Page 37 of 93 FirstFirst ... 2735363738394787 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 924

Thread: The first horse herders and the impact of early Bronze Age steppe expansions into Asi

  1. #361
    Registered Users
    Posts
    768
    Sex
    Location
    Gonur Tepe
    Y-DNA
    L-SK1414
    mtDNA
    U8b1a1

    African Union Ainu AchaemenidEmpire1 Kurdistan Star of David Dravida Nadu
    Quote Originally Posted by rms2 View Post
    Anthony mentions that IE Hittite was merely the speech of the palace elite. So naturally most of the so-called "Hittites" weren't Indo-European at all.

    Five samples. Yep, the steppe hypothesis is dead. Uh-huh. Not.
    There are 9 Bronze Age Anatolian sampels, not 5(if you include the Anatolia ChL sample from the 2016 study + the 3 Bronze Anatolians from last year). All were pretty similar. Basically Anatolian farmer + Iran Neolithic/CHG.
    91 sampels left to 100!

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to jesus For This Useful Post:

     Anabasis (05-12-2018),  bmoney (05-12-2018),  Eterne (05-12-2018),  ms85 (05-12-2018)

  3. #362
    FINAL WARNING! This thread will be closed for good if any more discussions of racism, and personalization of discussion continues. Some infractions have already been given. This is not a free for all. Members are reminded to stay on topic.
    Forum Reminders - Please remember to:
    Report any problematic content • Adhere to Anthrogenica Hidden Content • Discuss respectfully • Be mindful of sharing user data (both yours and others) • English language only in main forum area • PM 'Moderator' for basic maintenance tasks or information about member suspensions or bans

  4. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Administrator For This Useful Post:

     Aha (05-12-2018),  Anabasis (05-12-2018),  Hando (05-15-2018),  lukaszM (05-12-2018),  michal3141 (05-12-2018),  pegasus (05-12-2018),  Psynome (05-12-2018),  Rafe (05-15-2018),  Ruderico (05-12-2018)

  5. #363
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,087
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    C-F5481
    mtDNA
    M8a

    Kyrgyzstan
    So, regarding the paper: there is something strange with Sidelkino EHG: first, it's archaeological context is not described in the supplementary. Second, its sex is not listed in the supplementary tables. Third, after looking for info about this sample, I found that: "Сиделькино-3. Для снятия вопроса о половой принадлежности индивида была проведена генетическая экспертиза, выявившая принадлежность останков мужчине."(translation: Sidelkino-3. To resolve the question about sex of the remains, the genetic analysis was conducted, which showed that remains belonged to male), source: http://static.iea.ras.ru/books/7487_Traditsii.pdf

    So either they haven't mentioned his Y-DNA in the paper for some reason, or there are more than one Sidelkino sample and the male one has not yet been published. The coverage of the Sidelkino sample from the paper is 2.9, more than enough to tell Y-DNA haplogroup..

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to rozenfeld For This Useful Post:

     Bas (05-17-2018),  epoch (05-12-2018),  Hando (05-16-2018),  RCO (05-12-2018)

  7. #364
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,194
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by jesus View Post
    There are 9 Bronze Age Anatolian sampels, not 5(if you include the Anatolia ChL sample from the 2016 study + the 3 Bronze Anatolians from last year). All were pretty similar. Basically Anatolian farmer + Iran Neolithic/CHG.
    91 sampels left to 100!
    From my runs, the BA Anatolians from last year are markedly different from the CA sample.
    Something like 40% Barcin_CA, 20% Anatolian neolithic (maybe that one CA sample had a bit too much CHG?) and then a whopping 40% of the slightly earlier Jordan_EBA.

    EDIT: That was with f3, here is qpadm I forgot about, wants even more Jordan_EBA!

