Page 25 of 78 FirstFirst ... 1523242526273575 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 778

Thread: "The Genetic History of the Southern Arc: A Bridge between West Asia & Europe"

  1. #241
    Registered Users
    Posts
    493
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2a2b1 (SK522+)
    mtDNA (M)
    T1

    Quote Originally Posted by Psynome View Post
    In all honesty, I find this bald assertion of a West Asian PIE Urheimat to be quite astonishing. What do these folks know that we don't? Have we all been looking at the same papers? It's going to be a long...however long it takes until this new one comes out.
    Astonishing or not, the idea of tying language origins to dna is quite absurd. I think it's best for people to stop discussing language families when talking about dna and population movement. On the topic of Indo-European languages, the earliest recorded IE language was Hittite, and the location was Anatolia. Anything before that is anyone's guess unless you have actual evidence.
    Last edited by Tomasso29; 06-26-2022 at 04:08 AM.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Tomasso29 For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (06-26-2022)

  3. #242
    Registered Users
    Posts
    253
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    F0R1a1a-Z280
    mtDNA (M)
    R0H5B1

    Poland Slovakia Scotland England Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by Russianbear View Post
    But aren't Moabites and Edomites were also Hebrew speakers but with different dialects from the ones spoken by the Israelites? I remember reading that all of these dialects are Hebraic or something.
    In the bible some of the Enemies of Israel were the relatives for example the Edomites the descendents of Esau the descendent of Isaac the desdents of Shem (for those who don't know Jacob the brother of esau is considered a father of Israel). Other Cananites are classified as the desdents of Ham. According to the bible or at least some interpretations of it the Cananites were first and than the descents of Shem came from Ur of the Chaldeans. Ancient DNA shows E1b1b being the oldest y-dna in the levant and than being replaced by various forms of F while never going away. So this is why I was saying perhaps the legands have a grain of truth to them. I would assume latter on the cananites would be a cache all group to include all non Jewish enemies of Israel in the Levant regardless of origin but originally it referred to the descendents of Canaan the son of Ham. I do not believe the E1b1b is the descendent of Canaan or E being a desdents of Ham however the legands seem to loosly reflect reality to me at least in how it appears that the people of the Levant in ancient times were aware of two very different patriarchs long before genetics and this does not look like a coincidence to me. Also most semetic languages have J and if they have legands of originating somewhere around northern Iraq when J clearly is from further north than Israel and East than Israel why wouldn't they have a grain of truth to them?
    Maternal Uncle y-line= F0R1b1-L21

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

     Piquerobi (06-26-2022)

  5. #243
    Registered Users
    Posts
    771
    Location
    Brazil
    Nationality
    Brazilian

    Brazilian Empire Brazil
    Speaking of genetics and mythology, the strong recurrence of twins in Indo-European mythology (from Hengist and Horsa to Romulus and Remus, etc) curiously reminds me of the "twins" R1a/R1b and how they played the main role in expanding IE languages:

    The divine Twins are youthful, and associated with horses and a golden chariot. (...) The divine Twins are the most relevant and consistent myth across all Indo-European religions. And there is an unusual academic consensus on this. (...) It is not only consistent in depicting the Twins sons of the Sky Father, accompanied with horses and driving a golden chariot; it was one of the most popular myths in the ancient world, especially in the Græco-Roman and Vedic traditions.The Twins were protectors and rescuers at sea and in battle — perhaps two of the main dangers in Antiquity. They were worshipped and invoked in prayer by many in moments of need or in thanksgiving, once the danger had happily passed. The entire city of Rome, the most powerful city in late Antiquity, had a special devotion and affection for the divine Twins. And, of course, the divine Twins are always represented with their faithful companions, the white horses. This is the quintessential Indo-European trait.
    https://modernplatonist.medium.com/d...c-f7567a922a2f
    Last edited by Piquerobi; 06-26-2022 at 02:33 PM.

