Page 51 of 137 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361101 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 1366

Thread: E-V13 entered Greece with Illyrians and Dorian invasions

  1. #501
    Registered Users
    Posts
    74
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    Yamnaya was more like the ancestor of the first groups of Indo-Europeans in the Balkans that gave birth of the Anatolian, Greek, Armenian languages.Trzciniec was probably the ancestral culture of Balto-Slavic people. We also see that it was in close proximity to the Carpathians. However the many cognates of Thracian with Germanic probably suggests that Thracian was spoken west of Trzciniec, or the Lusatian culture which also was present in the Northern Carpathian. Probably it's not a coincidence that artifacts of both Gava Culture as a LBA Carpathian culture and the Lusatian Culture were found in the Balkans. This is what Nicholas Hammond wrote about the Lusatian finds in the Balkans:

    These finds were the reason why some maps of Thracians living up to the Baltic shores circulated on internet. Maps such as this one.
    Here's a known different view that has been reiterated recently by a linguist working with the languages of the area.

    Brixhe 2018: "Rather, in the period between Proto-Indo-European and the emergence of Greek, Thracian, and Phrygian, it is probably necessary to posit a linguistic conglomerate to which the populations which were later to develop into Greeks, Phrygians, and Thracians belonged. They must have arrived in the Balkans in the same migratory wave at a period when they were linguistically still relatively undifferentiated"

    If that's the case, then it'd another BA Balkan language formed in a Yamnaya-Balkan_C mix. The Illyrian (and Messapic) linguistic area might be of similar outcome considering the MBA-IA Croatian samples and the proto-Villanovan Adriatic coast sample from Italy. The still few Middle Helladic samples from northern Greece seem to point towards a Yamnaya-Balkan mix, as you stated, for Greek.

    OTOH, Anatolian might go to an earlier pre-Yamnaya Chalcolithic migration into the Balkans and the Chalcolithic outliers and/or the low-quality Kumtepe sample with steppe ancestry could be related to it.

    On the Lusatian finds, whose geographical spread seems difficult to connect them to the Thracians (if anything, it'd be the Phrygians more specifically as Hammond himself thought in that case), I recall a Serbian archaeologist expressing the view that they were the result of Balkan intermediaries but I couldn't be able to find the relevant information right now. As such, it might not be necessary that there was a direct Lusatian migration and linguistic connection with the area.

    I guess we don't really have Lusatian samples so far either, the Tollense group might be the closest thing to it so far spatiotemporally and who knows how representative or connected it is.

    Either way, much of all this is too speculative without further samples.
    Last edited by DFSTFD; 02-08-2021 at 04:22 PM.

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

     Hawk (02-08-2021),  Riverman (02-08-2021)

  3. #502
    Registered Users
    Posts
    512
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by DFSTFD View Post
    Here's a known different view that has been reiterated recently by a linguist working with the languages of the area.

    Brixhe 2018: "Rather, in the period between Proto-Indo-European and the emergence of Greek, Thracian, and Phrygian, it is probably necessary to posit a linguistic conglomerate to which the populations which were later to develop into Greeks, Phrygians, and Thracians belonged. They must have arrived in the Balkans in the same migratory wave at a period when they were linguistically still relatively undifferentiated"

    If that's the case, then it'd another BA Balkan language formed in a Yamnaya-Balkan_C mix. The Illyrian (and Messapic) linguistic area might be of similar outcome considering the MBA-IA Croatian samples and the proto-Vilanovan Adriatic coast sample from Italy. The still few Middle Helladic samples from northern Greece seem to point towards a Yamnaya-Balkan mix, as you stated, for Greek.

    OTOH, Anatolian might go to an earlier pre-Yamnaya Chalcolithic migration into the Balkans and the Chalcolithic outliers and/or the low-quality Kumtepe sample with steppe ancestry could be related to it.

    On the Lusatian finds, whose geographical spread seems difficult to connect them to the Thracians (if anything, it'd be the Phrygians more specifically as Hammond himself thought in that case), I recall a Serbian archaeologist expressing the view that they were the result of Balkan intermediaries but I couldn't be able to find the relevant information right now. As such, it might not be necessary that there was a direct Lusatian migration and linguistic connection with the area.

    I guess we don't really have Lusatian samples so far either, the Tollense group might be the closest thing to it so far spatiotemporally and who knows how representative or connected it is.

    Either way, much of all this is too speculative without further samples.
    Good to see other contributors although this isn't associated with the thread about E-V13. Still I will reply on the bolded parts and why I think they are wrong.