     

    left pops:
    Anatolia_BA
    Barcin_CA
    Jordan_EBA
    Peloponnese_N

    right pops:
    Barcin_N
    Iran_N
    Levant_N
    Kotias
    MA1
    Iron_Gates_HG
    Ukraine_Mesolithic
    Ust_Ishim

    chisq: 0.936 tail: 0.967545156 dofdiff: 7 chisqdiff: -0.936 taildiff: 1
    best coefficients: 0.267 0.582 0.150
    std. errors: 0.116 0.103 0.074

    error covariance (* 1000000)
    13469 -9289 -4180
    -9289 10555 -1266
    -4180 -1266 5446


    fixed pat wt dof chisq tail prob
    000 0 5 0.936 0.967545 0.267 0.582 0.150
    001 1 6 4.668 0.587081 0.394 0.606 -0.000
    010 1 6 19.482 0.00342211 0.896 0.000 0.104
    100 1 6 6.258 0.394885 0.000 0.776 0.224
    Last edited by Kale; 05-12-2018 at 07:30 AM.
    Collection of 14,000 d-stats: Hidden Content Part 2: Hidden Content Part 3: Hidden Content PM me for d-stats, qpadm, or f3-outgroup nmonte models. Looking for: KEB-IAM-TOR and Baikal_EN in plink/eigenstrat 1240k panel

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Kale For This Useful Post:

     jesus (05-12-2018)

  9. #365
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,665
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA
    K1

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    Quote Originally Posted by jesus View Post
    There are 9 Bronze Age Anatolian sampels, not 5(if you include the Anatolia ChL sample from the 2016 study + the 3 Bronze Anatolians from last year). All were pretty similar. Basically Anatolian farmer + Iran Neolithic/CHG.
    91 sampels left to 100!
    Yes, but none from a clear Hittites archeological context. Even the 5 MLBA samples from Kaman Kalehoyuk, if from Hittites territory and from the beginning of the Old Kingdom, could very well not be Hittites at all.

    Firstly because it was a settlement dedicated to farming, with continuity with older layers (so from the Hattian period).

    Secondly because it lies in the land of Hatti, not especially near Kanes, where Hittites are believed to form the majority of population around 1800 BC.

    Thirdly, because when Hittites conquered the land of Hatti, and created the Old Kingdom they probably were only a small minority in a wide multicultural Kingdom. So probably concentrated in places of power and stronghold. Most commoners were probably ethnically Hattians, and probably still used Hattic for some times.

    The only male sample from Kaman Kalehoyuk from the Assyrian Colonies period is very likely not a Hittite. At this time, there is no proof of Hittites presence in this place. So he was probably Hattian.

    The main problem remains the same: were Hittites a large population which can be found everywhere in Central Anatolia, or a small population which took power in a time of turmoil, and became extremely successful?

    Hittitologists are considering the second option as the more parsimonious given archeological data. In that prospect, if we want DNA from Hittites, we must have samples from a clear Hittites context. So nobles with weaponnery and artefacts showing a clear affiliation to Hittites. And those burials are rare.

    By the way, as I am actually reading a lot of papers on burials from EBA, the more logical explanation for Hittites migration would be: small bands from Balkans following commercial routes between Thrace and Syria, probably merchants and/or mercenaries, who fixed themselves in Central Anatolia from probably 2500BC (as some influences can be seen already around 2300 BC in Northern Anatolia).
    Last edited by ffoucart; 05-12-2018 at 06:04 PM.

  10. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     alan (05-12-2018),  Camulogène Rix (05-12-2018),  epoch (05-12-2018),  Hando (05-16-2018),  Helves (05-12-2018),  jdean (05-12-2018),  peternorth (05-14-2018),  Psynome (05-12-2018),  ren (05-12-2018),  rms2 (05-13-2018),  Silesian (05-12-2018)

  11. #366
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,013
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryukendo View Post
    This is absolutely not a valid objection.

    First, the understanding of genetics is completely wrong. If you were looking for a dilution of 10% EHG ancestry from 1000 years ago, it will not disappear if everyone else around you also had that 10%, or if the migratory EHG took up 10% of the population from that time onwards.

