Here's a useful R1b phylogenetic tree that was posted recently at the R1b-M269 (P312- U106-) DNA Project site.
If these results are correct (and judging by the quality of work at the aforementioned R1b project, I'm pretty sure they are), it would appear that the Samara hunter-gatherer, marked I0124, was not directly ancestral or even all that closely related to any of the Yamnaya/Pit-Grave samples from the North Caspian region (each one also marked with an I~ ID).
On the other hand, the North Caspian Yamnaya sequences are very similar to the rest of the Yamnaya sequences, which come from just north of the Caucasus (marked RISE~). Indeed, all of these Yamnaya samples are almost identical in terms of genome-wide genetic structure (see here).
What this suggests is that the Yamnaya nomads emigrated to the North Caspian from somewhere near the Caucasus, or they were the descendents of such migrants. And if we assume that their ancestral homeland abutted the territory of the Maikop Culture, as shown on this map from Dolukhanov 2014 (look for 9 - early Pit-graves), it becomes easy to understand why they carried such significant maternal and genome-wide genetic Caucasus-related admixture (usually estimated at around 50%).
However, if you're one of those online Near Eastern patriots who like to imagine the Yamnaya as your own, please don't jump for joy just yet. The Yamnaya nomads still look very much like a people native to the western steppe, and this is probably also where their R1b comes from.
Something i didn't understand from this lovely graphic is how a MBA armenian occupies the most basal position ? Perhaps loss of SNPs ?
ReplyDeleteIt's just the poor coverage. That sequence probably barely made it onto the tree.
ReplyDeleteRevisiting the idea of exogamy:
ReplyDeleteExogamy normally occurs from positions of lower status to those in higher status. ie the woman is gifted to chiefs in higher prestige regions/ clans/ territories (I know, those misogonyst ancients !). I wouldn't care to speculate as to who was 'higher status' between kura-Araxes and Majkop. They're both concurrently equivalent and different.
Said to Wim Penninx on "Human Population Genetics":
ReplyDeleteI know that you, and many others, like rethoric more than reasoning, and you prefer first of all Middle East, and, if not Middle East, anyway always something Eastwards Italy. I examined the haplotypes of L277 (when I was permitted to write on Anthrogenica yet), and wrote that Italy has the highest variance of this haplogroup, but also Armenia. Thus I used reasoning and not rethoric. That R-L277 has come from the Caucasus is possible. The hg lasts from India to Western Europe, but... I have explained many times (against all as usual) why I am for an origin of R1a and R1b from the Western European hunter-gatherers, and that I think that R-L51 was in Western Europe and not Eastwards Italy I have said here too a few minutes ago. The most important points for understanding this matter are not only R-L51, but also R-CTS7556, which is brother to my R-Z2110, but expanded from 4500 years ago, i.e. with Bell Beakers, and all the R-CTS9219 in Eastern Europe have come recently from West and not the other way around. Thus also R-L277 may have expanded eastwards with the Indo-Europeans and not to come from East. So far it seems to me that amongst the R-L23 from Samara there weren't either Z2110 nor L584 and L277... thus the possibility, not only that those old subclades derived from Western European hunter-gatherers, but that also these more recent subclades have come from West may be taken into account, in spite of your spites.
Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, the North Caspian Yamnaya sequences are very similar to the rest of the Yamnaya sequences, which come from just north of the Caucasus
ReplyDeleteSamara is the appropriate term, since that is the cultural complex that describes it. The whole "r1b around the caspian" is a made up yamnaya division.
What this suggests is that the Yamnaya nomads emigrated to the North Caspian from somewhere near the Caucasus, or they were the descendents of such migrants.
I don't how r1b spread throughout the yamnaya but how on earth do you figure that yamnaya type r1b spread from just north of the caucasus to the samara region?
And if we assume that their ancestral homeland abutted the territory of the Maikop Culture, as shown on this map from Dolukhanov 2014 (look for 9 - early Pit-graves)
Where are you getting these ideas???
* we get a consistent type of r1b in all the yamnaya from the south and the northeast, save one individual.
* we have old r1b already in the samara region by the mesolithic
and from this you look to Maikop culture? none of this is adding up
Gio
ReplyDelete"I have explained many times (against all as usual) why I am for an origin of R1a and R1b from the Western European hunter-gatherers, "
Or maybe its becuase they were all Y haplogroup I2a and C ?
"Variance"
Whats that ?
Sorry.
Colin,
ReplyDeleteAs you know, I have all of the Yamnaya samples sequenced to date. The samples from the south are basically identical to the samples from the north.
So are you suggesting that there was a migration from the north to the south and this is what explains their similarity?
If so, how would the northern Yamnaya end up with so much Caucasus-related ancestry, and why don't any of the Yamnaya carry anything resembling the Samara HG R1b sequence?
Thanks in advance.
What can be the subclade of Hittites, Luwian and others?
ReplyDeleteIs it under the Z2103 clade or something upstream? Like L23.
@ Mike Thomas
ReplyDeleteMany of you used variance for demonstrating the ancientness of an hg. in one region, this before we had deep SNPs tests. I wrote a lot about that on Anthrogenica. Unfortunately I have no access now, but if you have, you may read those posts of mine. The carachteristic of R-L277 are the values in DYS389I, DYS392, DYS389II, thus the motive which seems modal (and permitted to me to individuate in a Tuscan of 1KGP an L277) is 13 14 28. There are two mutations from the modal of R-Z2110, i.e. DYS392 from 13 to 14 and DYS392II from 29 to 28 (or, if you prefer, DYS389I + 15 from +16). Whereas the Jewish cluster has the motive 13 14 28 (even though it seems that a Moroccan Jew has DYS392 = 13), Italy has: 13 14 28, 12 14 27, 14 14 29, 12 15 27, 13 15 28 (if I remember well, but you may look at my posts in Anthrogenica). The same variance has Armenia (there no haplotype with 12 15 27, but there is an haplotype with 15 15 29 unknown in Italy).
Gioiello
ReplyDeleteThe Yfulltree shows
L277.1 TMRCA 4100 years BP
L584 TMRCA 4900 years BP
So maybe we don't find this markers in Yamna because they didn't yet existing during Yamna period.
Gioiello
ReplyDeleteAccording to "Armenian DNA project" the majority of Armenian R1b is L584+ (Of course there few L277+ and Z2106+ also)
What is Your opinion about L584+ ?
Let me guess, it's from Italy.
ReplyDeleteVery nice work. And I agree that we'll probably see R1b in Maykop, it makes sense.