    By all means, linguistically, culturally etc. it doesn't seem likely that the ancestors of the Greeks and the Thracians arrived in the Balkans with the same wave of Indo-European people and that they spoke "still relatively undifferentiated language". It's clear by the contributions of Duridanov and other linguists such as Georgiev and Hamp that Thracian formed close relationship with the Baltic languages. Much closer than the Greek and closer in time split than EBA. Unless you think that the proto-Baltic arrived from the same wave in the Balkans then I don't know how this can be reliable.

    As for the Lusatian finds associated with the Phrygians, it was already established that Phrygian was a close relative to proto-Greek and proto-Macedonian, languages that by all probability couldn't have descended by CWC group such as the Lusatian Culture.

    The genesis of the Balkan Peoples:
    VI. The Proto-Phrygian Region

    Ancient authors inform us that the Phrygians dwelt formerly in Macedonia () and eastern Illyria. The original region, i.e. the primitive home of the Phrygians, was probably the basin of the river Erigon (), today Černa (or Crna) in northern Macedonia.

    After the recent studies of the Phrygian inscriptions of Asia Minor by O. Haas and R. Gusmani [2] it is clear that Phrygian was closely akin to Greek. In the present writer's opinion, Greek, Macedonian and Phrygian formed in the fourth millennium b.c. a common language. But when the Phrygians, in about the second half of the second millennium b.c., passed gradually over southern Thrace into the north-western part of Asia Minor, their language was influenced by Thracian and Mysian.
    Distance to: Aspar_scaled
    0.01995435 35.00% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2 + 65.00% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02156914 40.60% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av1 + 59.40% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02223177 55.20% Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215 + 44.80% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19
    0.02300447 61.80% BGR_IA:I5769 + 38.20% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Aspar For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (02-08-2021)

  5. #503
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,716
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    Probably you are right about proto-Anatolian as an earlier split. But proto-Greek and proto-Armenian are very likely descendants of a language spoken in Catacomb Culture which in turn was a Yamnaya derived culture. All three, Cernavoda, CWC and Yamnaya were probably derived from the earlier Sredny Stog because if CWC was directly descended from Yamnaya we would have seen a closer relationship uniparental markers wise but that's not the case so it's an earlier split from Sredny Stog IMO. Although I'm not sure how much archaeologically accountable is that as I never had such a big interest for the earliest Indo-European issue.
    We can't completely exclude that possibility, but I rather agree with what DFSTFD wrote about that issue, since I too think that Greek-Armenian in particular came in later and not with Yamnaya. I'm just not sure yet whether they already descend directly from charioteers or just lived in the region and adopted it before completely conquering Greece.

    On the other hand I totally agree with you on Yamnaya vs. Corded Ware. To me, Corded Ware looks like a descendant of Dereivka rather, pottery, farming, styles, primitive metallurgy and conservative, small, clan based units etc. general influence from the West, from farming cultures with little to no genetic contribution however. The Yamnaya people were more pastoralist, seasonal herders with little genetic and cultural input. The earlier Western groups like Cernavoda, Usatovo-Cotofeni etc. and Corded Ware itself were all rather cousins or brothers rather than direct descendants of Yamnaya. And yes, both should descent from Lower Don Culture -> Sredny Stog Culture, then came the split, before Yamnaya made its big expansion on the step and kicked everyone else out, including the mentioned brothers and cousins.

    Concerning the closeness of Greek and Armenian, this is of course debatable.
    Last edited by Riverman; 02-08-2021 at 04:30 PM.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Aspar (02-08-2021)

  7. #504
    Registered Users
    Posts
    74
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    Good to see other contributors although this isn't associated with the thread about E-V13. Still I will reply on the bolded parts and why I think they are wrong.

    By all means, linguistically, culturally etc. it doesn't seem likely that the ancestors of the Greeks and the Thracians arrived in the Balkans with the same wave of Indo-European people and that they spoke "still relatively undifferentiated language". It's clear by the contributions of Duridanov and other linguists such as Georgiev and Hamp that Thracian formed close relationship with the Baltic languages. Much closer than the Greek and closer in time split than EBA. Unless you think that the proto-Baltic arrived from the same wave in the Balkans then I don't know how this can be reliable.

    As for the Lusatian finds associated with the Phrygians, it was already established that Phrygian was a close relative to proto-Greek and proto-Macedonian, languages that by all probability couldn't have descended by CWC group such as the Lusatian Culture.