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

     Jack Johnson (06-27-2022),  parasar (06-26-2022),  razyn (06-26-2022),  venustas (06-26-2022)

  7. #244
    Registered Users
    Posts
    123
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Pontus
    Nationality
    Pontic Greek
    Y-DNA (P)
    EV13

    Empire of Trebizond Byzantine Empire
    Quote Originally Posted by parasar View Post
    "People from what is now Iran moved eastward into northern India and northward across the Caucasus. Approximately 8,000 years ago ... This is presumably how Indo-European spread to all these areas."

    "also plausible that the IndoIranian languages were brought to India and Pakistan from the steppes of Central Asia during the Bronze Age."

    "we are quite certain that the Indo-European languages ultimately originated in the Fertile Crescent, as proponents of the Anatolian theory suppose, but not, as they suggest, in western and central Anatolia; rather, it emerged from northern Iran."

    A Short History of Humanity: A New History of Old Europe
    By Johannes Krause, Thomas Trappe
    https://books.google.com/books?id=-p...cover&pg=PA133
    Does Krause trolling or he has some strong evidence about this theory?

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Avraam Kyriakidis For This Useful Post:

     doghead (07-12-2022),  Jack Johnson (06-27-2022),  Kaltmeister (06-26-2022)

  9. #245
    Registered Users
    Posts
    521
    Sex

    Greece
    Quote Originally Posted by Avraam Kyriakidis View Post
    Does Krause trolling or he has some strong evidence about this theory?
    He doesn't have. He says they moved 8000 years ago but maybe the didn't move 8000 years ago but e.g. 5000 years ago or 3500 years ago etc

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

     Avraam Kyriakidis (06-26-2022),  Jack Johnson (06-27-2022)

  11. #246
    Registered Users
    Posts
    227
    Sex
    Location
    Europe
    Ethnicity
    Roman
    Nationality
    Irish

    Quote Originally Posted by Russianbear View Post
    But aren't Moabites and Edomites were also Hebrew speakers but with different dialects from the ones spoken by the Israelites? I remember reading that all of these dialects are Hebraic or something.
    I think he meant that Hebrew, Moabite and Edomite were dialects in a dialect continuum sub group of north west semitic (Canaanite?), rather than actual decendants of hebrew. So all 3 have independant origin.

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

     Russianbear (06-27-2022)

  13. #247
    Registered Users
    Posts
    961
    Sex
    Location
    Moscow
    Ethnicity
    East Europe + Finland
    Nationality
    Russian
    Y-DNA (P)
    N-Z1936-Y19110
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a5b