ReplyDeleteAlso looking at the mtDNA from the RISE Yamnaya samples, I see:
U5a1d1
U5a1d2b
T2a1a
U4
U5a1i
T2a1a
I can't claim to know much about haplogroups, but don't they look like a mix from different origins? Or are those U5 subclades specific from the Near East?
I have expressed many times that I esteem YFull tree underestiated for at least 1000/1500 years. About the ages:
ReplyDelete1) you should consider the formed time and the MRCA. The MRCA is calculated on the samples found so far, thus the age of 4100 years for L277 has no meaning, because there are samples (see the last Italian Mattoli and Contrisciani) who has so many private SNPs so that their ancientness is much older than 4100 years). Thus samples of L277 may exist from 6100 years ago (and remember that I esteem underestimated the YFull age).
2) My R-Z2110* is 6100 years old, but no Z2110 in Samara o Yamnaya, but I find close links in a Basque and an Englishman.
3) L584 is diffused above all in Middle East and the Caucasus, but the oldest samples, those L584+ but PF7580- (and with DYS434= 8 and not 9) are in Western Europe.
Of course DYS434 = 9 (which is the modal for all R1b hts) and not 8 (the marker is so slow mutating one that DYS434 = 8 is an indication of R-L584/PF7580+).
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteYfull experimental tree[ http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1b/] has snp's:
[R1b-269]+[R1b-478] forming/branching, in the Upper Paleolithic[13300ybp] Northern/Western Steppe formation?
R-M478Y13208 * Y13209 * Y13202... 32 SNPsformed 13300 ybp, TMRCA 7300 ybp
R-M478*
id:YF02940
R-Y14051Y14051 * Y14062 * L1433... 46 SNPsformed 7300 ybp, TMRCA 1450 ybp
id:YF03139
id:YF03179UKR [UA-05]
R-M269PF6406 * V1741/L483/PF6097 * PF6495... 80 SNPsformed 13300 ybp, TMRCA 6400 ybp
Thanks for sharing, David.
ReplyDeleteThere does appear to be paternal continuity in the region, at least for a while.
The only thing I can think of to account for the later rise in "other" ancestry is that the Karelia and Samara woodsmen are from the absolute margins of the epicenters of these lineages and were a simple binary mix of two ancient populations. The later changes may reflect continued expansion of populated areas into the frontiers.(?)
@bellbeakerblogger
ReplyDelete"There does appear to be paternal continuity in the region, at least for a while."
R1b used the same region/location to bury their dead for
2500+/- years[7500-5000+/-B.P.] and most likely a lot longer.
David,
ReplyDelete// if you're one of those online Near Eastern patriots who like to imagine the Yamnaya as your own, please don't jump for joy just yet. The Yamnaya nomads still look very much like a people native to the western steppe, and this is probably also where their R1b comes from.//
As you wish Sir :).
@a
ReplyDeleteContinuity through the beginning of the ceramic period, but I doubt the presence of these lineages extends beyond that.
So are you suggesting that there was a migration from the north to the south and this is what explains their similarity?
ReplyDeleteIf so, how would the northern Yamnaya end up with so much Caucasus-related ancestry, and why don't any of the Yamnaya carry anything resembling the Samara HG R1b sequence?
It just way way too soon to talk about the direction of movement at the start of the yamnaya. North to south or west to east are possibilities. Maybe there was a migration south and then a lot of homogenization. Maybe there was a migration from the south (steppe or caucasus) that did not replace ydna. Or maybe you are right and the migration was from the southern steppe.
I suppose you are also taking into account the unpublished studies david A. mentioned. I admit that the homogenization of that part of the steppe needed to happen quickly, as per david anthony's mention of unpublished findings, which give a slight favor to your take but its still too soon.
Does the fact that CW are more farmer like than their EHG ancestors mean that CW r1a came from very close to west asia? of course not.
Also, the mesolithic samara guy just means that there was early r1b stuff in the area. It doesn't mean there was a whole bunch of hit type which could not have lead to L23.
ReplyDeleteIts just an old type and most of them die out anyways.
The Rise Yamnaya look more Near Eastern by the Kuban area. I'll post it in the next day or two. I'm about ready for the calculator.
ReplyDeleteRandom but, how did the caucasus get so much ANE, assuming the ANE model can be used in this instance?
ReplyDeleteJust as a cautionary I will say that EHG was well established by the mesolithic (Karelia and Samara), and so the ANE in EHG could not have been the result of ANE loaded PIE speakers West Asia or South Asia.
But the question remains as to how modern day caucasians are so loaded with ANE and relatively lacking in WHG or EHG. Whatever is the source of their ANE does not seem to have come from the yamnaya nor mesolithic samara. I understand how South Asia could have received a strong ANE contribution but not a strong WHG since any migration from eastern europe to india would have crossed high ANE zone. But this doesn't seem to be the case for caucasians.
Did a pre yamnaya migration slip by 'mesolithic' EHG on its way to the caucasus to deliver ANE?
Also, what was the ydna of the population that brought ANE to the caucasus, in the case that it was not just yamnaya?
ReplyDeleteAnother possibility is that the caucasus become more ANE like well after the yamnaya. By migrations from the east. However, all of northern West Asia seems pretty high in ANE compared to europeans.
"Did a pre yamnaya migration slip by 'mesolithic' EHG on its way to the caucasus to deliver ANE?"
ReplyDeletewildly speculatin'
A population with ANE but no WHG following the edge of the steppe from the Tien Shan direction and then being forced to retreat by the horse dudes might retreat into the Caucasus.
The Yamnaya people are increasingly looking like non-Indo-Europeans.
ReplyDelete@Colin_Welling
ReplyDeleteWe can only speculate for now, but since you asked, this is what I've proposed for quite a while:
Ancient North Eurasians were a Central Asian population. The core area would be what thousands of years later would become part of the Silk Road. Basically from the South Caspian area, following the border between Iran and Turkmenistan, to North Afghanistan and from there north, through the South Eastern part of Uzbekistan and Western parts of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, finishing in South East Kazakhstan. They might have also been west of the Caspian Sea, in the Caucasus, from the beginning, but maybe not. And probably expanded through Iran and S-C Asia.
This population would have been pure (or almost) ANE in the Mesolithic. And belong to R1. My best guess is that the western branch (west of Afghanistan) was R1b, and the Eastern branch was R1a.
R1a people entered the steppe early (from SE Kazakhstan), mixing with WHG types, which became EHGs. A few R1b from the South Caspian might have followed the Caspian coast north (they were seal hunters), and mixed also there (as in Samara_HG). But mostly R1b remained in the south Caspian area.
Then in the Neolithic, Near Easterners arrived to those areas (for example the Jeitun culture, in Turkmenistan, from around 6500 BC) and mixed with them. These would become the "Teal" people.