    The genesis of the Balkan Peoples:
    The major point I wanted to make is that still barely anything is that "clear", even if we find one or another scenario more likely based on our readings. Not for the post-Beaker interactions in Western Europe during the BA-IA or for the Balkans. I personally do find it very likely that Yamnaya, in mixed form, might have been directly the linguistic ancestor of all the Balkan branches we find attested in the IA (rather than a "backmigration" from the west or from the Steppe_MLBA-like post-Catacomb steppe/forest steppe being responsible) but I could end up being wrong.

    Re: Lusatian, that was precisely my point. They're found in areas generally associated with Phrygians (and I do think Hammond himself made that connection since you brought his view up) so the connection you brought up might be tenuous and could reflect something else.
    Last edited by DFSTFD; 02-08-2021 at 04:38 PM.

  8. #505
    Registered Users
    Posts
    74
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    We can't completely exclude that possibility, but I rather agree with what DFSTFD wrote about that issue, since I too think that Greek-Armenian in particular came in later and not with Yamnaya. I'm just not sure yet whether they already descend directly from charioteers or just lived in the region and adopted it before completely conquering Greece.
    The chariot has been debated endlessly but I'm not sure if it's necessarily connected to proto-Greek (or early Greek before they moved further south at any rate) rather than being a cultural adoption, whether from the Carpathian Basin or the steppe itself during the MLBA. The intimate relationship a lot of linguists have argued exists between Greek and Indo-Iranian has made a lot of people reasonably find it likely but around the same period and later on it's also connected to various both non-IE and IE (but likely not Steppe_MLBA connected populations in the IE case like the Nordic BA/Germans and Celts), as you know. I suppose to an extent it also depends on which scenario one finds more likely, whether a late EH-early MH arrival or a rather late MH/early LH arrival, in which case the connection with the chariot is more likely. The new samples certainly point towards the former, in my view, but ideally we'll have more soon enough.
    Last edited by DFSTFD; 02-08-2021 at 04:53 PM.

  9. #506
    Registered Users
    Posts
    936
    Sex
    Location
    lombardy
    Nationality
    italian

    Italy Portugal Order of Christ Russia Imperial Canada Quebec Spanish Empire (1506-1701) Vatican
    Dereivka had contribution of genes from the farmers. The influence was both cultural and in dna:

    sample": "Ukraine_Eneolithic:I4110",
    "fit": 3.4225,
    "Globular_Amphora_Ukraine": 42.5,
    "Progress_Eneolithic": 30,
    "SHG": 19.17,
    "EHG": 7.5,
    "WHG": 0.83,
    "LBK_N": 0,

    What happened after was that Ukraine HG absorbed more populations from Progress rich cultures. So EEF went down and Progress went up. That is the formation of Yamanaya EBA steppe dna.
    It was a shift from a more western SS to a more eastern SS genetic profile.
    Last edited by etrusco; 02-08-2021 at 05:04 PM.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to etrusco For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (02-08-2021)

  11. #507
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,716
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by etrusco View Post
    Dereivka had contribution of genes from the farmers. The influence was both cultural and in dna:

    sample": "Ukraine_Eneolithic:I4110",
    "fit": 3.4225,
    "Globular_Amphora_Ukraine": 42.5,
    "Progress_Eneolithic": 30,
    "SHG": 19.17,
    "EHG": 7.5,
    "WHG": 0.83,
    "LBK_N": 0,

    What happened after was that Ukraine HG absorbed more populations from Progress rich cultures. So EEF went down and Progress went up. That is the formation of Yamanaya EBA steppe dna.
    It was a shift from a more western SS to a more eastern SS genetic profile.
    Dereivka is just a place, what matters is proven representatives of the Dereivka culture. I'm not sure any single sample found and analysed so far is really representative for the late Dereivka culture in the first place and even if it would, one single example is surely not enough for getting the full picture. But I totally agree with you on your conclusion, that this was an internal shift of SS related groups, with the Western ones being already pushed out of the steppe at that point, like Cernavoda shows to us and a whole East -> West shift took place. This was however at first not related to Yamnaya at all and later they rather pushed on, rather than being the people which moved on the forest steppe themselves, possible admixture not withstanding.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     etrusco (02-08-2021)

  13. #508
    Registered Users
    Posts
    512
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by DFSTFD View Post
    The major point I wanted to make is that still barely anything is that "clear", even if we find one or another scenario more likely based on our readings. Not for the post-Beaker interactions in Western Europe during the BA-IA or for the Balkans. I personally do find it very likely that Yamnaya, in mixed form, might have been directly the linguistic ancestor of all the Balkan branches we find attested in the IA (rather than a "backmigration" from the west or from the Steppe_MLBA-like post-Catacomb steppe/forest steppe being responsible) but I could end up being wrong.

