
Am oddly reminded of my childhood : )


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cUwVLx8K9s

For me it is the sore tongue (am constantly biting it - or at least trying to) :)

D

dsm
07-11-2018, 10:12 PM
"Horse riding and Yersinia pestis alone could have caused the major toppling of Copper Age Y-DNA groups from the Balkans all the way to Ireland."

This has to be one of the great red flags as to rapid de-population. The only challenge I see to it is that a lot of the evidence in regard to Steppes horsemen sweeping into Europe suggests that mtDNA was not greatly diminished. Otherwise the plague would have been my #1.

D

rms2
07-11-2018, 10:19 PM
"Horse riding and Yersinia pestis alone could have caused the major toppling of Copper Age Y-DNA groups from the Balkans all the way to Ireland."

This has to be one of the great red flags as to rapid de-population. The only challenge I see to it is that a lot of the evidence in regard to Steppes horsement sweeping into Europe suggests that mtDNA was not greatly diminished. Otherwise the plague would have been my #1.

D

How would you detect diminished mtDNA in people who lived?

GASKA
07-11-2018, 10:28 PM
ATP3 was not R1b-M269.

That has been said time and time again.

Apparently you missed anglesqueville's post here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=416033&viewfull=1#post416033), in which he analyzed ATP3's bam file.

Now think for a minute.

At the very best the claim that ATP3 was R1b-M269 is controversial (false, actually).

If ATP3 were really M269+, shouldn't some more R1b-M269 be showing up in Iberia in subsequent samples from the period before the advent of Kurgan Bell Beaker and steppe dna?

The fact that it's not is consistent with the fact that ATP3 was not M269.

ATP3 was R1b M269, but I agree that it is controversial (not false).

Keep calm, it's true, that in Iberia, at the moment, no more cases of R1b-M269 line have been found until the discoveries of Olalde (2.275 BC). That is why I have to admit that we can not demonstrate a genetic continuity between M269 and P312. That is why the archaelogists and geneticits are looking for interesting sites that can solve the question. Meanwhile, obviously you can think what you want (even that ATP3 is false), and I will continue thinking that may be if we look in the right place we can take a pleasant surprise. We are not in a hurry, and you have to take for granted, that what we find we will share with you.

rms2
07-11-2018, 10:36 PM
Just for grins, here is a map of the Eurasian steppe. Note where Latvia is.

24575

See where the Dnieper and Volga rivers begin not far from Latvia? The Zapadnaya Dvina-Daugava River begins not far from there and runs through Latvia to the Baltic Sea.

So, to get to Latvia from the Russian steppe, all hunter-gatherers had to do was to walk north up the Dnieper and/or Volga river valleys and then go west down the Zapadnaya Dvina-Daugava river valley.

YFull has P297 forming around 15,600 years ago, with a tmrca of 13,300 years.

The oldest of those P297 Latvian hunter-gatherers lived about 9,000 years ago, so over 4,000 years later than the tmrca of P297.

Thus P297 had plenty of time from its birth to make it from the Eurasian steppe to Latvia, and then plenty of time to make it back again, if necessary, to be in time for the birth of Indo-European beginning around 4500 BC.

So, the idea that those P297 Latvian hunter-gatherers are an argument against a steppe origin for R1b-M269 and its subclades is a product of fuzzy thinking.

rms2
07-11-2018, 10:39 PM
ATP3 was R1b M269, but I agree that it is controversial (not false).

No, it wasn't. You are obviously ignoring anglesqueville's very clear analysis of ATP3's bam file (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=416033&viewfull=1#post416033).

That doesn't speak well of you (I would say something stronger but for the forum rules).



Keep calm, it's true, that in Iberia, at the moment, no more cases of R1b-M269 line have been found until the discoveries of Olalde (2.275 BC). That is why I have to admit that we can not demonstrate a genetic continuity between M269 and P312. That is why the archaelogists and geneticits are looking for interesting sites that can solve the question. Meanwhile, obviously you can think what you want (even that ATP3 is false), and I will continue thinking that may be if we look in the right place we can take a pleasant surprise. We are not in a hurry, and you have to take for granted, that what we find we will share with you.