    Russian Federation
    What if Harvard is right? I'm not talking about linguistics now, but about the formation of populations. Let's take four regions - the Volga, the Don, the Dnieper and the North Caucasus. Up to 5000 BC, a population of 100% EHG lives on the Volga. On the Upper Don up to 6000 BC, the population of HG, apparently very similar to EHG, on the lower Don, the population of HG, apparently similar to the Ukraine Mesolithic. About 6000 BC, apparently through the Caucasus, and maybe through the eastern Caspian, the CHG population penetrates. On the Volga, CHG mixes with EHG, on the lower Don, CHG mixes with the Lower Don population of HG. About 6000-5500 BC, the population of the initial Neolithic of Bulgaria penetrates into the Dnieper and Lower Don region, apparently bringing haplogroup I2a. However, the autosomal contribution of this migration was apparently not great, and on the Volga it generally dissolved into the local environment. However, this migration brought certain farming skills and familiarity with working with copper. This gave an impetus to the formation of the Khvalysk Eneolite on the Volga. On the Lower Don of culture Mariupol/Lower Don. Apparently, about 5000-4500 Khvalynsk Eneolite tribes penetrated into the steppes of the Kuban up to the foothills of the North Caucasus, where they met with the CHG who lived there. Thus, the Progress Eneolite population arose. At the same time, the 5500-4500 population of the Lower Don Eneolite penetrates the Dnieper and the Middle Don. On the Dnieper, the first stage of the Srediy Stog or the early Srediy Stog is being formed on the Don, we see these people in the Allentoft preprint. It is important to note that two populations have formed: the first is the Progress of the Eneolithic EHG/CHG and the second is the early Stedniy Stog is the Lower Don HG/CHG. Around 4500-4000 BC, the Progress Eneolite population is activated, apparently having received an impulse from the early groups of the Maykop culture. Apparently, this particular population is the Novodanilovo culture / Skelyan culture. This group practically invades the entire steppe coast of the Black Sea and reaches the cultures of the Bulgarian Eneolithic, where the Suvorovo culture is formed. Apparently, the same group forms the lower layer of the Nizhnyaya Mikhaylovka culture. On the Dnieper, the mixing of the Progress of the Eneolithic and early Sredniy Stog forms the culture of Sredniy Stog II. By 4000 BC, there was an actual territorial division, the steppe was under the control of a population with a predominance in the autosomal profile of the Progress Eneolite and apparently it is Z2103, and the forest-steppe was under the control of a population with a predominance in the autosomal profile of the early Sredniy Stog. At the same time, on the Dnieper, this population also mixed with the Neolithic of the Dnieper, thus the profile of the Dereivka Eneolite 2 arose. The population of Sredniy Stog II of the Middle Don apparently partially migrated to the north of Ukraine and apparently even to Belarus. Apparently, the early CWC CTS4385 and Z284 in Poland and the Baltic are from this area. Maybe also some early L151 with an abnormally low EEF fraction. Fatyanovo apparently originated somewhere on the Dnieper (Middle Dnieper CWC). Other CWC groups are already the result of mixing the late Sredniy Stog II groups, both Dnieper and Don with Trypillia and GAG in the forest-steppe on the Right bank of the Dnieper. Part of Z93 may have remained on the Dnieper and did not leave together with Fatyanovo, from which the Babino culture will then arise. As for Z2103, apparently this group began to separate around 4000 BC, simultaneously with the separation of L23 by transforming post-Novodanilovka groups in different regions. The amazing similarity of the autosomal profile of Yamnaya Don, apparently from the Middle Don, and the early Sredniy Stog quite possibly indicates that the group of early Sredbiy Stog who lived there was assimilated by the Yamnaya warriors. The post-Novodanilovka groups in other regions (Samara, Kalmykia, the Caucasus) were also transformed into Yamnaya and Afanasievo. The group Nizhnyaya Mikhaylovka apparently transformed into Yamnaya Ukraine. Thus, apparently, there really was a mix of two groups around 4500-4000 BC, possibly R1b-M269 and R1a-M417, while at some point R1b-L51 ended up in a group with R1a-M417. Apparently, earlier Repino, which passed earlier than others to the Middle Don, united there with R1a-CTS4385 and it was from there that they went together to the Dnieper and further west. This is of course a hypothesis, not a fact.

    Target: RUS_Vonyuchka_En:VJ1001
    Distance: 2.9158% / 0.02915849 | R5P
    46.0 RUS_Khvalynsk_En
    18.2 GEO_CHG
    17.0 TKM_Geoksyur_N
    15.0 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    3.8 UKR_N

    Target: RUS_Progress_EnG2004
    Distance: 2.7822% / 0.02782155 | R5P
    68.2 RUS_Khvalynsk_En
    14.6 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    10.0 GEO_CHG
    7.2 TKM_Geoksyur_N

    Target: RUS_Progress_EnG2001
    Distance: 2.3771% / 0.02377149 | R5P
    60.8 RUS_Khvalynsk_En
    14.8 GEO_CHG
    10.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    8.6 TKM_Geoksyur_N
    5.6 RUS_Maykop_Novosvobodnaya


    Target: RUS_Afanasievo:I5277
    Distance: 3.3639% / 0.03363887 | R3P
    63.8 RUS_Progress_En
    28.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    8.0 POL_Globular_Amphora

    Target: RUS_Afanasievo:I5273
    Distance: 2.6584% / 0.02658361 | R3P
    45.8 RUS_Progress_En
    42.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    12.0 BGR_MP_N

    Target: RUS_Afanasievo:I5272
    Distance: 3.0279% / 0.03027882 | R3P
    49.2 RUS_Progress_En
    42.4 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    8.4 UKR_N_o

    Target: Yamnaya_RUS_Samara:I7489
    Distance: 2.6316% / 0.02631631 | R3P
    50.8 RUS_Progress_En
    42.8 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    6.4 BGR_N