    Even if we were to go with your model of serial dilution, suppose you were looking for a single EHG ancestor instead.

    By the time of 7 generations ago, you have 2^7 =128 ancestors.

    Suppose that only 1/128 ancestors of yours was EHG and spoke Anatolian, resulting in you speaking anatolian and not having detectable EHG ancestry (0.78%). What is the chance that you so happen to speak the language of one out your 128 ancestors from 7 generations ago, and not the mass of other 127 ancestors?
    Suppose Maikop was an intermediate PIE culture. R1[a,b] + J[,2]. EHG level lower than Yamnaya. We see I2 in Western Yamnay, something like that. It expands from there to Kura-Araxes, which was a culture with diverse burials, among which Kurgans. You'd have a good route for dilution, with cultural traces.

    EDIT: Also, Hittite clearly wasn't the only language spoken in the Hittite empire. Part of the Hittite liturgy was in Hattic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryukendo View Post
    The fact of the matter is, this set of issues facing your proposal ('serial dilution') reduce to the problem of minority imposed language change, and a minority imposed language change when the minority is less than detectable is just not a good argument.

    Which is why the linguists in this paper make very tentative and equivocal statements, giving due attention to each side, because the genetics contradict the dominant linguistic arguments made so far pretty strongly, so we have a very conflicting and contradictory picture in front of us (in fact the genetics also contradict other genetic evidence, like EHG sex bias in Yamnaya).

    (and this is not the same as the Hungarian case! The were no polities as complex or martial classes as stratified as in Hungary in Chalcolithic Anatolia, and technically the Steppe then was still in the Stone Age when Anatolia was already in the Metal Ages, and the Steppics were not nomads at the time, just HGs, so the kind of elite dominance in Hungary is not an explanation we can readily apply here).
    And Guus Kroonen made the case for a pre-Yamnaya split between Hittite and the rest.
    Last edited by epoch; 05-12-2018 at 12:02 PM.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to epoch For This Useful Post:

     Celt_?? (05-13-2018),  Hando (05-16-2018)

  13. #367
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,556
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA
    L21
    mtDNA
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryukendo View Post
    This is absolutely not a valid objection.

    First, the understanding of genetics is completely wrong. If you were looking for a dilution of 10% EHG ancestry from 1000 years ago, it will not disappear if everyone else around you also had that 10%, or if the migratory EHG took up 10% of the population from that time onwards.

    Even if we were to go with your model of serial dilution, suppose you were looking for a single EHG ancestor instead.

    By the time of 7 generations ago, you have 2^7 =128 ancestors.

    Suppose that only 1/128 ancestors of yours was EHG and spoke Anatolian, resulting in you speaking anatolian and not having detectable EHG ancestry (0.78%). What is the chance that you so happen to speak the language of one out your 128 ancestors from 7 generations ago, and not the mass of other 127 ancestors?

    The fact of the matter is, this set of issues facing your proposal ('serial dilution') reduce to the problem of minority imposed language change, and a minority imposed language change when the minority is less than detectable is just not a good argument.

    Which is why the linguists in this paper make very tentative and equivocal statements, giving due attention to each side, because the genetics contradict the dominant linguistic arguments made so far pretty strongly, so we have a very conflicting and contradictory picture in front of us (in fact the genetics also contradict other genetic evidence, like EHG sex bias in Yamnaya).

    (and this is not the same as the Hungarian case! The were no polities as complex or martial classes as stratified as in Hungary in Chalcolithic Anatolia, and technically the Steppe then was still in the Stone Age when Anatolia was already in the Metal Ages, and the Steppics were not nomads at the time, just HGs, so the kind of elite dominance in Hungary is not an explanation we can readily apply here).
    If a small invading clan in a sea of natives have a stict exogenous tradition of not marrying (say) first cousins(a taboo against it) then the first century after migration would see rapid dilution to 12% or more before it stabilises out. Even more so of the taboo stretched to 2nd cousins. Such a taboo could easily exist given that the ancients had millennia to observe the nasty genetic effects of close cousin marriage. Difference is hue between Hittites who clearly just took over the Hatti state and the demographic steamrollers Z2103, L11 and the R1a who basically bulldozed all populations before them is huge.