I think it is pretty obvious what the problem is.

dsm
07-11-2018, 11:31 PM
How would you detect diminished mtDNA in people who lived?

What I was alluding to is that the admixture data we are seeing for aDNA finds in central and western Europe, show a rapid switch to R1b, but also shows that the female DNA already in central & western Europe (& UK/Ireland) remained largely intact.

D

rms2
07-11-2018, 11:56 PM
What I was alluding to is that the admixture data we are seeing for aDNA finds in central and western Europe, show a rapid switch to R1b, but also shows that the female DNA already in central & western Europe (& UK/Ireland) remained largely intact.

D

I think that indicates that Kurgan Bell Beaker was largely male vectored.

GASKA
07-12-2018, 08:31 AM
No, it wasn't. You are obviously ignoring anglesqueville's very clear analysis of ATP3's bam file (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=416033&viewfull=1#post416033).

That doesn't speak well of you (I would say something stronger but for the forum rules).



I think it is pretty obvious what the problem is.

I'm not ignoring anglesqueville's analysis of ATP3 bam file, in fact I'm happy with its results because it coincides in pointing out that ATP3 is positive for PF6518. I don't know what is the opinion of anglesqueville with respect to haplogroup Y of ATP3, but the geneticists with whom I have spoken in Spain have told me that it can be perfectly M269 and therefore it is what I think nowadays.

Regarding Latvian hunter gatherers, this only shows that our R1b-P297 lineage was OUT the steppes 3.000 years before the first wave of Gimbutas. As you know, the late TMRCA of R1b M269 (4.300 BC), means a very slow development of the P297 hunter lineages in Europe.

Nobody Knows what where the patterns of migration of these people. Germany and Poland are very close to Latvia, but they may also have traveled to the steppes. I think that for geneticists it will be much easier to find P297 or M269, than to find L23 or L51 that practically overlap in time.

P297 had plenty of time from its birth to travel throughout Europe thousands of times. It could be that their children were born in the steppes or in Baden-Württemberg. The solution will be found in the ancient dna.

GASKA
07-12-2018, 09:30 AM
The point of this thread is to find where the first Bell Beaker with L51 and the autosomal steppe component (EHG+CHG) came from. Following a "package" is useful, but only to a certain extent. Harping on the fact that some individual aspects of the kurgan package were found in the Europe prior to Yamanay may of may not be useful. Heck, some are not even Remedello innovations. For example, flexed burials with axes are as old as Linearbandkeramik... several thousand years earlier than Remedello!

See here: http://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/styles/article_main_large/public/images/sn-farmer.jpg?itok=roxer-AS

So, what do we know for sure about the packages relevant to this thread (which I think most here have lost sight of):

Innovative R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Horse riding: There is clear osteopathic evidence for horse riding in a Czech Bell Beaker R-L2 male.
2. Yersinia pestis: Some may argue that this should be first, but its spread would not have been as sudden if not for horse riding. Also, the Bronze Age strain was not one that could be carried by fleas.
3. Bronze: It is often overlooked that Bronze is an alloy metal that is much harder than copper. In places like Britain, the Copper Age may have been skipped altogether.
4. Brachycephalic, with flattened occiput skulls: Brachycephalic skulls are know in Copper Age Europe (Rinaldone, Seine–Oise–Marne etc.) but I've never seen them described as having flat occiputs like those found in Central European Bell Beaker skulls. If cradle boarding was to blame, I haven't seen it explained outside of the Central Bell Beaker context.
5. Bow Shaped Pendants made of Boar's Tusks: Yes, boars tusk pendants are found in Early and Middle Neolithic Europe, but I haven't seen any that are made to look like bows like those found in Central European Bell Beaker.

Horse riding and Yersinia pestis alone could have caused the major toppling of Copper Age Y-DNA groups from the Balkans all the way to Ireland.

