Uralic homeland and genetics and their implications for PIE

[parastais]

But - neither deepest diversity, nor first branch split can indisputably tell us about place of split.
For example, it turned out erroneous to apply same logic and look for PIE homeland in Anatolia (since Anatolian split first).

Also Kallio’s idea on late (2nd century) arrival of Finnic into Latvia comes from linguistic not archeological facts. Basically he wrote that North Latvian hydronyms can be explained via Estonian or Livonian not Proto-Finnic.

How is your community of Finnish linguists? Are you like pals who can chat with each other or more like formal. Like I could ask any of my colleagues informally about everything. Could you ask him directly what he thinks of current evidence for Southern Route?

[Standardized Ape]

One thing that isn't getting much attention is that modern Estonians don't have much N-L550 which Balts have but instead much more N-Y5004 which about 10% of males in Finland have too and which is the likely main culprit behind the Finnish language. I don't think we know enough about N-Y5004 to know what route it came from. Even if it turns out it came from the east that would still not disqualify L550 as the original Baltic Finnic lineage but I could see parastais thinking the case is closed.

[parastais]

One thing that isn't getting much attention is that modern Estonians don't have much N-L550 which Balts have but instead much more N-Y5004 which about 10% of males in Finland have too and which is the likely main culprit behind the Finnish language. I don't think we know enough about N-Y5004 to know what route it came from. Even if it turns out it came from the east that would still not disqualify L550 as the original Baltic Finnic lineage but I could see parastais thinking the case is closed.

At some point L550 did speak Uralic anyway. If not Baltic Finnic then some other West Uralic. Also probably they were somehow involved in bronze working and Malaren/Ananino axes production or distribution.
Unless lingua franca of their network was for example Scythian.

Also story of Baltic N is still not told... and Baltic - Finnic interactions far from solved. So, case is gonna be wide open for some time...

[Jaska]

But - neither deepest diversity, nor first branch split can indisputably tell us about place of split.
For example, it turned out erroneous to apply same logic and look for PIE homeland in Anatolia (since Anatolian split first).

Of course. But you still cannot claim that the place of deepest diversity could support any other location than that where the deepest diversity is seen. Then it is a matter to compare all the relevant evidence and see, do the other arguments support the same location or do they contradict with it.

Also Kallio’s idea on late (2nd century) arrival of Finnic into Latvia comes from linguistic not archeological facts. Basically he wrote that North Latvian hydronyms can be explained via Estonian or Livonian not Proto-Finnic.

Kallio writes in his Gauja-article:
"However, as the Finnic toponyms in northern Latvia nearly always point to either Estonian or Livonian (see Balode & Bušs 2007 and the cited literature), Finnic looks like a recent superstrate rather than an ancient substrate, thus supporting the theory that the earliest Finnic expansion to northern Latvia dates no earlier than the second century AD. Before this Finnic southward expansion, the Baltic speaking area extended much further to the north - - "

Nearly always = there are still other possible explanations.
Also, the North Baltic theory should be updated to concern the recent sound historical views of Ante Aikio.
Besides, the ancient speech areas were not total in their coverage, but there could have been different languages spoken in the same area, so the presence of Baltic cannot exclude the presence of other languages.

How is your community of Finnish linguists? Are you like pals who can chat with each other or more like formal. Like I could ask any of my colleagues informally about everything. Could you ask him directly what he thinks of current evidence for Southern Route?

Yes, I could ask. It would be good to discuss about the arguments and their interpretations concerning the old assumptions vs. Lang's view.

[Zelto]

This new paper seems relevant to the original discussion.

Circumpolar peoples and their languages: lexical and genomic data suggest ancient Chukotko-Kamchatkan–Nivkh and Yukaghir-Samoyedic connections
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...02.27.433193v1

[Zelto]

There are still plenty of questions surrounding the entry of various N subclades to the Baltic region.

N-L550 was found in some of the Estonian Tarands. In my opinion, this lineage is the best candidate for Valter Lang's southern route. One would assume the populations migrating along the northern and southern routes would be at least somewhat related. They both came from the broader Volga region. Maybe N-Y5004 took the northern route? N-L550 and N-Y5004 are united under N-VL29 after all.