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Celt_?? (05-13-2018),  epoch (05-12-2018),  Hando (05-16-2018),  kikkk (05-12-2018),  Silesian (05-12-2018)

  15. #368
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,013
    Sex
    Omitted

    I recall there was a thread here where Gravetto-Danubian and Agamemnon got into an argument on which route IE must have taken into Anatolia. Can't find it anymore, but I would like to reread Agamemnons arguments: He was vehemently opposing a Caucasian route, I believe on the basis of lack of Caucasian substrate in the Anatolian languages.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to epoch For This Useful Post:

     Hando (05-16-2018)

  17. #369
    Registered Users
    Posts
    12
    Sex

    Kaman Kalehoyuk seems to have become part of the Hittite realm only during Labarna I/Hattusili Is rule, so those chaps might predate the Hittites as well.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ümläüt For This Useful Post:

     ffoucart (05-12-2018),  Hando (05-16-2018)

  19. #370
    Moderator
    Posts
    5,330
    Sex
    Location
    Normandy
    Ethnicity
    northwesterner
    Y-DNA
    U152>L2>Z367
    mtDNA
    H5a1

    Normandie Netherlands Friesland Finland Orkney
    "First, the lack of genetic indications for an intrusion into Anatolia refutes the classical notion
    of a Yamnaya-derived mass invasion or conquest. However, it does fit the recently developed
    consensus among linguists and historians that the speakers of the Anatolian languages established
    themselves in Anatolia by gradual infiltration and cultural assimilation
    .
    (...)
    Our findings corroborate the Indo-Anatolian Hypothesis, which claims
    that Anatolian Indo-European split off from Proto-Indo-European first and that Anatolian Indo-
    European represents a sister rather than a daughter language. Our findings call for the
    identification of the speakers of Proto-Indo-Anatolian as a population earlier that the Yamnaya
    and late Maykop cultures."

    (Linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. 2018: Early Indo-European languages,
    Anatolian, Tocharian and Indo-Iranian
    AUTHORS
    Guus Kroonen1,(3), Gojko Barjamovic(2), and Michaël Peyrot(3).
    AFFILIATIONS
    1 Department of Nordic Studies and Linguistics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
    2 Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University, USA.
    3 Leiden University Centre for Linguistics, Leiden University, The Netherlands)"

    (Posted earlier on https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....l=1#post392550)
    In my understanding, in the sentence "Our findings corroborate the Indo-Anatolian Hypothesis, which claims that Anatolian Indo-European split off from Proto-Indo-European first and that Anatolian Indo-European represents a sister rather than a daughter language.", we should perhaps have to replace the word "Proto-Indo-European" by "Indo-Uralic".
    En North alom, de North venom
    En North fum naiz, en North manom

    (Roman de Rou, Wace, 1160-1170)

  20. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to anglesqueville For This Useful Post:

     Camulogène Rix (05-12-2018),  epoch (05-12-2018),  ffoucart (05-12-2018),  Hando (05-16-2018),  jdean (05-12-2018),  lukaszM (05-12-2018),  MitchellSince1893 (05-12-2018),  Psynome (05-12-2018),  Rafe (05-16-2018)

Page 37 of 93 FirstFirst ... 2735363738394787 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Impact of Unetice or Central European Bronze Age!?
    By Finn in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-08-2018, 01:12 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2017, 05:12 PM
  3. Bronze Age Steppe and European mtdna in South Asians
    By Raskolnikov in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-01-2015, 03:03 PM
  4. Replies: 124
    Last Post: 04-07-2015, 09:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •