Wednesday, December 4, 2024
The PIE homeland controversy: December 2024 open thread
It seems like we're getting close to the moment when Iosif Lazaridis has to finally admit that the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) homeland was located in Eastern Europe, and also that the ancestors of the Hittites and other Anatolian speakers entered Anatolia via the Balkans.
Let's discuss.
However, please note that comments from total morons, trolls and/or mentally unstable people will not be approved.
See also...
Indo-European crackpottery
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
491 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 491 of 491Turkey from about 8000bce shows a lot of Y haplo G...By chalcolithic Chg-IranN rich population with some natufian start moving into Central Turkey...
Most of these ancient population with haplo G have way too much ANF compared to CHG-IranN...
But I concede I haven't paid much attention to the population in that part of the world...
@ Garbu
''The claim that CHG was in EE since Paleolithic is nonsense. Neither Sidelkino nor Veretye, Minino (ig), Yuzhniy (ig), Satanay have any trace of CHG. '
Nope, there is Y-hg J(1) in Popova & Karelia which proves an archaic but minor West Asian presence in EHG.
left pops:
Sidelkino_EHG
AfontovaGora3
Villabruna
Pinarbasi_HG
best coefficients: 0.684 0.164 0.152
tail prob 0.210
left pops:
Sidelkino_EHG
AfontovaGora3
Villabruna
best coefficients: 0.682 0.318
tail prob 0.004
Posth et al also detected a 'neolithic' like admixture in some EHG. in qpGraph, CHG comes out as the primary source rather than Pinarbasi. Ghaliachi et al claims were ''wrong'' because their analysis was myopic although their summation of Satanay itself was correct.
''Originally there were EHG in Ukraine & Baltics. Then EpiGravettians from Balkans and Italy with I2a moved into Ukraine & Baltics by 10K BCE and mixed with EHG to form UHG-BHG. Some minor part of this I2a also went into generic EHG as a result, there is like no I2a in EHG anyway, who are mostly R1a/b, with some Q1+'
WHG arrived earlier in the Baltics, ANE in western Russia, but Russian sites are poorly dated due to cryopertubation.
No...that is stretching the argument...It is a proposal that l657 could have spread with the migration of Kushans and Sakas to India as oldest l657 sample from China is a scythian...that sample there is a proof that some clades of l657 and an unbroken chain of L657 men leading to him were present outside India since bronze age...without any Indian ancestry...
@Gabru I don't know why you say that the homeland of NEC is somewhere in Abkhazia, serious linguists have no doubt that the homeland of NEC languages lies somewhere in the Eastern Caucasus (approximately northern Azerbaijan and southern Dagestan ), the homeland of NWC languages is accordingly the Western Caucasus, here is an screenshot from an article by Johanna Nichols, who has devoted her entire life to studying East Caucasian languages (based on the Ingush language)
https://i.ibb.co/Wshy8pG/Screenshot-20241220-105633.jpg
here is a video of the presentation itself, if you have nothing else to do, watch it
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gfvauHnP1c4
You don't have samples for Indians and scythians from 100bce-500ce India...
Target: India_RoopkundA:I6946__AD_841__Cov_27.98%
Distance: 3.7349% / 0.03734859
62.4 SAHG
19.8 Iran_GanjDareh_N
7.6 Russia_AfontovaGora3
4.2 Natufian
3.0 Caucasus_Hunter-Gatherer
3.0 China_YR_LN
Target: India_RoopkundA:I6942__AD_832__Cov_40.14%
Distance: 2.5845% / 0.02584540
63.0 SAHG
27.0 Iran_GanjDareh_N
7.4 Russia_AfontovaGora3
2.4 Natufian
0.2 Russia_Karelia_HG
Target: Pakistan_Butkara_IA:I12450__BC_801__Cov_50.77%
Distance: 2.6545% / 0.02654503
41.4 Iran_GanjDareh_N
18.4 SAHG
17.0 Caucasus_Hunter-Gatherer
9.4 Russia_AfontovaGora3
7.6 Turkey_N
4.6 China_YR_LN
1.6 Russia_Karelia_HG
All three of them are R1a and you can't even tell from where these R1a men originate...especially one of them who shares ancestors with the sarmatian sample...
@ Gabru
''The oldest J1 in EHG is well around 6200bce. Minino is older than 6200bce but haven't yielded any J1. No proof of presence of CHG older than 6400bce in EE.''
Characteristically inaccurate claims, Gabru
Minino 3; J1-M267; 7500 BC (Hofmanova 2022)
''The model of Sidelkino with Pinarbasi ^^^ is better because EHG has more Dzudzuana : Gravettian than WHG (EpiGrav) as base. Not because there is CHG in Sidelkino.''
Possibly, but if it's extra Dzudzuana affinity, then your claim it only arrived c. 6200 BC doesn;t make any sense; nor does it explain why such ancestry is greater in the older samples from Sidelkino & Karelia.
@Gabru
yes, but these same J1 samples from Karelia and from Minino, autosomal have less CHG than the earlier ones, right? why? after all, we are sure that this J1 came to them from the Western Asian population, and all because this Western Asian mixture, together with some J1, got into EHG at the beginning of its formation, then due to gene drift EHG moved away from CHG, that is, J1 in EHG is older than PES001, they just haven’t been found yet.
If this could be useful in this discussion, this is what I wrote in the J2 group of fb:
Hg J is certainly old in the Caucasus, but my previous theory that it was among the WHG like the brother group I isn't disproved so far: if you take J-Z6049 (13948 BCE), we have the oldest samples in Austria and Romania (Kleinhadersdorf Flur 5068, Pietrele 28, Pietrele 44); J-Z43590 (10993 BCE but Barcin/Anatolia is 6224-6074 BCE) and J-FTf148 (about 10000BCE) is all in Europe (Asparn Schletz 10 5500-5000 BCE etc).
Infact no one knows for sure if these Indo-scythians were even those EA rich ones from TianShan or no or low EA ones from China and Tajikistan...
Target: Kyrgyzstan_TianShan_Saka_o2:DA53__BC_422__Cov_25.86%
Distance: 2.2399% / 0.02239904
40.2 Russia_MLBA_Sintashta
40.0 Turkmenistan_Gonur_BA_1
16.4 Russia_Afanasievo
3.4 Mongolia_LBA_Khovsgol_6
Target: China_Xinjiang_Abusanteer_IA_oWestEurasian:C4131__BC_667__Cov_42.14%
Distance: 1.3810% / 0.01381027
41.6 Russia_MLBA_Sintashta
41.2 Turkmenistan_Gonur_BA_1
12.8 Russia_Afanasievo
4.4 Mongolia_LBA_Khovsgol_6
I don't know if they have Russia_Afanasievo but adding them do improves the model slightly....
Abusanteer_IA outlier is R1a1a1b2a2-Z2124
84/408 R1a samples from India are under R1a-Z2124
@Mr Funk re sheep: thank you for that information. It confirms what Kortland said. Hairy sheep were herded on the steppes early enough to have been herded by Sredny-stog. However woolly sheep although present on the caucasus and kurdistan much much earlier only crossed into the steppe after 2900 BC. This is a strong argument against an early Indo-european migration north through the caucasus because they would almost certainly have somehow obtained woolly sheep.
451BCE-1591CE
Is the range for steppe ancestry among Punjabi's...
74BCE-715CE
Is the range for Punjabi Sikh Jat
In this time period everyone knows who was migrating into India and Where...
(Narasimhan et al)
So what is the source of steppe ancestry this late among Punjabis? These dates coincide with Indo-Scythian and Kushan period...