These "Teal" people, from the 5th millennium, but much more along the 4th millennium BC, started to move in big waves to the steppe, probably due to desertification of their homeland. They also moved west (Caucasus, West Asia) and south (down to India).
Just my pet theory. Without ancient DNA from Central Asia and with spotty archaeological investigation for different reasons (for example, this trailer about Gonur Tepe documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LMvFI8gPAU) it's not possible to have any hard proof of it. But maybe soon we'll get some data that can shed some light about it.
Alberto
ReplyDeleteIt's not secret in sympathetic to your theory. But I have a difficult time envisaging. The mesolithic (pre-Neolithic) in Central Asia doesn't look impressive (ie in contrast to northern latitudes). Essentially, it was really in the neolithic that settlements began to blossom in Kpet Dhag, Northern Iran, etc.
This might be due to current state of research, but it nevertheless brings difficulties to suggesting an ultra-pure ANE in Central Asia rather than a "neolithic" : near eastern look.
On the other hand, I find Daves suggestion that the North caucasus represented an oasis somehow different to the rest of the broad and very similar EHG area also a bit difficult to accept.
I guess both are possible
@Alberto
ReplyDelete"due to desertification of their homeland."
What region are you referring to. Is it turkmenistan. I think Kazakhstan became arid from the early bronze age. so any migration from turkmenistan crossing the kazakh steppe would ideally be before that.
@Mthomas
"I find Daves suggestion that the North caucasus represented an oasis somehow different to the rest of the broad and very similar EHG area also a bit difficult to accept."
Mountains are catchment areas. So in general we can expect more stable populations hemming mountains . they also serve as corridors for migration for humans and animals. I don't see the need to give any preference to the north vs south caucasus.
http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/detail/climate-zones-of-the-caucasus-ecoregion_851d#
Modern R1a distribution is high along mountain corridor from the Pamirs into the altai.
Davidski
ReplyDelete"If so, how would the northern Yamnaya end up with so much Caucasus-related ancestry.."
Kargaly copper field
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kargaly
Orenburg Oblast
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Orenburg+Oblast,+Russia/@50.0689529,52.7688719,5z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x417dba4c4c15b833:0x104a7ef9dd9fd9c7
Volga and Don
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Volgarivermap.png
#
conclusion 1:
Black Sea -> Don River -> Volgograd -> Volga river -> Samara
and
Caspian -> Volga -> Samara
are to my mind the most likely routes to/from the Kargaly copper field.
#
locations of some of the Yamnaya R1b finds (assuming I got the names right)
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Balka+Temrta,+%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F+%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BB.,+Russia,+347480/@48.0081103,42.7022651,5.5z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x4101fc4f450c25e9:0x14d3b14d3f0bebc8
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Volgograd,+Volgograd+Oblast,+Russia/@50.4162103,36.9795735,5.25z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x41053375b85b7667:0x880d179cce57da41
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Lopatino,+Penzenskaya+oblast',+Russia,+442550/@50.5889544,40.8469771,5.5z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x416a8231522f2a31:0xdb3d90a169e04ee3
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Ekaterinovka,+Saratovskaya+oblast',+Russia/@51.8586257,38.1779457,5z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x413fd9364bcef1f1:0x430a88db202e2879
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Kutuluk,+Samarskaya+oblast',+Russia,+446323/@54.2894815,46.0020151,5.5z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x4165da27a5180e1f:0x18cf7bc53c04a140
#
conclusion 2:
they seem to mostly fit along a (very rough) upside down Y shape caused by the two river routes: caspian-volgograd-samara and blacksea-volgograd-samara
river map again
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Volgarivermap.png
#
So if for the sake of argument most of the Yamnaya samples we have are from a population who were centered *along a river* then swapping brides south to north along the river might not be so strange.
#
"...and why don't any of the Yamnaya carry anything resembling the Samara HG R1b sequence?"
Maybe the particular group who got into copper mining had more surviving kids than the ones who didn't?
###
Originally I thought the copper mining thing went the other way - from somewhere around the Black sea towards Kargaly and that still seems intuitively more likely despite the R1b found at Samara but it's at least possible it went the other way.
"The Yamnaya people are increasingly looking like non-Indo-Europeans."
ReplyDeleteCurrently (open to dramatic change) they seem more IE to me than they did before - although without the full military package yet.
One last point on Kargaly
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kargaly
"In Kargaly’s operation was the long interruption in six centuries (2500-1900). The second and much more active period begins and extended up to 15/14 cent. BCE."
Displacement?
That's probably when the very aggressive Abashevo derived tribes move in from the west and whoop some ass.
ReplyDeleteShortly after Sintashta and Andronovo spring up.
every time you say bad ass or something of that nature I just get this image
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8QyNB7CYGU
;)
Davidski
ReplyDeleteThat's what I was thinking: copper culture = rich target.
Some very interesting reading here about what was happening in the Trans-Ural steppes during the late stages of the Early Bronze Age. From page 27...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.academia.edu/765506/THE_ORIGIN_AND_SPREAD_OF_THE_WAR_CHARIOT
Alberto,
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think about the connection between ANE and y-haplogroup R2? R2 is quite common in S Asia, and one still needs to account for the high ANE in S Indian tribals.
R2 might generally be a Dravidian lineage from Central or West Central Asia.
ReplyDeleteSo there'd have been a narrow time-window for northern arrivals to south-central Asia, ie 1700 ('disintegration' of BMAC if not already Indo-Iranian) - 1500 BC (first appearance of Mittani).
ReplyDeleteMike,
ReplyDeleteMitanni were most likely Iranian speakers with some Affinity to Indo-Aryans yes, But there is no scope For An IE language to arrive in India or SC Asia around 1500 BC because it demands a special pleading a radical change and more importantly traces in Archaeology etc to suggest such happening from Steppes which does not exist.
We can conclude that Indo-Iranians were A farming Dominant Population anyway here's an interesting article by Mallory on PIE issue interested people may look at it-
http://jolr.ru/files/(112)jlr2013-9(145-154).pdf
David
//R2 might generally be a Dravidian lineage from Central or West Central Asia.//
R2 Is Also Found around where Mitanni Speakers once resided the Case of R2 maybe a bit like R1b.
On Chariot the Oldest Spoked wheels ones are actually from Iranian Area around 2800 BC.
Nirj
ReplyDeleteI don't think we need to distinguish between pastoral and farming necesaarily, they could be both, like later Iranians.