Borrowed R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Flexed single grave, gender oriented burials
2. Corded decoration on pottery: While not a Bell Beaker innovation, it could be that both Iberian Bell Beaker copied and Steppe Bell Beaker inherited the technique from Steppe derived groups. Iberian Bell Beaker could have copied it from Swiss and Alsacian Corded Ware groups and Steppe Bell Beaker from Corded Ware or Danubian Yamnaya.

Unknown R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Archer's wrist guards: Harrison & Heyd see is as a Central Bell Beaker innovation, but I don't know if that's just based on frequency or real radiocarbon dating. Yes, a couple of wrist guards do show up in Copper Age Iberian graves, but I don't know what their dating is either, and certainly Bell Beaker and non-Bell Beaker groups were contemporary in Iberia for quite some time.
2. V-perforated buttons: If memory serves me correctly, pre-Bell Beaker v-perforated buttons existed in places as far away from each other as Iberia, Sicily and the Baltic. Again, no idea what the dating says.

I believe that the only truly distinctive elements of the Central-Europeans BBs with respect to the Western European BBs are;

1.- Horse riding- There is evidence of domestication of the horse in Spanish sites since the early chalcolithic age, but archaelogists that it was used for work (they were slaughtered at a later age), and it has not been proven that it was used for hunting or war. The oldest evidence (study of bones) of horse riding we have in Iberia is from la Bastida (Argar culture, Bronze Age, 1.750 BC).

2.Bow shaped pendants made of boar's tusk- You are right, they exist from the neolithic, but they not have the form nor the meaning that they seem to have in Central Europe.

3.- Flexed single grave, gender oriented burials- The individual inhumations in Iberia don't seem to follow a common pattern, sometimes they coincide with the Central European ones and others don't.

Regarding the unknown RL51 steppe bell beaker package-

1.- Archer wrist guards- I already sent you the Peña del Aguila site (Muñogalindo, Avila), with a wristguard in pre BB strata (2.750 BC). There are more examples, like those that you sent from the Portalón, and those that were found in the cave of Nerja. Wrist guards are not an innovation in Europe because they exisst manufactured in different forms and materials since man hunts with bow.

2.- V perforated buttons- Las Pozas (Casaseca de las Chanas, Zamora, 3.300-2.700 BC)- Chalcolithic settlement with three lines of defensive pits. Only one perforated button was found ( I don't remember if in bone or ivory), but the site is very old and clearly Pre-BB.

Regarding "flat occiputs", I don't think is a distinctive sign of the steppe populations, because brachycephaly is typical of the Alps and the Pyrenees, but obviously, I can be wrong because I'm not an anthropologist.

I don't know any evidence of Yersinia Pestis, and there was also NO violent destruction of settlements. The mitochondrial haplogroups in Iberia remain unchanged throughout the chalcolitic period, except for entries from the Baalberge culture.

Regarding metallurgy, the oldest steppe bell beakers (2.500 BC) are not realted to bronze but to copper, and we have already seen that the techniques are clearly different (absence of annealing), therefore there was no transmision of metallurgical knowledge.

anglesqueville
07-12-2018, 09:41 AM
The only certain thing about ATP3 is that the authors (Günther et al.) were not willing to publish any Y-haplo prevision for him: 24576
ATP3 can "perfectly" be M269 just because he can be, or better said can have been absolutely anything downstream CT. Debating about ATP3's Y-haplo is exactly the same as debating about the sex of the angels. The legend of ATP3 = M269 is nothing but an invention of genetiker (one more), spread by people like Gioiello who have a horse, or even a whole stable, in the race. If you want to get sensical information about genetiker's calls, ask Richard Rocca. I'm sure he can teach you a lot about this topic.

dsm
07-12-2018, 11:36 AM
Mikkel has his interactive homeland time map back up.

It has worked ok for me. But, it may take a moment or so to load the map itself. Give it a try. Touch or click on the dots / symbols to read what each is. You can get a summary of them by scrolling down.