Minor correction: Not India but India + Pakistan...
perhaps after 2900 BC (Maikop culture?) a woollier breed of sheep was brought to the Caucasus from Anatolia, the Chatalhoyuk
@Gabru in other places it doesn't matter but not in the Caucasus, in the Caucasus it's not just the side of the ridge, in the Caucasus every hill matters, look for example at the DNA of megrels (sample of 216 people), you see all the diversity of chromosomes but there isn't a single J1 among the main ones, and yet they have one of the highest chg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GfHPX5EXUAAdpXy?format=jpg&name=medium
Although we have lived in the same neighborhood since at least the Neolithic era, the DNA picture is different, although the distance is literally a couple of hundred kilometers
Hey Davidski since Illustrative DNA doesn’t provide real g25 coordinates anymore, will you be reopening your shop or providing g25 cords for another dna service? If so please let us know
@ Garbu
“ My point still stands just as. And an intrusion 5K years earlier isn't gonna change anything really if that's your motivation”
Sadly for you, none of your points ever stand because (I) you’re incompetent (2) a liar. The sooner you Cope with that, the less oxygen you’ll waste
@ Mr Funk
proto-NEC probably expanded from the Iron Age Characoj-Karakent culture
btw Majkop was a linguistic dead end, NWC derives from the Koban culture.
@Rob ,@Gabru
came across a qpGraph chart based on the article "Reconstructing the Human Population History of East Asia through Ancient Genomics – Dec. 2024"
on a scale of 0 to 10 how much is this nonsense?
he also has tutkaul there, but it is not involved in any mixture, it looks like a dead-end population
@Davidski, when you finish with the new calculator, will you again receive coordinates for ancient samples? And what will be the requirements for file coverage? The same as in G25? I mean will it be possible to use lower quality files on this calculator?
how many bytes of information will each sample contain in numerical form? more than G25?
@Derstanos
I'm not sure what I'm going to do with that yet, but I'll make the decision by February 2025.
oh god i forgot to pin the link to the diagram
i meant this diagram what do you say @Rob @Gabru
https://x.com/Tatsuya9JP/status/1870247120835317777/photo/1
@Rob
Kayakent - Kharachoy, this is when the languages had already divided into three main groups, I think, Avar-Ando-Tsez, Dargo-Lak and Lezgin (many languages and dialects within each group, were not yet formed at that time), and also Shahdag (the indigenous people of the northern part of Azerbaijan)
It is difficult to say about the Nakh, most likely they separated even earlier and mixed with the Maykopians / Kobanians
''https://x.com/Tatsuya9JP/status/1870247120835317777/photo/1''
It's hypermanic and fairly meaningles. The position of Ust-Ishim is dubious, half of the individuals are fictitious, and the west Eurasian side of bollocks. It seems this guy goal is to prove that japanese come from southeast Asia and lack any mainland northeast Asian ancestry. And according to him, Y-hg R1 also comes from Southeast and Eastern Asia.
It's amusing that this Steppe hypothesis now hinges on I2, but for now I'll remain doubtful. As far as late IE (Indo Aryan, Balto Slavic, and Italo-Celto-Germanic) goes the connection to R1a is easy to see but for early IE the situation is more confused and unclear than ever. I don't really hold any strong opinions about early IE at the moment. If we find a bunch of Hittites belonging to I2-L699 I'll be more enthused. At the moment it is as interesting an idea to me that PIE itself (as well as Anatolian, Greek, Albanian, Armenian) holds a stronger connection to the manufacture of Bronze than to Steppe genetics.
The classic steppe hypothesis doesn't hinge on I2.
It hinges on the evidence of a migration from the steppe to Anatolia via the Balkans, and that evidence does now exist in ancient DNA and archeology.
So it makes no difference if steppe ancestry is found to persist in Bronze Age Anatolia at a significant level, or if there's evidence of the spread of steppe ancestry into Anatolia via the Caucasus. These are all different issues that are being conflated by a lot of people.
@ Davidski
Can you do a post on current status of Slavs origins. There've been a few recent papers, incl one with Iron Age Ukraine data by Saag et al (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.05.24.595769v1.full.pdf)
@ Romulus
OK PIE came from Ganj Dareh and you're the father of Slavs. Ease up on the LSD
@CordedSlav
There's a lot of stuff coming soon that will settle the issue of Slavic origins.
We have to wait until it's released to the public and then I'll get to work on it.
Hello Davidski, sorry for the off-topic comment, can you do G25 coordinates for me?, I sent you email few days ago.
@GNT23
I can't. I'm on holidays and don't have the equipment with me.
@ Sam Elliot
''A few new Yamnaya ancient J2b L283 samples''
Fake News. For some reason, there is pressured desire for J2b haplo-Noobs to pretend their Caucasian -origin lineage is Yamnaya-related
@CordedSlav
I'm not endorsing the Harvard Hypothesis. Bronze work in Corded Ware did not come from Maykop or cross the Caucasus. It was in the Balkans long before and if it entered the Balkans from anywhere it was Western Anatolia.
Also my Trzciniec ancestors did invent Slavs, it's a fact. It was also a big mistake. That's why we abandoned Eastern Europe. Many still do.
''Bronze work in Corded Ware did not come from Maykop or cross the Caucasus. It was in the Balkans long before and if it entered the Balkans from anywhere it was Western Anatolia.''
I doubt the expansion of PIE was as simple as trading bronze axes
''Also my Trzciniec ancestors did invent Slavs, it's a fact. .''
Wow, I will venerate you alongside Cyril & Methodius.
But your comments suggest that you do not understand much about Slavic origins.
''It was also a big mistake. That's why we abandoned Eastern Europe. Many still do''
Who are 'we'' ? You mean after 1200 BC you left Eastern Europe and ended up in UK or Canada ?
### Admixture Proportions for Botlikh Population:
- **Georgia_Kotias.SG**: 39.50% ± 5.00%
- **Russia_Samara_EBA_Yamnaya**: 46.80% ± 3.90%
- **Turkey_Catalhoyuk_N_Ceramic.SG**: 13.70% ± 2.90%
### Statistical Metrics:
- **Chi-Squared Value**: 14.87
- **P-Value**: 0.137
from this video
https://youtu.be/QeAzoNFt-VU?si=h1Aq6PclnGtZAlm0
What is the most likely geographic origin and genetic structure of the CHG population that contributed to Steppe Eneolithic? Apparently these people were different to those found in Georgia, so not entirely Kotias-like, but I've seen tons of conflicting information online with little actual answers.
@Tom
they lived in the Neolithic in the Nalchik region, but I don’t know where they came from, maybe Mesolithic Armenia, there is a gorge connecting the northern and southern Caucasus, right in the center of the mountains
https://i.ibb.co/r41sBY0/1727113900310.jpg
there is still the highest population density of all the regions of the foothills of the Caucasus, probably more people lived there in the Neolithic than in the neighboring regions of the Caucasus, there is a basin and fertile soil, it is humid and warm (of course, not like in Georgia and Transcaucasia)
https://i.ibb.co/LzVY3T5/1727113940052.jpg
A haplotype-based evolutionary history of barley domestication
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.12.18.628695v1
@ Tom
''What is the most likely geographic origin and genetic structure of the CHG population that contributed to Steppe Eneolithic? Apparently these people were different to those found in Georgia, so not entirely Kotias-like, but I've seen tons of conflicting information online with little actual answers.''
There is no single source, just a constant trickle of CHG and Iran-N like ancestry between 5500 and 3300 BC, which might have shifted in pace & taken on slightly different ratios of CHG:Iran ancestry, depending on time & place. So its both prominent yet underwhelming, with no single 'magic' source a/p Mr Funk's suggestion (in fact, Nalchik only gives a low pass). For even funnier suggestions refer Olympus Mon's 'Shulaveri-Shomu fleeing the snake people ''
@Tom
I think the commentator above misunderstood me when I wrote about the Neolithic of Nalchik, the Neolithic is what is older than about 5000BC (for the North Caucasus), before the steppe Eneolithic received additional mixtures like Aknashen-Arateshen - Mentesh - Chatal Huyuk, which by that time began to occupy the South Caucasus. This Neolithic of Nalchik did not have additional Anatolian Mesopotamian mixtures, but was similar to the people from the burial grounds of Progress - vonjuchka geographically they are in the same region as Nalchik. It is also interesting that this region and rivers belong to the Caspian Sea basin
https://i.ibb.co/FWjBBMF/1734961159452.jpg
A multi-proxy reconstruction of anthropogenic land use in southwest Asia at 6 kya: Combining archaeological, ethnographic and environmental datasets
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2024.109142
@David - "R1a and R1b aren't from West Asia..\. They only arrived there during the Bronze Age from Eastern Europe, and that includes the so called "basal clades".
