Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 67

Thread: Most ancetrial homeland of Indo-Europeans in Europe - Karelia and Baltica...

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by rms2 View Post
    PIE did not come into existence until about 4500 BC at the very earliest. Mal'ta Boy died about 24k years ago near Lake Baikal in Siberia. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that PIE first arose on the Pontic-Caspian steppe.

    That's why not.
    1. These dates are not sure at all.
    2. Even if so, then they weren't mute before living on the PC steppe.
    3. Malta has evident western imput, so anyway, he was from the west.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Rethel For This Useful Post:

     Hando (10-25-2020)

  3. #22
    Registered Users
    Posts
    401
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by RCO View Post
    Petra Goedegebuure, a Professor of Hittitology, declared the Hittite separated from other PIE before the invention of the wheel and before the invention of agriculture, they did not share agricultural terminology with rest of PIE, so we can consider PIE being spoken since the Mesolithic, 8000 BC, at least.
    I understood her argument to mean that PIE and Anatolian split before agriculture was introduced in the common homeland. She puts this at 5000BC. So according to her Anatolian and the PIE split before 5000BC.

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

     Hando (10-25-2020)

  5. #23
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,371
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a29a

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    Quote Originally Posted by RCO View Post
    Petra Goedegebuure, a Professor of Hittitology, declared the Hittite separated from other PIE before the invention of the wheel and before the invention of agriculture, they did not share agricultural terminology with rest of PIE, so we can consider PIE being spoken since the Mesolithic, 8000 BC, at least.
    Highly unrealistic.

    1st: because Hittite as such didn't existed before around 2000BC (it is only attested since around 1900 BC, on a limited scale (names, loanwords), and in reality after 1600 BC). Before Hittite, you can say Proto-Hittite, but it didn't separated itself from PIE, but from other Anatolian languages (mainly Luwian and Palaic) or Proto Anatolian.

    For all we know, Anatolian languages did have a complexe history of mutual inluence, with different influence of other languages, especially Hattic. Given those influences, it means that Proto Anatolian existed some centuries before 2000 BC, and probably something like 1000 years (more or less), with some centuries of contact with Hattic.

    It means that Proto Anatolian existed as such probably something around 2800/3000 BC, at the same time than Late PIE. As you need several more centuries to date the split between Proto Anatolian and Late PIE, it means that Early PIE was probably spoken in the late Vth millenium and early IVth millenium, perhaps until around 3500 BC.

    That is consensual, from what I read. And I don't see anything against it, quite the contrary.

    2d: Now you must take into account the society which PIE was spoken: herders, not farmers. It is therefore clear that words related to farming are loanwords, and could be different from each subgroup of PIE. It doesn't mean that PIE society was a Mesolithic one.

    If, as it is likely, Proto Anatolian was spoken among herders communities living in Balkans in the IVth and early IIId millenium (Cernavoda I, III, perhaps Bulgarian Yamnaya), they must have adopted words for farming from Balkans languages, or after, in Anatolia. But not from the same cultures than Late PIE.

    3d: By the way, Ancient DNA is telling us that Late PIE split in modern IE branches is rather recent: migrations from the Steppe are mainly after 3000 BC. It means the split of Late PIE can not be older than around 3000 BC, and you must give time for new branches to emerge, so a few centuries more. So main branches may have existed before mid or late IIIth millenium BC. It is far more recent than some have guessed.

    In that prospect, Goedegebuure doesn't seem to have grasped some main consequences of recent progress in Ancient DNA (but I must say that given the conclusions made by some authors (Wang et al.,..) it is not her fault), among other things. Her backing of an Eastern route to Anatolia is also very difficult to defend for many reasons (archeology, linguistic, paleogenetic..).
    Last edited by ffoucart; 04-16-2020 at 08:27 AM.

  6. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (04-16-2020),  Alain (10-24-2020),  artemv (04-16-2020),  Hando (10-25-2020),  Kulin (04-16-2020),  Onur Dincer (04-17-2020),  Psynome (10-24-2020),  Ruderico (04-16-2020)

  7. #24
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,212
    Sex
    Location
    lombardy
    Nationality
    italian

    Italy Portugal Order of Christ Russia Imperial Canada Quebec Spanish Empire (1506-1701) Vatican
    Quote Originally Posted by RCO View Post
    Petra Goedegebuure, a Professor of Hittitology, declared the Hittite separated from other PIE before the invention of the wheel and before the invention of agriculture, they did not share agricultural terminology with rest of PIE, so we can consider PIE being spoken since the Mesolithic, 8000 BC, at least.





    I think Mallory never back tracked from supporting a pontic-caspian homeland for PIE. In the IE Encyclopedia he addressed the problem of PIE agricoltural terminology. Below his conclusions.


    In addition to the specific names of plants we also can securely reconstruct terms associated with the technology and processes of cultivation. The old argument that the ancestors of the lndo-Iranians either did not know agriculture or had abandoned it in their movements across the steppe rested to some extent on the reconstruction of a word for ‘field’ ( *h 2 egros ) which regularly indicated a cultivated parcel of land in the European languages but only an uncultivated ‘plain’ in Old Indie. But such a hypothesis is harder to sustain when we also have a term *Rapos- that indicates cultivated
    land in both the European stocks and in Iranian. Moreover, we have fundamental terms for breaking the soil either by ‘plowing’ ( *li 2 erh 3 ie/o -), or by a ‘harrow’ ( *h 3 eketeh a -), ‘sowing’ grain ( *sehi - ), employing a ‘sickle’ ( *sfpo/eh a - ) for harvesting and ‘threshing’ the grain (*yers- ; and if an Anatolian cognate is sufficient for Asia, *h 2 eh 2 er-), which produces the ‘chaff’ ( *pelo/eh a ~). There are also several words for ‘grind’ ( *melh 2 - , *peis - ). From this we can see that there is no case whatsoever for assuming that the ancestors of all the Indo-European stocks did not know cereal agriculture. While there may have been speculation in the past as to whether some terms might have applied originally to the gathering and processing of wild plants, terms for the plow, cultivated field, and techniques appropriate to the processing of domesticated cereals whose home range lay outside of most of Europe, suggest that all the earliest Indo-Europeans knew agriculture before their dispersals.

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

     Hando (10-25-2020),  Onur Dincer (04-17-2020)

  9. #25
    Banned
    Posts
    13,888
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF41>FGC36981
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2c3a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-Z253>BY93500
    mtDNA (P)
    K1a1a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Rethel View Post
    1. These dates are not sure at all.
    2. Even if so, then they weren't mute before living on the PC steppe.
    3. Malta has evident western imput, so anyway, he was from the west.
    So, twenty-four thousand years ago people might have been speaking some form of Indo-European? Is that it?

    What "western input"?

    What proof do you have that Mal'ta Boy was from "the west"? How far west?

  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to rms2 For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (04-16-2020),  Alain (04-16-2020),  artemv (04-16-2020),  ffoucart (04-17-2020),  Hando (10-25-2020),  Michał (04-16-2020)

  11. #26
    Registered Users
    Posts
    502
    Sex
    Location
    Haifa
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & Slavic
    Nationality
    Israel & Russia
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1b - S17250
    mtDNA (M)
    R0a4
    mtDNA (P)
    T2b5a

    Israel Israel Jerusalem Russian Federation Serbia Montenegro
    Quote Originally Posted by Kristiina View Post
    This is more or less how Karelia is understood in Finland:

    Attachment 37147

    The River Svir marks the starting point of Aunuksen Karjala (Karelia of Olonets). Venäjä is Russia.

    Alexander-Svirsky Monastery is on the northern side of the River Svir, so for me it is in Karelia of Olonets.
    But where do those borders, shown on this map come from? Why borders from this map are more important than todadministrative borders?

    Quote Originally Posted by Huck Finn View Post
    Karelia as an ethnic area is or actually was of course much wider than Respublika nowadays is, for instance the river name Svir is apparently based on something like Karelian/Veps Syvär', -i.

    Even Izhorians south of St. Pete are/were basically Karelians, at least that was their endonym.
    All the pre-Slavic peoples of what is now North Russia spoke one of Finno-Ugric languages. We do not even know all of them.
    We can even suppose that peoples genetically somewhat close to Finnic peoples lived on the territory of Novgorod/Pskov, as today's population of the area has significant Finnic-like admixture.
    But we shouldn't call all of those people "Karelians" even if they were likely somewhat close genetically and spoke somewhat similar langauges. Novgorodian texts use different names for them (and there are no texts of their own).

    But the question I asked was even more simple. What is "old Karelia"? Early 20th century? 18th century? 12th century? How can someone know its exact borders?

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

     Hando (10-25-2020)

  13. #27
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    8,479

    Quote Originally Posted by rms2 View Post
    So, twenty-four thousand years ago people might have been speaking some form of Indo-European? Is that it?

    What "western input"?

    What proof do you have that Mal'ta Boy was from "the west"? How far west?
    In the sense perhaps that ultimatelty from Africa thus from the west?

    Initially the Raghavan paper also pointed to MA1's mtDNA U as indicative of a western connection.

    But that was before the Yana paper which not only found Yana ANS as a potential autosomal/ANS precursor of MA1, but also found Yana1 and Yana2 to be potentially related on the Y (P-M45) and mtDNA (U2'3'4'7'8'9) sides.

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

     Hando (10-25-2020),  rms2 (04-17-2020)

  15. #28
    Today's Republic of Karelia doesn't correspond exactly with the traditional Karelia, that's why. You find the basic history and maps on Wikipedia.

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

     Hando (10-25-2020),  parasar (04-25-2020)

  17. #29
    Banned
    Posts
    672
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    1/2 Italian, 1/2 Armenian
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152
    mtDNA (M)
    H5a

    Quote Originally Posted by parasar View Post
    In the sense perhaps that ultimatelty from Africa thus from the west?

    Initially the Raghavan paper also pointed to MA1's mtDNA U as indicative of a western connection.

    But that was before the Yana paper which not only found Yana ANS as a potential autosomal/ANS precursor of MA1, but also found Yana1 and Yana2 to be potentially related on the Y (P-M45) and mtDNA (U2'3'4'7'8'9) sides.
    Does Yana eliminate the possibility of y P males in North Central Asia/South Siberia.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to davit For This Useful Post:

     Hando (10-24-2020)

  19. #30
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    8,479

    Quote Originally Posted by davit View Post
    Does Yana eliminate the possibility of y P males in North Central Asia/South Siberia.
    Difficult to say, since to get to Yana, Y-P M45, IMO, had to move north from SE Asia.

    And we have K2b Tianyuan as well as modern P Malay sample and a P Andaman sample.
    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....l=1#post700062

    But then, how is Yana mt-U when we do not have any U in SE Asia? What is possible is that we will find mt-R in SE Asia that is a precursor to mt-U.

    Kostenki 14, Y-C1b, mt-U2, was initially thought per Gerasimov/Debets to be an early migrant from a tropical region.
    "In the opinion of Debets, these characteristics drew the man from Kostenki 14 closer to modern equatorial groups, such as Papuans and Melanesians"

    "The latest results of anthropological studies of bone remains from the earliest Upper Paleolithic burial discovered on Russian territory, the Markina Gora site (Kostenki 14), are described. Multivariate statistical methods and parallel studies of the buried skull structure and dentition established that their morphological characteristics undoubtedly belonged to the Caucasian complex. In combination with paleogenetic data, the findings contradict the earlier hypothesis of the southern origin of the Kostenki 14 individual and its similarity to the population of the Australo-Melanesian region ... Thanks to the improved methodological base, it has become clear today that, although some characters point to the similarity of the Kostenki 14 man to equatorial groups, their weight in the total vari-ability is not high enough to set a high value on them when solving race–genetic issues. In the case of Kostenki 14, the marked alveolar prognathism can be considered the only authentic criterion, the rest of the“southern” markers having been overestimated."
    The Upper Paleolithic man from Markina Gora: Morphology vs. genetics?

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to parasar For This Useful Post:

     Hando (10-25-2020)

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Reconsidering the Indo-European Homeland
    By Johane Derite in forum General Sociology/Ethnology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-26-2018, 03:14 PM
  2. Ancient DNA & the Proto-Indo-European Homeland
    By R.Rocca in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 505
    Last Post: 01-12-2018, 08:40 PM
  3. Europe's Indo Europeans
    By BillMC in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-09-2017, 01:01 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-31-2016, 12:22 PM
  5. Replies: 80
    Last Post: 09-29-2014, 05:23 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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