But see that paper David just referenced. Could be interesting
Hi Mike,
ReplyDeleteAgro-pastoral and Sedentary identity of Indo-Iranians seems more likely, the time around 4.2 KYO event triggered migrations of Indo-Iranians from their Settled areas from Around SC Asia including India.
Yes I know of It but AFAIK know the origin of Spoked Chariots etc are in Near East-Western Asia.
BTW here is an interesting description for the case of Indo-Aryans and Horses, Spoked Wheels relation etc for the starters.
http://sanscritonline.blogspot.in/2010/12/lardore-e-la-storia-2.html
@Mike
ReplyDeleteYes, I can agree with any criticism because it's purely hypothetical based on "hints" rather than evidence. But I guess my basic premise is that there has to be a place where an ANE population could have mixed on one side with northern types (WHG, to produce EHG), and on another side with Middle Easterners (to produce the "Teal" people). A map of Eurasia does not leave many options, so connecting scattered dots I get to that hypothesis.
The Mesolithic might not be very impressive, but I wouldn't underestimate it either. The south Caspian area seems to have had a decent population of "advanced" sedentary HGs that took on animal domestication rather early. Domesticated animals in general have been there since very early. For example, in Uzbekistan there are (inconclusive) evidences of horse domestication from around 6000 BC (which predates some 2500 years the also inconclusive evidences of horse domestication in the steppe). The dog is considered to have been domesticated in Central Asia, and it was probably not for using it as a pet, but for herding.
Connections with Iran and maybe South Asia from early on are also likely given the location. I think you posted this interesting book already before, for anyone interested:
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000944/094466e.pdf
@Postneo
Many areas to the East of the Caspian Sea might have been a desert from very early, but certainly not all and not to the extent it is today (probably the same foes for Iran). So people with a well developed economy/culture, either pastoral or agricultural, had to move as desertification intensified in many of those regions. I don't think they were all one people, one culture, one haplogroup and one common language. Though genetically I guess they were all mostly "Teal" (a mix of ANE and ENF).
I've been interested in knowing if Afanasievo was R1a because I think that from Central Asia to the steppe, the natural path is through SE Kazakhstan (from North Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan). It's hard to cross jumping through oases more to the west of that area. And i see more likely R1a being in that area to the east, while R1b being more to the west. So one possibility is that Yamnaya and Afanasievo are so similar not because of direct contact, but because both populations were the mix of the "teal" people coming from the south with the EHG people living in the steppe. Again, speculative, but not impossible.
@V.R.
I don't know exactly what to think about ANE and R2, but as you say basically all populations in India have some good amount of ANE, including R2 ones. So ANE had to be in India since pretty early, maybe first with R2 people. It's a possibility.
I don't understand what's the problem. Actually the recent finding that the Samara EHG was R1b1a is huge evidence in favour of a local EHG origin of Yamnaya R1b and also of a PIE homeland in the PC steppe.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Haak et al. paper was published last February, the Samara EHG was still classified as R1b1, which was of much less informative value. Back then I repeatedly pled for caution and scepticism regarding the origin of Yamnaya R1b, because R1b1 was also present in Iberia at an equally early date, and R1b1b and R1b1c are almost exclusively Asian and African. So it didn't look unlikely that R1b1a was from West Asia.
But now we know R1b1a was already present in an EHG on the steppe with no West Asian autosomal admixture. And R1b1a is ancestral to the R1b-M269 and R1b-L23 that was present in Yamnaya.
Now it could be criticized that the Samara EHG wasn't exactly ancestral to R1b-M269, instead he was somewhere on the way towards R1b-M478. But you have to realize what an unrealistic expectation it would be to expect the first and only steppe EHG we have to be a direct ancestor of Yamnaya-R1b, and indeed of West European R1b!
Also it could be objected that the Bronze Age Armenian RISE413 is rather ancestral to Yamnaya R1b than the Samara EHG. But this is nonsense, the Bronze Age Armenian lived long after the Yamnaya culture had existed, so he can't be ancestral. And moreover the Bronze Age Armenians carry an autosomal signal of a more northern origin, they are certainly not local to the Transcaucasus.
Now the reasons why R1b1a in Samara EHG actually strongly favours a PIE homeland on the PC steppe: We know the Yamnaya folks were of mixed origin, partly EHG, partly West Asian. If their predominant y-haplogroup had originated in West Asia it would look quite likely that so did their language. But now it seems that their West Asian admixture was mostly transmitted by women, which is well reflected in their mtDNA. And since the Yamnaya males were very patriarchalic it's unlikely that they acquired their language from their women.
To me it's all pretty clear now and the ongoing discussions are a waste of time.
I agree. My point was that the more detailed classification of the Samara HG and Yamnaya R1b sequences, as well as the close genome-wide similarity between the Samara and Kuban Yamnaya, suggested that the Yamnaya samples we have were recent migrants to the Samara region from somewhere in the south, most likely the Kuban steppe.
ReplyDeleteI think this is very plausible, and doesn't affect in any way the big picture.
Simon W
ReplyDeleteI agree with your summary. But I'm scautious , perhaps unwarranted, but still. I certainly agree that it's parasiminous M269 is from the steppe, but until solid evidnece (ie negative evidence from Neolithic west asia) surfaces, some might still find room for doubt.
Finally, I like to separate genetics and langaige, and caution against the potentially circular reasoning, because (for one of many other reasons) there can the very real possibility that R1b1a groups weren't all linguistically homogeneous. For me, evidence from Mycenean Greece is vital.
Dave
It doesn't affect the big picture in anyway, but for me the devil was always in the detail. I have always been sceptical of the supposed Repin-Yamnaya (or what have you) sequence. I have always pointed to rather the Majkop area and the first steppe zone- Cucuteni or otherwise. I'm confident this will be the case, which is actually somewhat different than the case proposed by the classics kurgan hypothesis.
@Simon_W
ReplyDeleteI'm still cautious. I'm open to any possibility, and leaving aside my own pet theory stated above, the reality is that we're still dealing with very partial data. No one can see everything very clear, unless they put some imagination into the equation.
"Also it could be objected that the Bronze Age Armenian RISE413 is rather ancestral to Yamnaya R1b than the Samara EHG. But this is nonsense, the Bronze Age Armenian lived long after the Yamnaya culture had existed, so he can't be ancestral."
See the problem? Of course the guy in question was not ancestral to the other older samples of Yamnaya we have, because he lived much later. And that's one problem, we don't have older samples from the region to find out. However, the subclade carried by this guy might be ancestral, which could mean something. You also have to admit that if it came from Yamnaya, it's the hell of a coincidence that we found an ancestral subclade to ALL the Yamnaya samples so far. Besides, we have a strong evidence of admixture of these Armenian-types into Yamnaya, but not the other way around. This could mean something too.