I assume we're excluding V88 from this? I don't think V88 originated in West Asia either but I think it's pretty obvious it was at least present there prior to the Neolithic. Hence the broad distribution in North Africa.
"It hinges on the evidence of a migration from the steppe to Anatolia via the Balkans, and that evidence does now exist in ancient DNA and archeology."
Why does the steppe hypothesis hinge on a Balkan route? I think PIE originating in the steppe is much more clear than the route it took to Anatolia. (I agree these recent samples do support a Balkan route).
As much as it seems to bother Arsen's petty jealousies, these 'southern' populations must have come via Georgia, at least in part, because they all have extra CHG over PPN/ Mesopotamian/ Shulaveri Farmers, and Georgia/ SW Caucasus was the key refuge zone for CHG
Pre-Nalchik is an unconvincing source for the Berezhnovka-like profile, considering that Satanaj ~6100BC lacks CHG ancestry and Nalchik itself seemingly was archeologically subject to Volga influence as opposed to the reverse. Nalchik and the Piedmont Steppe samples are likely somewhat recent migrants from just slightly further north.
Nalchik is instead a reasonable enough source for the trace ANF ancestry in samples like SNG001 and PG2001.
@ Mr Funk / Arsen from GeneArchiver
''I think the commentator above misunderstood me when I wrote about the Neolithic of Nalchik, the Neolithic is what is older than about 5000BC (for the North Caucasus), before the steppe Eneolithic received additional mixtures like Aknashen-Arateshen - Mentesh - Chatal Huyuk, which by that time began to occupy the South Caucasus. This Neolithic of Nalchik did not have additional Anatolian Mesopotamian mixtures, but was similar to the people from the burial grounds of Progress - vonjuchka geographically they are in the same region as Nalchik. It is also interesting that this region and rivers belong to the Caspian Sea basin
https://i.ibb.co/FWjBBMF/1734961159452.jpg''
Your statement is confused because you did not read the articles and didn't understand the picture- dots you pasted in your link.
Nalchik definitely have PPN/ Mespotamian ancestry, as Zhur et al highlight in their article 'The Nalchik male genotype combines the genes of the Caucasus hunter-gatherers, the Eastern hunter-gatherers and the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) farmers of western Asia. ''
Moreover, Nalchik is quite different to Progress, Vonuchka and the rest of "LVC cluster', because NCK lack central Asian (TTK) ancestry whilst the former have relatively high proportions of it. Overall, it Nalchik contributed 20-30% ancestry to steppe Eneolithic (LVC) samples and ~ 8% to yamnaya, but it is expendable and any other CHG/PPN admixed population are appropriate in their place (such as Unakozovskaya/ Meshoko).
lastly, with regard to your map, the steppe populations all have excess CHG over PPN/ south Caucasian / Mesopotamian farmer ancestry. This means that an important role of transmission was played via Georgia/ SW Caucasus, which was the vital refuge zone for CHG groups. You need to put aside your petty jealousies and accept this evidence instead of pushing irrelevant claims from TikTok
In brief summary & rounded off
The difference between nalchik & Progress can be understood as
35% CHG
45% PPN
25% Khvalynsk
PG2001
25% CHG
25% PPN
25% Khvalynsk
25% TTK
Also, it is worth noting that Nalchik are local dead-ends, because they were mass replaced by Majkop-Unakozovskaya groups after 4000 bc (near disappearance of R1b-V1636 in north Caucasus, replaced by various j2a, J2b, T and L lineages from Fertile Crescent)
Finally as regard to Yamnaya, CW and other IE steppe groups, there is again no single or magic necessary source population for the Near Eastern ancestry, ''Progress'', ''Vonuchka'', 'LCV', 'BPV'', 'Zolotarevka', potatoes, potRtoes, tomatoes, armadillos, all more or less work and just varations of a similar mix.
@Ryan
R1b-V88 moved into Africa from Iberia.
There's no evidence that it was present in West Asia during the Neolithic, or that it moved from West Asia to Africa.