The map can be dragged around as well as zoomed in and zoomed out. The left right arrow keys will move the map too. Clicking the play symbol on the slider bar will run the history in a steady playback. The slider can be moved around and fine positioning can be achieved with the double left or double right buttons.

http://homeland.ku.dk/

Comments on and about the map...
http://homeland.ku.dk/#comments

D

alan
07-12-2018, 11:43 AM
The point of this thread is to find where the first Bell Beaker with L51 and the autosomal steppe component (EHG+CHG) came from. Following a "package" is useful, but only to a certain extent. Harping on the fact that some individual aspects of the kurgan package were found in the Europe prior to Yamanay may of may not be useful. Heck, some are not even Remedello innovations. For example, flexed burials with axes are as old as Linearbandkeramik... several thousand years earlier than Remedello!

See here: http://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/styles/article_main_large/public/images/sn-farmer.jpg?itok=roxer-AS

So, what do we know for sure about the packages relevant to this thread (which I think most here have lost sight of):

Innovative R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Horse riding: There is clear osteopathic evidence for horse riding in a Czech Bell Beaker R-L2 male.
2. Yersinia pestis: Some may argue that this should be first, but its spread would not have been as sudden if not for horse riding. Also, the Bronze Age strain was not one that could be carried by fleas.
3. Bronze: It is often overlooked that Bronze is an alloy metal that is much harder than copper. In places like Britain, the Copper Age may have been skipped altogether.
4. Brachycephalic, with flattened occiput skulls: Brachycephalic skulls are know in Copper Age Europe (Rinaldone, Seine–Oise–Marne etc.) but I've never seen them described as having flat occiputs like those found in Central European Bell Beaker skulls. If cradle boarding was to blame, I haven't seen it explained outside of the Central Bell Beaker context.
5. Bow Shaped Pendants made of Boar's Tusks: Yes, boars tusk pendants are found in Early and Middle Neolithic Europe, but I haven't seen any that are made to look like bows like those found in Central European Bell Beaker.

Horse riding and Yersinia pestis alone could have caused the major toppling of Copper Age Y-DNA groups from the Balkans all the way to Ireland.

Borrowed R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Flexed single grave, gender oriented burials
2. Corded decoration on pottery: While not a Bell Beaker innovation, it could be that both Iberian Bell Beaker copied and Steppe Bell Beaker inherited the technique from Steppe derived groups. Iberian Bell Beaker could have copied it from Swiss and Alsacian Corded Ware groups and Steppe Bell Beaker from Corded Ware or Danubian Yamnaya.

Unknown R-L51 Steppe Bell Beaker Package:
1. Archer's wrist guards: Harrison & Heyd see is as a Central Bell Beaker innovation, but I don't know if that's just based on frequency or real radiocarbon dating. Yes, a couple of wrist guards do show up in Copper Age Iberian graves, but I don't know what their dating is either, and certainly Bell Beaker and non-Bell Beaker groups were contemporary in Iberia for quite some time.
2. V-perforated buttons: If memory serves me correctly, pre-Bell Beaker v-perforated buttons existed in places as far away from each other as Iberia, Sicily and the Baltic. Again, no idea what the dating says.
I would add a couple of things that stand out about social structure and lifestyle. The beaker people are closely associated with an incredible demographic and geographical expansion of a single young male lineage over a few centuries that was previously invisible. That is a close parallel to what we see with Z2103 in a Yamnaya and R1a in CW and it’s derivatives. That indicates all three had the same expansive clan type social structure that limited participation of other male lines to a small minority. That is indirect evidence that bell beaker, Yamnaya and CW derives from a common social termplate.

alan
07-12-2018, 12:00 PM
I posted before that it is known that in certain environments a beaker physical type emerged among Yamnaya groups. Specifically this was the case in Yamnaya groups in the hyper arid area around the mouth of the Volga as it reached the Caspian and the south steppes just west of there to the north of the Caucasus.