So how can it be so clear? Let's wait for older samples from the south to see.
One thing we would all agree is that EHGs didn't get their paternal lineages from the WHGs, but rather from their ANE ancestors. We have another population ("teal") that has as much ANE as EHGs. Isn't it plausible that they share the R1 haplogroups with EHGs? Plausible it is. And the BA Armenians make it even likely. So again, we need more samples to know. It's unclear now.
"To me it's all pretty clear now and the ongoing discussions are a waste of time."
I agree that the debate is stuck for now. No one is going to change their views (especially those with strong opinions) because of theoretical models or pet theories. I prefer to not have strong opinions myself and be open to the many possibilities that still exist, and I will move with he data.
@ Alberto
ReplyDeleteWhere is it we find that there wasn't any admixture from Yamnaya to BA Armenia ?
A higher resolution sequence of RISE413 would probably put high much higher up the tree. He might well share a subclade with one or more of the Yamnaya, but we can't tell because of the missing data.
ReplyDelete@Mike
ReplyDeleteWhat I said exactly it: "we have a strong evidence of admixture of these Armenian-types into Yamnaya, but not the other way around".
And yes, there is no strong evidence of admixture in BA Armenia from Yamnaya. It's not the same as saying there isn't any. There is the possibility of minor gene flow and that it brought R1b with it. But it's a much smaller possibility than the other way around.
Why no strong evidence of admixture? The most basic reason is that if we do a Yamnaya - Smara_HG (that should be read "Yamnaya minus Samara_HG") we get something like BA Armenian. So if BA Armenian before mixing with Yamnaya were like BA Armenians, where did the Yamnaya admixture go?
By f3 stats, this is the lowest one for BA Armenian with Yamnaya in the Allentoft paper:
baArm baYam neolHu -0.0024291011 -1.6809428905 134705
The paper didn't have EHG to test Yamnaya as baArm + Samara_HG, but we've seen with other similar populations before to know it will be much lower.
@David
A higher resolution sequence of RISE413 would probably put high much higher up the tree. He might well share a subclade with one or more of the Yamnaya, but we can't tell because of the missing data.
Yes, maybe. Missing data is the problem here. It goes both ways, things cannot be confirmed, but they can't be denied either. When we get more and better data we will know. Till then it's uncertain.
Isn't Krefter around to enlighten me about the Rise Yamnaya mtDNA? U4 and U5 always looked like HG markers to me, but I get lost with subclades so I might be wrong about it.
@ Aram Palyan
ReplyDelete"Gioiello
The Yfulltree shows
L277.1 TMRCA 4100 years BP
L584 TMRCA 4900 years BP""
Why the MRCA of the R-L584 subclade is 4900 years whereas that of L277 is only 4100 (and that could have meant, as L584 is more diffused in Middle East, a not European origin of R1b)? Not only because, as I said above, if YFull calculated the age of the two Italians (Contrisciani and Mattoli) very likely the MRCA would be older, but because one of the L584 belongs to the oldest subclade, that European one (L584+ PF7580-), whereas the other belongs to the more recent subclade:
YF03097 Andrey Kurilo, b. 1912 Ukraine R-L584
12 23 14 11 11 15 12 12 12 13 12 29
YF03149 Nils Östensson, d. 1567, Skellefteå Sweden R-L584
12 23 14 11 12 16 12 12 13 13 13 29
... thus it makes the MRCA higher. Very likely the R-L584+/PF7580+ have a more recent common ancestor amongst themselves.
Simon_W
ReplyDelete"I don't understand what's the problem. Actually the recent finding that the Samara EHG was R1b1a is huge evidence in favour of a local EHG origin of Yamnaya R1b and also of a PIE homeland in the PC steppe."
I think the Yamnaya R1b - or some branches of it - may be specifically connected to copper and if so population movements might be at the family scale rather than the tribal scale and so *might* not follow tribal movement type logic - that's my personal quibble - but apart from that what you say currently seems the most likely.
Is it possible that R1b-P297 originated in West Asia and was present in an EHG who had no West Asian admixture? Sure it's possible, but it's not likely at all. In all likelihood it's from EHG.
ReplyDeleteDoes that mean R1b-M269 is definitely from the steppe? Nope, in theory it's possible that EHG with R1b-P297 migrated to West Asia, got M269 there, and then migrated back to the steppe. But again, that's not very likely.
You always have to ask what is most likely.
In theory PIE may have originated in Indonesia, it's not impossible!
@Simon
ReplyDelete"But now it seems that their West Asian admixture was mostly transmitted by women, which is well reflected in their mtDNA. And since the Yamnaya males were very patriarchalic it's unlikely that they acquired their language from their women."
Far from being any sort of expert at these topics, but don't many of the present day Turkic peoples of Central Asia carry R1a and R1b lineages? It would imply that the patriarchal IE nomads at some point switched over to the "mother" tongue.
@ Robert N
ReplyDeleteYes. Same with the R1b heavy basques. Which exposes that a certain amount of special pleading is required ...Or perhaps more parasiminous, they weren't all PIE.
@ Simon W
I don't think anyone would argue that at present it is most likely that M297 arose in the steppe. But you have to allow for the very real possibility of constant movement of groups North and South of the caucasus, in each direction. Given what we know about these groups (mobility), and that there are archaeologically documented several new arrivals on the steppe during the Pre-Neolithic as well as the Eneolithic: a successive, staged movement of different R1b1a groups into the steppe isn't all that far fetched- at least not as much as your "Roman slaves" hypothesis
:)
Indo-Europeans converted a lot of patriarchal cultures to Indo-European in large part thanks to the wheel, horse and chariot.
ReplyDeleteTurks converted a lot of patriarchal cultures, including some Indo-Europeans, in large part thanks to the stirrup.
"The stirrup, which gives greater stability to a rider, has been described as one of the most significant inventions in the history of warfare, prior to gunpowder. As a tool allowing expanded use of horses in warfare, the stirrup is often called the third revolutionary step in equipment, after the chariot and the saddle.
...
By the late 6th or early 7th century, primarily due to invaders from Central Asia, such as the Avars, stirrups began spreading across Asia to Europe from China."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirrup
Yes the horse, wheel and chariot "IE package".
ReplyDeleteThe wheel was actually invented in CT, and possibly Mesopotamia. The horse was eaten and not used as true equestrian warfare until two Millenia later. The chariot; well yes it certainly looks like the big Chiefs in Sontishta mastered it, but this was 1800 BC, so a little divorced from Yamnaya.
But I feel like we're rehashing old grounds .
The Proto-Indo-Europeans were the first to use the horse and wheel together.
ReplyDeleteSo it's not about being first, it's about the edge provided by innovation, even if it's from borrowed elements.
I'm not aware of any use of horses in CT, and Mesopotamians used donkeys or asses.
Newest work on CT.
ReplyDeletehttp://arxiv.org/abs/1505.05121
Thanks Chad .
ReplyDelete"The significant fraction of cattle and horses in the CTU faunal assemblages and osteometric
evidence of their use for traction" Interesting
I prefer non-Rassamakin stuff. He's clearly a Ukrainian-centrist. It's pretty obvious that Yamnaya has no CT admixture.
ReplyDeleteYep. There's always potential for bias , intentional or unitentional, as well as "story-telling".
ReplyDeleteWhen did CT begin to break up? Was it before ANE started to arrive west of Ukraine or a little later?
ReplyDeleteLater. Yamnaya descended stuff is in the Carpathian basin 100-300 years before the end of CT.
ReplyDeleteDown the Black Sea and up the Danube to Vudedol and pre-Mako.
ReplyDeleteThat's the more popular idea.
ReplyDeleteYamnaya finds in the balkans and hungary do not date before 3000 BC. The CT culture began to move east and onto the step as early as 4500 BC
ReplyDeleteAlso, Uamnaya culture was also more uniform and less hierarchical (less elaborate burials and mounds) compared to the preceding grouplets. It doesn't really conform to the idea of elite chiefs conquering vast territories
ReplyDeleteYes, but Yamnaya like cultures appear in the Carpathian Basin between 2800-3000BCE, with CT dissolved at 2700BCE. That was just an answer to his question.
ReplyDeleteOk. But to answer "When did CT begin to break up? " depends on how one defines 'break up'. It began to break up, fragment, & migrate elsewhere long before 2700 BC. 2700 BC is just when the last recognizably "Cucuteni"-derived pottery elements, etc, disappear.
ReplyDeleteBut, as I said, I recognize that Yamnaya lacks any "ENF", at least those east of the Don.
David,
ReplyDelete//Mesopotamians used donkeys or asses.//
Unfortunately for example in Sumerian-Mesopotemian-Iranian area we have evidences of Horses from Neolithic or Before and probably even depiction of Horse Riding from 3rd Millennium BC! however, the Indo-Iranian horse including them were not the Horses of Steppes (Contrary to the Idea that Domesticated Horses came down with IE Nomads in 2nd Millennium BC), they were different and local, The Sumerians called Horses as Mountain Donkeys i.e. ANŠE.KU.RA,
Yes. When was that? Around 3200BCE? Did you download and read the whole PDF on Cucuteni farming and stockbreeding? It's full of an immense amount of detail.
ReplyDeleteI need to revise myself again the chronology of steppic horizon cultures. Its very complicated, and even with radiocarbon dates there is considerable debate. But it appears clear that people moved in and out of the steps several times over between 5000 BC and 3000 BC, albeit from nearby forest steppe, and Caucasus region probably too.
ReplyDeleteBut all Russian and Ukrainian scholars see Yamnaya as a homogenized, more democratized, and admittedly widespread cutlure than Majkop or local steppe predecessors. It also occured in a particularly arid phase. IMO: yamnaya was a 'horizon', not a demographic phenomenon, with compensatory extensive contacts (to survive the aridity, ensure "mates" and food); hence the appearance of it being "expansive".
"...don't many of the present day Turkic peoples of Central Asia carry R1a and R1b lineages? It would imply that the patriarchal IE nomads at some point switched over to the "mother" tongue."
ReplyDeleteThey were conquered as part of the Turkic expansion from the east and conquered minority populations often take the language of the conquerors.
.
If you look at the breadth of military history there are often populations who were seen at the time as notable cavalry nations e.g. Numidians in Roman times. It seems to me the critical factor - once you account for differential technology - is time in the saddle.
One way of looking at the kind of aristocratic societies that surrounded the steppe is they were organised around providing as many fighters able to spend ten hours a day in the saddle as the society could support whereas pastoralist herder societies get that naturally through their method of subsistence as most of the males spend ten hours a day in the saddle.
@Grey
ReplyDeletepastoralist herder societies get that naturally through their method of subsistence as most of the males spend ten hours a day in the saddle.
What do I know about herding? Just anecdotal encounters with shepherds along my life. But I haven't ever seen one riding a horse. A stick and a few dogs are their tools.
If talking about cows, grass-fed big herbivores must spend most of the time eating in order to get enough protein. A cow maybe 12-15 hours a day. And they hardly move. And when they move, they do it at human walking pace. Herders spend their life sitting in a rock or under a tree watching animals eat, or just looking at the landscape. Hence bucolic poetry.
I might be completely wrong in this, but I can't see why in a herder society most males would spend 10 hours a day riding horses. Is there a reason for it?
Alberto
ReplyDeleteFair point, not all herders just those who herd on horseback.
http://www.mongolia-travel-and-tours.com/images/Juin2011/SG/mongolia-tailor-made-tour-guide-nomads-15.JPG
http://media.education.nationalgeographic.com/assets/photos/000/284/28495.jpg
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e189/anda_mn/178_33.jpg
especially if from a very early age
http://www.gluckman.com/NdmRace.jpg
http://www.china-mike.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/mongolian_child-horseback.jpg
Very interesting, grey. Yep those modern Mongolians are a fascinating people.
ReplyDeleteI know its not really your usual approach, but can you please provide actual evidence for horseback herding in 4000 BC ?
I was looking for pictures of Berber mounted herding but didn't find any although this was interesting.
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numidian_cavalry
"Numidian horsemen rode without saddles or bridles, controlling their mounts with a simple rope around their horse' neck."
If there are Roman references to this it might be useful in this debate.
.
@Mike Thomas
Pretty sure I didn't mention 4000 BC. I was making a general point that cultures based on mounted herding get free cavalry.
@Grey
ReplyDeleteOccasionally a horse can be used, especially for seasonal migrations. Mostly to transport things, kids and to help with moving animals faster on long distances. But that might be a few days every 6 months. Otherwise animals don't feed themselves while running at horse pace. They eat standing still, hour after hour after hour.
In a nearby village I was watching an old woman (70+) with some 6-8 cows taking them every day from her house to the field (about 1-2 km. away) and many hours later back home. She walked, carried a stick (probably out of habit) and used her voice to make some sounds. That was all. Those cows would probably still be fed with some extra "modern" food to increase their protein intake and save them a few hours of eating a day.
So I'm not sure horses provide much help in doing the job (except on very occasional instances). Next time I visit the countryside I'll ask real professionals about it and report back.
"If there are Roman references to this it might be useful in this debate."
ReplyDeletehttp://worksofchivalry.com/en/tag/numidian-cavalry/
There's quite a few references to Numidian cavalry fighting bareback and without bridles apparently: Livy, Polybius and even Trajan's column.
http://worksofchivalry.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2-Colonna-di-Traiano-cavalleria-numida.jpg
I must admit I find that quite funny - all these people saying for years that cavalry was impossible until saddles and bridles and evidence to the contrary literally carved in stone.
ReplyDelete@Alberto:
ReplyDeleteBefore helicopters were invented, horses were used extensively in American and Australian cattle and sheep ranches... ever seen a cowboy without a horse?
We know you can ride horses without saddle. That's not the issue
ReplyDeleteThe issue is about effective mounted combat
And artistic Roman busts aren't exactly the most effective way to gauge this. Those bareback Numidians might have been scouts, skirmishers, or recon. Certainly not the main fighting force.
But whatever the case, it's irrelevant to what I thiught this thread was about
@Tobus
ReplyDeleteIn old Europe I've never seen a shepherd riding a horse, not to mention a helicopter. As stated above, I've seen old women driving their cows by foot without a problem. But that's anecdotal evidence, of course.
Anyway the point is not if a horse is useful or not for driving large herds of cattle for long distances. They might be quite useful for that (mostly to not get tired walking), but that's probably a small part of a herder's job.
"Many herbivores spend a large part of their life eating. Elephants need to eat about 130 kilograms (300 pounds) of food a day. It takes a long time to eat that much leaves and grass, so elephants sometimes eat for 18 hours a day."
I didn't find the exact figure for cows, but I guess that 12-14 hours a day eating is reasonable. And they don't eat while on the run. They move about 1 m. per hour. For 12-14 hours a day. You don't need to ride a horse to watch over them. You sit and think about poetry.
@Mthomas
ReplyDeleteWhat prevents ENF from spreading east through via the forest steppe before and even during Yamnaya movements westwards?
Alberto
ReplyDelete"In old Europe I've never seen a shepherd riding a horse"
Iberian cowboys practicing transhumance in Spain/Portugal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZnvcLCd998
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LinwXzTQ6Ds
And transhumance horse herding somewhere in the French Pyrenees.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.equi-libre.fr/index.php/fr/les-randonnees-equestres-3/automne
So maybe more a question of transhumance than herding per se - which I'd guess is a function of low grass quality.
So maybe the root function is actually lots of poor grass = good cavalry
And transhumance horse herding somewhere in the French Pyrenees
ReplyDeleteAnd Camargue( SE France)! Do you know
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAGDJUHAlJ8
Helgenes
ReplyDeleteCool, ty
Hungary as well (dying out now apparently)
https://youtu.be/0t4hZz0Boig?t=406
(as an aside those Hungarian cattle look they could have stepped out of the neolithic)
@tobus@grey
ReplyDeleteinjecting some reality into horse fantasies.
Sure cowboys and gauchos have ridden horses in the last 150 years. It is because they work huge ranches with thousands of head of cattle. Its for the commercial meat industry where you want a SMALL LABOUR FORCE to round up brand and brand and slaughter hundreds or more at a time. Its a far cry from subsistence cultures.
dairy farmers don't use cowboys.
horses cannot rush about insanely whole day carrying out raids in arid depopulated regions. They need to graze and drink water.
horses would be useful for
1) rounding up other wild horses at the dawn of domestication
2) as pack animals to pull ore laden spoked wheel carts in the south urals. This was happening even pretty recently.
@ PostNeo
ReplyDelete"What prevents ENF from spreading east through via the forest steppe before and even during Yamnaya movements westwards?"
Nothing. But this eastward EEF hasn't been samples yet, has it ?
Well u have a pretty mature Bronze Age east of the urals into Siberia seima turbino phenom also afnasevo predates cw
DeleteSo you're saying that Afansievo genomes have "EEF" ?
Deletepostneo
ReplyDelete"It is because they work huge ranches with thousands of head of cattle. Its for the commercial meat industry where you want a SMALL LABOUR FORCE to round up brand and brand and slaughter hundreds or more at a time. Its a far cry from subsistence cultures."
Or... population living in a region where there is a lot of grass but poor quality so they have to move the herds a lot... like on the steppe.
Right. And your empiric evidence for the kJ/g content of "grass" in the steppe is where ?
Deletepostneo,
ReplyDeleteFinds of Corded Ware pottery and Corded Ware Culture-like stone battle axes in Ukraine date to earlier than Afanasievo.
Hunter-gatherers from just north of these areas have been shown to belong to R1a.
Obviously, the origins of the Corded Ware Culture are in Eastern Europe. There was never any Bronze Age migration of R1a Afanasievo people to Eastern Europe.
Surely you must realize this at some level? Are you mentally unstable, or just trolling out of sheer frustration? What's the point of this?
David,
ReplyDeleteDo you think that Sredny Stog people were R1a and might have been pushed by R1b people moving from the south, so they left north and that's the genesis of Corded Ware?
It is perfectly plausible, but then do you think that Sredny Stog were genetically similar to Yamnaya, with Caucasus-like admixture already? Or more likely the similarity comes from admixture of EHGs with EEFs from Tripolye?
Though some evidence seems to point to male EEF mixing with local females:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/04/anthropology-of-sredny-stog-and.html
So again we're missing data to have any kind of good answer to this.
There's a nice concise entry about Sredny Stog in the Encyclopedia of Indo-European culture.
ReplyDeletehttps://books.google.com.au/books?id=tzU3RIV2BWIC&pg=PA540&lpg=PA540&dq=Sredny+Stog+Indo-European&source=bl&ots=wWm330725C&sig=4RiIxwFUihIjJdKpoQzHdTEetYQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEMQ6AEwCWoVChMIu4SM6e71xgIVZp6mCh2WbA4F#v=onepage&q=Sredny%20Stog%20Indo-European&f=false
So it might have been ancestral to parts of the Yamnana horizon and eventually Corded Ware. The horse cheek pieces found at Sredny Stog settlements also suggest it was ancestral to the later horse warrior package that spawned Sintashta.
Dave , Alberto
ReplyDeleteSrijedni stih was but one pre-Yamnaya grouplet, I don't think it should really be elevated over other ones. There were a lot of permutations between SS and Yamnaya.
How definitive were Haak et al in excluding Tripolye admixture in Yamnaya and CWC ?