Also, the funny thing about Nalchik is that Zhur's "NL122" and Ghalichi's "NCK001" are supposed to both be from Grave 42. The former is low ANE, the latter is higher ANE.
NCK002 is lower quality so I'm not sure how helpful it is in resolving this.
I repeat once again I wrote - NALCHIK NEOLITHIC i did not write about the late Neolithic of Nalchik to which belong three samples from Nalchik, which we have on hand - NL122, and NCK001 and NCK002 which, as I said, are already certainly mixed with something from PPN, I do not know exactly what source, since I have not played with professional genetic utilities yet, but I think they will be the same as Steppe_N in the Gabru model, approximately 50/50 mixture of EHG / CHG
and they have already included cattle breeding (for example, Neolithic Chokh ,which could have been CHG with the effect of genetic drift or additionally mixed with Iran_N,and there was cattle breeding there in the 6th millennium, why shouldn’t the same be in Nalchik?)
Why doesn’t David give any of his comments? Previously, he wrote about the neoletian steppe CHG/EHG in a 50/50 ratio, which participated in Khvalynsk, but now he simply doesn’t write anything on this topic?
@ Ethan
''Also, the funny thing about Nalchik is that Zhur's "NL122" and Ghalichi's "NCK001" are supposed to both be from Grave 42. The former is low ANE, the latter is higher ANE.
NCK002 is lower quality so I'm not sure how helpful it is in resolving this.''
There's something funky about the new genome.
But you're right that if that community was dominanted by R1b-V1636, they would have some links with Progress, although a collateral male branch which doest not appear to have expanded.
@ Arsen
''I repeat once again I wrote - NALCHIK NEOLITHIC i did not write about the late Neolithic of Nalchik to which belong three samples from Nalchik, which we have on hand - NL122, and NCK001 and NCK002 which, as I said, are already certainly mixed with something from PPN, I do not know exactly what source, since I have not played with professional genetic utilities yet, but I think they will be the same as Steppe_N in the Gabru model, approximately 50/50 mixture of EHG / CHG
and they have already included cattle breeding (for example, Neolithic Chokh ,which could have been CHG with the effect of genetic drift or additionally mixed with Iran_N,and there was cattle breeding there in the 6th millennium, why shouldn’t the same be in Nalchik?)''
Your opinion that hunter-gatherers from Dagestan, who you claim to be a perfect 50/50% mix of EHG and CHG, and just happened to invent pastoralism without any form of contact or admixture with Mesopotamia is wishful thinking, not based on any samples or scientific evidence
In reality, the CHG-rich agro-pastoralists who produced Meshoko and contributed to Malchik & Progress came via Georgia (probably Obdishi-Darkveti horizon).
Curiously, the Spanish R1b-V88 which made it to Africa is linked to Continenza, Italy. There is also a central European branch which sporadically appear in TRB, Blatterhohle, etc; and a branch which is found in Gumelnita, Varma,. These link to the Dnieper group, and if anything were dispersing from the advance of Cucuteni farmers than anything else.
You are an amazing hypocrite, if someone writes words on your behalf that you did not say, then you pounce on the person with the latest insults, but at the same time you quote words and attribute to me what I did not say. Perhaps you are blind or too stupid and pass off your words as mine, where did I write that the admixture in chokh was 50/50 CHG ehg? I am writing about Nalchik in the Neolithic, people also lived there in the Neolithic, better than in chokh, and there are mountains and rivers and different animals, so I say perhaps people with the admixture CHG EHG lived there, who participated in later steppe populations. And they possibly had cattle breeding, which is not associated with Mesopotamia, but has either local or Iranian roots
Merry Christmas Davidski, Rob, Gaska, Gio, and everybody else too.
@Davidski
"@Ryan
R1b-V88 moved into Africa from Iberia.
There's no evidence that it was present in West Asia during the Neolithic, or that it moved from West Asia to Africa".
I of course agree with your last sentence. Was I to make the first fighy against the theory of the Levantinists about an origin of R-V88 in the Levant or Near East (Always for the same presupposition of the Ex Oriente lux until the Harvardian agenda, and exchanged many letters also with Cruciani who discovered the V SNPs and the same V88 who thought himself to an African or Middle Eastern origin), but, Always for my presupposition of the origin of R1b1 from the Villabrunas, I thought to Italy and demonstrated where there were the first R-V88 in the Sahara. I made also the hypothesis of a migration from Iberia, but just because 7500 Years ago happened the migration of Zilhao from Italy to Iberia and many orthers later. In fact hg R1b is unknown in Iberia in the Palaeolithic, whereas it was in Italy.
Actual aDNA of R-V88 have been found in central Europe, closer to Italy and not Iberia, but as for R-V1636 (other Cruciani's SNPs) I am waiting for samples in Italy.
I thank Rob for having written this: "Curiously, the Spanish R1b-V88 which made it to Africa is linked to Continenza, Italy. There is also a central European branch which sporadically appear in TRB, Blatterhohle, etc; and a branch which is found in Gumelnita, Varma,. These link to the Dnieper group, and if anything were dispersing from the advance of Cucuteni farmers than anything else".
@Romulus the I2a L233+ Proto Balto-Slav, layer of Corded Ware Women
I thank you for having thought to me, whoever you are, but of course I dedicated my life not only to genetics in these last 20 Years, but to literature, history, philosophy etc, and I read all the books about religion and I am not a believer, because also the feasts have a genetics and derived from other ancestors. Everyone knows that "Jesus" wasn't born on 25 December (Dies Natalis Solis Invicti) and also about his uniparental markers they have many doubts.
@ Romulus
Thanks same to you & All
@ Mr Funk
Don’t get offended by the facts, and it’s not my fault we can’t entirely understand what your Google -translated random speculations - which you pass off as fact- actually mean. Btw the Zagros region is part of the PPN sphere .
it turns out Nalchik is not V1636, it is from a parallel branch that has a common ancestor R-BY15337 who lived approximately 12,000 BCE, at least this is what familytreedna claims
https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/R-BY15337/tree
where were they hiding from 12,000 to 5,000 BC? 🤕
Thank you Romulus, Merry Christmas to everyone.
In spite of everything, Europe is still Christian
😨
@ Davidski
''There's a lot of stuff coming soon that will settle the issue of Slavic origins.
We have to wait until it's released to the public and then I'll get to work on it.''
Great, yes potentially a lot of Slavic -related aDNA hopefully for 2025.
Hopefully we find out progenitor of R1a-M417 as well, the Vorezhneh Don and Usatove leads are promising.
@ Mr Funk
''it turns out Nalchik is not V1636, it is from a parallel branch that has a common ancestor R-BY15337 who lived approximately 12,000 BCE, at least this is what familytreedna claims
https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/R-BY15337/tree''
Hhm he could actually be V1636, but lower coverage genomes are not fully resolved, sometimes looking as if they are 'basal' or parallel. Either way, they are from east Europe
_
Merry Christmas to all the Patriots
@CordedSlav
Wow😰
@David - an Iberia to Sudan migration seems rather implausible don’t you think?
We V88 was incorporated very early into the Neolithic expansion into Europe at the very least, and that it was present in the Balkans before the Neolithic. Getting swept up into the Neolithic expansion as it passed through the Balkans and spreading with Cardial Pottery to both Iberia and North Africa in paraelle is more plausible to me than Iberia to the whole of the Sahel.
If memory serves (I’m on my
phone so having a hard time checking) we have a Barcin individual with extra Iron Gates ancestry in the Chalcolithic (or was it early Bronze Age) in this Anatolia paper? And we have V1636 in eastern Anatolia from the Chalcolithic I think as well?
So it seems why couldn’t whatever process or processes was/were bringing Iron Gates ancestry to Barcin and wierd R1b branches to eastern Anatolia couldn’t bring V88 to West Asia during or prior to the Neolithic?
No smoking gun of course… Balkans is probably a more likely place for V88 to get absorbed into Neolithic cultures, but it seems more likely than Iberia to North Africa, at least to areas beyond Berber influence.