    Target: Yamnaya_RUS_Samara:I0444
    Distance: 2.6283% / 0.02628276 | R3P
    46.8 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    28.4 RUS_Steppe_Maykop_o
    24.8 RUS_Khvalynsk_En

    Target: Yamnaya_RUS_Samara:I0443
    Distance: 2.3870% / 0.02387043 | R3P
    44.6 RUS_Vonyuchka_En
    39.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    16.2 UKR_Dereivka_I_En2

    Target: Yamnaya_UKR:MJ06
    Distance: 4.3625% / 0.04362503 | R3P
    56.0 RUS_Progress_En
    29.6 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    14.4 UKR_Globular_Amphora

    Target: Yamnaya_UKR:I2105
    Distance: 1.9116% / 0.01911606 | R3P
    63.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    18.6 RUS_Maykop
    18.2 RUS_Progress_En

    Target: Yamnaya_UKR_Ozera_o:I1917
    Distance: 2.0380% / 0.02037954 | R3P
    54.6 RUS_Maykop
    40.4 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    5.0 BGR_MP_N

    Target: Yamnaya_RUS_Caucasus:ZO2002
    Distance: 3.0611% / 0.03061111 | R3P
    74.2 RUS_Progress_En
    21.0 UKR_Dereivka_I_En2
    4.8 RUS_Maykop_Novosvobodnaya

    Target: Yamnaya_RUS_Caucasus:SA6010
    Distance: 2.7573% / 0.02757297 | R3P
    64.4 RUS_Progress_En
    19.0 RUS_Steppe_Maykop_o
    16.6 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG

    Target: Yamnaya_KAZ_Mereke:I11736
    Distance: 2.4960% / 0.02495953 | R3P
    67.8 RUS_Progress_En
    20.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    12.0 UKR_Dereivka_I_En2

    Target: RUS_Fatyanovo_Moscow_BA:IVA001
    Distance: 2.4915% / 0.02491524 | R3P
    47.4 POL_Globular_Amphora
    33.6 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    19.0 RUS_Progress_En

    Target: RUS_Fatyanovo_Moscow_BA:HAN004
    Distance: 2.2603% / 0.02260332 | R3P
    43.8 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    38.6 POL_Globular_Amphora
    17.6 RUS_Progress_En

    Target: RUS_Fatyanovo_Moscow_BA:HAN002
    Distance: 2.1576% / 0.02157626 | R3P
    51.6 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    31.2 BGR_MP_N
    17.2 RUS_Progress_En

    Target: Corded_Ware_POL_early:poz81
    Distance: 2.2881% / 0.02288137 | R3P
    50.4 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    36.2 RUS_Progress_En
    13.4 POL_Globular_Amphora

    Target: Corded_Ware_CZE_early:VLI088.A0101
    Distance: 2.4214% / 0.02421376 | R3P
    53.6 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    24.8 RUS_Progress_En
    21.6 POL_Globular_Amphora

    Target: Corded_Ware_CZE_early:VLI085
    Distance: 1.9091% / 0.01909121 | R3P
    44.8 POL_Globular_Amphora
    27.8 RUS_Steppe_Maykop_o
    27.4 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG

    Target: Corded_Ware_CZE_early:VLI081
    Distance: 4.5560% / 0.04556010 | R3P
    47.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    27.0 RUS_Progress_En
    25.8 UKR_Globular_Amphora

    Target: Corded_Ware_CZE_early:VLI076
    Distance: 2.2052% / 0.02205216 | R3P
    49.6 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    35.8 RUS_Progress_En
    14.6 POL_Globular_Amphora

    Target: Corded_Ware_CZE_early:OBR003
    Distance: 1.9212% / 0.01921226 | R3P
    65.4 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    17.8 UKR_Trypillia
    16.8 RUS_Progress_En

    Target: Corded_Ware_CZE_earlyNL001.merged
    Distance: 2.4754% / 0.02475389 | R3P
    61.0 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    28.6 RUS_Progress_En
    10.4 UKR_N_o