Mike,
ReplyDeleteWe don't know exactly how Tripolye was, though at least in its genesis it came from EEF-types. Admixture from it in CW is definitely possible, and likely. In Yamnaya less so. Yamnaya seems to lack any kind of EEF/Mediterranean element. It looks very eastern. But who knows. We don't have samples from Western Yamnaya yet. Nor from Tripolye. So nothing is definitive at this point.
Mike Thomas
ReplyDelete"And your empiric evidence for the kJ/g content of "grass" in the steppe is where ?"
There's swarms of evidence since historical times
http://www.mytripblog.org/mod/file/thumbnail.php?file_guid=10393&size=large
which doesn't prove it was true in the time/place in question but it categorically disproves the argument that mounted herding doesn't exist.
In the same way the Numidian cavalry of the Roman era recorded as fighting without saddle or bridle
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1117D9_hhVk/U0zm54tw1JI/AAAAAAAAGLo/sDzQOZHh7N0/s1600/DSCF6098.JPG
doesn't prove anything about Yamnaya either but it categorically disproves the idea that cavalry couldn't exist until saddles and bridles.
.
You seem to think this is about proving something to do with Yamnaya. It's not; it's about refuting people who claim x or y theories are *impossible* without a shred of evidence that they are impossible.
No my point is that you have a habit of making tangential, off topic statements, otherwise not supported by a shred of evidence. And stating that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence is a weak form of arguement.
ReplyDeleteMike Thomas
ReplyDeleteThis thread is full of evidence that mounted herding exists under the right conditions and that there are recorded instances of famous light cavalry who operated without saddles or bridles.
(although both those things help - the Numidians for example are reported as being excellent scouts, raiders and skirmishers but generally lost in melee combat against fully equipped cavalry)
(I'd also suggest after the last few day's reading that there is a correlation between famous light cavalry from various times and places in history and mounted transhumance herding e.g. Numidians, Jinetes, Hussars etc but I'm too lazy to collate all the evidence.)
The potential relevance to the thread being it's not necessarily the presence of horses that makes a military difference between two adjacent cultures e.g. Cucuteni vs Yamnaya but the difference in the average time spent in the saddle between the two cultures (if any).
Ok. Sorry if I misunderstood
ReplyDeleteMore speculatin'
ReplyDelete"here's an interesting article by Mallory on PIE issue interested people may look at it-
http://jolr.ru/files/(112)jlr2013-9(145-154).pdf"
made me wonder about a couple of things
"There is naturally an alternative view of Anatolian that does not support its relatively
great antiquity but rather explains its absence of features found in other IE languages as
‘losses’. As these are generally explained by losses occasioned by the impact of a non-IE substrate on Anatolian within Anatolia itself,"
Does the Anatolian language have all the IE words connected to metal work?
and
"That the steppe populations exploited wild plants such as Chenopodium and Amaranthus is well known and while this might explain the ambivalence of some of the cereal names to reflect a specific cereal type (rather than just ‘grain’) we would still need to explain why the semantic variance among cognate words is largely confined to ‘wheat’, ‘barley’ and ‘millet’ as if at least one of these was the original referent (and not some wild grain)."
could that be because they traded for the grain rather than grew the cereals themselves?
I don't think that the horse and the wheel are as important as the lactase tolerance that the Indo Europeans brought to Europe given how prevalent that trait has become. The Indo Europeans seem to have expanded without restriction while Neolithic peoples were still on subsistence.
ReplyDeleteHow do you figure that the Lactase Persistence allele gave the advantage to Corded Ware, when none of the Corded Ware samples had this allele?
ReplyDeleteMaybe it was something else?
http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/corded-ware-people-more-versatile-and.html
Yep. As you've said
ReplyDeleteIt's like filling a 'niche"
1) (yet unexplained) decline in mid neolithic groups
2) agro-pastoralists from the forest steppe fill vacuum, moving west and north, aided by their more dispersed mode of living (hence relatively greater mobility) and a pastoralist economy suited to a central north Europe in the wake of soil degradation
I wonder if anyone is going to do a palaeo-autopsy of Neolithic central Europeans to see if there wasn;t something like a Neolithic "Black Death' ? HA ha
ReplyDelete@grey
ReplyDeleteLet me help u make a better case
For horse dudes.
You are essentially saying that in arid steppe areas vast tracts of land were needed to support small populations. A different way of saying they would have low demographic impact.
Except: because of higher mobility perhaps they could self organize and throng at a particular boundary to do raids. This is conjecture...
We can see traces of historical conquering groups throughout Europe, like the Roman y chromosomes in Britain or the Viking y chromosomes in Sicily and they are often a small minority. I dint think some sort of milatiristic model is logical because these people were too primitive.
ReplyDeletepostneo
ReplyDelete"You are essentially saying that in arid steppe areas vast tracts of land were needed to support small populations. A different way of saying they would have low demographic impact."
Yes. Hence no conquering hordes hence if there was tribal scale expansion *despite* those low numbers then maybe they did it some other way
e.g.
raid / depopulate / expand
(the conquering horde part only coming much later in time with improved technology i.e. saddles, bridles, stirrups, chariots etc)
.
(or alternatively in some places not tribal movements at all but groups of miners hopping from one source of soft metal to the next and expanding their numbers from there e.g. could languages like Anatolian be the result of some early IE miners arriving at a copper producing region in Anatolia among people speaking a non-IE language that became the substrate?)
(maybe leading eventually to Hittite vs Armenian = Rio Tinto vs De Beers)
Romulus
ReplyDelete"I don't think that the horse and the wheel are as important as the lactase tolerance that the Indo Europeans brought to Europe given how prevalent that trait has become."
Logically that seems the simplest explanation but so far very few of the ancient samples has had it. It seems (to me) to have only exploded when it reached the Atlantic Coast and NW Europe - which may be somehow related to the soil in the Atlantic coast bio-region being too acidic for wheat (due to leaching).
Where does the early neolithic Iberian R1b fit in to this chart?
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't because it's R1b-V88. We'd need to have two main tree trunks on that schematic to fit it in.
ReplyDeletePerhaps it does, because everyone thought till yesterday that no R1b would be found in Western Europe, and perhaps you know that I am writing from so long that R1b1-V88 hasn't come from Middle East but from Sardinia/Italy or Iberia (I have written hundreds of letters about that, about the two Sardinian lines of R-V35 and R-V18, very likely the oldest and ancestors of the African and Middle Eastern R-V88-Z7771 and V69, and about the fact that many people hide their tests). Of course I also wrote why I think that R1b1a2-L51 and subclades were in Western Europe and not at Samara or Eastern Europe. For that I'd wait for the next aDNA data from Tyrrhenian Italy and Iberian Bell Beakers.
ReplyDeleteOf course R-M18 and not R-V18!
ReplyDelete