    Re: Lusatian, that was precisely my point. They're found in areas generally associated with Phrygians (and I do think Hammond himself made that connection since you brought his view up) so the connection you brought up might be tenuous and could reflect something else.
    Of course we are only debating and speculating based on the material we have trying to connect the dots. I on the other hand find it likely that a Catacomb Culture people might have brought proto-Greek to Greece. It's proximity with some CWC group directly ancestral for proto-Indo-Iranian is a good point to imagine that some influences between both cultures might have formed some isoglosses and other linguistic features that Greek shares with Indo-Iranian languages.

    On the other hand, the finds of the Lusatian cultures Hammond spoke about are from mount Vermion in Central Macedonian and North-Western Turkey or Hellesponte Phrygia, place that the Thracian tribes initially settled. Central and Eastern Macedonia were even known as Thraco-Macedonian region.
    Distance to: Aspar_scaled
    0.01995435 35.00% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2 + 65.00% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02156914 40.60% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av1 + 59.40% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02223177 55.20% Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215 + 44.80% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19
    0.02300447 61.80% BGR_IA:I5769 + 38.20% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19

  14. #509
    Registered Users
    Posts
    74
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    Of course we are only debating and speculating based on the material we have trying to connect the dots. I on the other hand find it likely that a Catacomb Culture people might have brought proto-Greek to Greece. It's proximity with some CWC group directly ancestral for proto-Indo-Iranian is a good point to imagine that some influences between both cultures might have formed some isoglosses and other linguistic features that Greek shares with Indo-Iranian languages.

    On the other hand, the finds of the Lusatian cultures Hammond spoke about are from mount Vermion in Central Macedonian and North-Western Turkey or Hellesponte Phrygia, place that the Thracian tribes initially settled. Central and Eastern Macedonia were even known as Thraco-Macedonian region.
    I find the first part likely too, a neighboring relationship rather than a genetic (in the linguistic sense too) one at this point but we'll see with more data.

    The foothills of Bermion were the "gardens of Midas". It was where the Phrygians were supposed to have settled in Macedonia before moving towards Anatolian Phrygia (while apparently leaving some remnants behind in parts of the Balkans) via NW Anatolia, though it's true that Thracian tribes seem to have settled in the area too (e.g. the Bottiaei) before the Argead Macedonians apparently expelled them. As I said, Hammond himself made the connection of these Lusatian findings to the Phrygians specifically, especially because of the dating. You're opting for a different interpretation, reasonable enough I suppose, but the areas they are found in do have a connection with the Phrygians which is why he made the connection himself.

    Another point is what Lusatian connection the historical larger Thracian area has in general, rather than those specific ones that have different interpretations too. I haven't come across that.
    Last edited by DFSTFD; 02-08-2021 at 05:32 PM.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DFSTFD For This Useful Post:

     Aspar (02-08-2021),  Riverman (02-08-2021)

  16. #510
    Registered Users
    Posts
    74
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    Dereivka is just a place, what matters is proven representatives of the Dereivka culture. I'm not sure any single sample found and analysed so far is really representative for the late Dereivka culture in the first place and even if it would, one single example is surely not enough for getting the full picture. But I totally agree with you on your conclusion, that this was an internal shift of SS related groups, with the Western ones being already pushed out of the steppe at that point, like Cernavoda shows to us and a whole East -> West shift took place. This was however at first not related to Yamnaya at all and later they rather pushed on, rather than being the people which moved on the forest steppe themselves, possible admixture not withstanding.
    I agree. We only have 2 samples, which differ considerably between each other too, towards a UKR_N direction. That being said, the early Corded Ware samples interestingly do seem to plot between Yamnaya (or the pre-Yamnaya part of the Khvalynsk-Progress cline if you prefer) and a "Dereivka"-like population, though that might be just a fluke since a similar steppe-hg-farmer mix would probably give you similar results.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to DFSTFD For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (02-08-2021)

Page 51 of 137 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361101 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. G-L497 et les invasions indo-européennes
    By palamede in forum French
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-22-2019, 10:33 AM
  2. Monkeys and Chimpanzees have entered the Stone Age
    By shazou in forum Natural Sciences
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-12-2019, 07:48 AM
  3. sorry to have entered in this forum
    By euasta in forum Forum Support
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-23-2019, 06:27 PM
  4. Mycenaean and Crete Armenoi (Dorian) on GEDMatch!
    By Sikeliot in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-05-2017, 07:47 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-19-2015, 01:07 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
  •