    Target: Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:I4629
    Distance: 3.8419% / 0.03841857 | R3P
    45.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    30.0 RUS_Progress_En
    24.8 UKR_Dereivka_I_En2

    Target: Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:I4629
    Distance: 3.8419% / 0.03841857 | R3P
    45.2 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    30.0 RUS_Progress_En
    24.8 UKR_Dereivka_I_En2

    Target: Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:Gyvakarai1_10bp
    Distance: 2.4414% / 0.02441429 | R3P
    58.6 SIM_Don_Forager_PROG
    23.2 BGR_MP_N
    18.2 RUS_Steppe_Maykop

    Thanks Copper Axe for the coordinates of the simulation of the Middle Don.
    Last edited by VladimirTaraskin; 06-27-2022 at 04:24 AM.

  14. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to VladimirTaraskin For This Useful Post:

     CopperAxe (06-28-2022),  etrusco (06-26-2022),  illyroid (08-05-2022),  Jack Johnson (06-27-2022),  Megalophias (06-26-2022),  parasar (06-26-2022),  pegasus (06-27-2022),  razyn (06-26-2022),  RCO (06-26-2022),  Ryukendo (06-28-2022),  xenus (06-26-2022)

  15. #248
    Registered Users
    Posts
    211
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Psynome View Post
    In all honesty, I find this bald assertion of a West Asian PIE Urheimat to be quite astonishing. What do these folks know that we don't? Have we all been looking at the same papers? It's going to be a long...however long it takes until this new one comes out.
    Sad to say this but i'm sure that i'm not the only one who looks forward to the data they publish but can't take their unsubstantiated claims seriously. It's very hard to prove the location of PIE speakers going back further than there point of radiation out of the steppe. Not only would they need to show reasonable levels of migration into the steppe that everyone (including themselves) magically managed to miss all this time, but also manage to prove to everyone the origins of the speakers of the Anatolian languages because the whole crux of their argument seems to actually be "we haven't found much steppe dna in Anatolia."

    The Anatolian hypothesis never became the leading theory and no amount of sensationalism is going to revive it.

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to xenus For This Useful Post:

     Eurasia (06-27-2022),  Jack Johnson (06-27-2022),  parasar (06-26-2022),  Pribislav (06-27-2022)

  17. #249
    Registered Users
    Posts
    493
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2a2b1 (SK522+)
    mtDNA (M)
    T1

    Quote Originally Posted by xenus View Post
    Sad to say this but i'm sure that i'm not the only one who looks forward to the data they publish but can't take their unsubstantiated claims seriously. It's very hard to prove the location of PIE speakers going back further than there point of radiation out of the steppe. Not only would they need to show reasonable levels of migration into the steppe that everyone (including themselves) magically managed to miss all this time, but also manage to prove to everyone the origins of the speakers of the Anatolian languages because the whole crux of their argument seems to actually be "we haven't found much steppe dna in Anatolia."

    The Anatolian hypothesis never became the leading theory and no amount of sensationalism is going to revive it.
    This obsession of mixing languages with dna seems to be getting out of hand. Not that I have a dog in this fight, but what evidence do we have that supports the theory of IE languages originating on the steppes?

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Tomasso29 For This Useful Post:

     Eurasia (06-27-2022),  parasar (06-27-2022)

  19. #250
    Registered Users
    Posts
    227
    Sex
    Location
    Europe
    Ethnicity
    Roman
    Nationality
    Irish

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyh View Post
    Yup. Just look at Etruscans for the contrary of Anatolians. Heavily Indo-Europeanized religion and heavy steppe admixture (same as other Italics at least) and yet they didn’t adopt the language
    Wait a minute, I thought the Etruscans *were Indo-Europeans* who adopted a non Indo-European language.

Page 25 of 78 FirstFirst ... 1523242526273575 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-19-2021, 11:58 AM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-25-2018, 11:02 AM
  3. "The genetic forge of Europe", by Carles Lalueza-Fox
    By razyn in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 03-18-2018, 05:52 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-16-2017, 05:36 PM
  5. Replies: 43
    Last Post: 01-18-2015, 02:11 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
  •