Although, I also have questions regarding the origin of N-L550 itself and, the materials that are corelated to its spread. Akozino-Malar axes and, Tarand graves seem to match well with N-L550's current distribution. Even though, there is discontinuity between the two, for example, a lack of Akozino-Malar axes in Estonia.

The western area of Textile ware/pre-D'yakovo pottery was known for its fortified settlements however, they lacked much metallurgy. Akozino-Malar axes are thought to have originated further east in the contact area between textile ware and, Ananyino (Akozino-Akhmylovo culture). So did N-L550 come from the Akozino-Akhmylovo or, pre-D'yakovo pottery area?

That also leaves the question of N-Z1943+ subclades which, dominate the northeastern Baltic. Perhaps related to the Ananyino materials in Fennoscandia?

One more interesting point: the two Ingrian Tarands from Saag et al. 2019, are both R1a. These burials have way more grave goods in general and, that are connected to the east.

[Jaska]

There are still plenty of questions surrounding the entry of various N subclades to the Baltic region.

N-L550 was found in some of the Estonian Tarands. In my opinion, this lineage is the best candidate for Valter Lang's southern route. One would assume the populations migrating along the northern and southern routes would be at least somewhat related. They both came from the broader Volga region. Maybe N-Y5004 took the northern route? N-L550 and N-Y5004 are united under N-VL29 after all.

About the half of the Saami N-men were N3a3 (VL29) in Ilumäe et al. 2016. Pity that they don't analyze the samples to any precise degree.

Still, the picture is complicated by the fact that most Northern Finnic and half of the Saami N-men are N3a4 (Z1936), which is very rare in Estonia. There are possibly many migrations from the Volga region, and their linguistic affiliations are very difficult to guess.

One more interesting point: the two Ingrian Tarands from Saag et al. 2019, are both R1a. These burials have way more grave goods in general and, that are connected to the east.

The populations speaking different languages could have had similar lineages. But more precise analysis of the Y-DNA could be illuminating.

[Huck Finn]

Still, the picture is complicated by the fact that most Northern Finnic and half of the Saami N-men are N3a4 (Z1936), which is very rare in Estonia. There are possibly many migrations from the Volga region, and their linguistic affiliations are very difficult to guess.

For some reason Post et al however found many with N-Z1936 > N-Z1934 in Estonia, even quite old (local?) lineages, see Fig 2:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-44272-6

Otherwise, it's easy to agree on the idea of many migrations.

[Ebizur]

This new paper seems relevant to the original discussion.

Circumpolar peoples and their languages: lexical and genomic data suggest ancient Chukotko-Kamchatkan–Nivkh and Yukaghir-Samoyedic connections
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...02.27.433193v1

I wonder what supporting evidence the authors may have provided.

Genetically, present-day Nivkh seem to be quite East Asian and very difficult to distinguish from their Tungusic-speaking neighbors (Ulch, Nanai, Negidal). They appear to lack most of the ANE-derived ancestry and drift associated with Chukotko-Kamchatkans. Have I missed some ancient DNA evidence that might pertain to the question of the Nivkhs' origin?

The present-day remnants of the Forest/Kolyma Yukaghirs seem to be greatly admixed with recent migrants from Europe (ethnic Russians, etc.) to a degree similar to the Aleuts. The present-day Tundra Yukaghirs seem to have been less influenced by recent migrants from Europe, but it is not clear how similar their current genetic composition may be to the genetic composition of the proto-Yukaghirs, as they do not appear to have been strongly isolated from their neighbors in northeastern Siberia.

[Jaska]

For some reason Post et al however found many with N-Z1936 > N-Z1934 in Estonia, even quite old (local?) lineages, see Fig 2:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-44272-6

Yes, Z1934/B535 contains 4,7 % of Estonian men. But it is not found in Balts (except one Latvian man) or Belarussians, unlike VL29, which points to a different route of spreading: more northern = straight from the east or even from the north.