@David - Rereading the Pinarbasi paper, and it’s worth noting that they model Iron Gates as getting 25.8% of its ancestry from a population related to Pinarbasi but lacking Pinarbasi’s
Basal Eurasian ancestry. That’s in adition to another 62.9% Villabruna/WHG ancestry and 11% EHG ancestry. They suggest two-way gene flow between the Balkans and Anatolia.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09209-7
Here is what the gpt chat replied about the first cattle breeding in the Caucasus
---
### The Origins of Animal Husbandry in the North Caucasus
**1. Early Beginnings in the Central Caucasus Foothills**
The earliest evidence of animal husbandry in the North Caucasus dates back to around **5800–5600 BCE**. This innovation first took root in the foothills of the Central Caucasus, where archaeological excavations uncovered remains of domesticated animals and clear traces of their use for food and other purposes.
**2. Expansion to the Steppe Zones**
By **5500–5300 BCE**, animal husbandry spread northward into the steppe regions, including modern-day Kuban. These areas provided vast open pastures, making them ideal for the practice to flourish.
**3. Maykop Culture and Intensification**
During the Maykop culture period (circa **3700–3000 BCE**), animal husbandry became a central component of the economy. Evidence suggests a shift towards large-scale breeding of cattle, sheep, and goats, with animals being used for both food and labor.
**Key Takeaway**
The foothills of the Central Caucasus served as the cradle of animal husbandry in the region, with its gradual expansion into the steppes shaping the economic and cultural landscapes of the North Caucasus by the early Bronze Age.
---
if anything, he uses external links.
Let's imagine this situation: we start digging a Neolithic burial site from the North Caucasus, or to be more precise, cattle breeders, and bam, we stumble upon a couple dozen ancient skeletons. What do you think is the probability that among them there will be individuals from the R-BY15337 subbranch, as well as something like ancestors for R1b-M269?
if someone answers in a sarcastic manner I will break their jaw 🙂
ChatGPT appears to have been brainwashed by Arsen, the datings are far too early :)
It's a shame that there is a lack of good quality scientific studies from the northern Caucasus, but 5000 bc seems a reasonable date for the earliest agro-pastorali communities. Nalchik needs to be checked for RE, and Meshoko dates from 4700 BC onward. Everything prior to this are just hunter-gatherers, as we now know from Satanay cave.
The 'neolithic' layers from Chokh date after 3000 bc, acc. to Amirkhanov's new C14 data, with a big 'gap' from the hunter-gatherer period sites.
@ Ryan
How does the absence of R1b-V88 in Neolithic (or any other period) Anatolia and the Near East sit with your theory ?
when I asked the chat about cattle breeding in the Caucasus, I didn't ask about the exact local location of cattle breeding monuments, I asked all over the northern Caucasus, but nevertheless, chat-gpity doesn't say a word about Chokh, it talks about the central Caucasus.
it doesn't make up this information, it didn't come up with it off the top of its head, it scans the entire Internet, any mentions of cattle breeding in the Caucasus, all articles, all publications. that's why it's a convenient thing.
I don't know where you got the information about the Neolithic in Chokh, which starts from 3000 BC. Chokh is a multi-layered monument, it starts from the Upper Paleolithic, ending before the Iron Age. there the layers go almost without a break.
@ Mr Funk
''when I asked the chat about cattle breeding in the Caucasus, I didn't ask about the exact local location of cattle breeding monuments, I asked all over the northern Caucasus, but nevertheless, chat-gpity doesn't say a word about Chokh, it talks about the central Caucasus.
it doesn't make up this information, it didn't come up with it off the top of its head, it scans the entire Internet, any mentions of cattle breeding in the Caucasus, all articles, all publications. that's why it's a convenient thing.
I don't know where you got the information about the Neolithic in Chokh, which starts from 3000 BC. Chokh is a multi-layered monument, it starts from the Upper Paleolithic, ending before the Iron Age. there the layers go almost without a break.''
You can't have a serious debate by quoting chatGPT. Firstly, you have not understood the point that 'Central Caucasia' generally refers to Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan. Secondly, chatGPT cannot intelligently evaluate the the substance & authenticity of what the articles they summarised have claimed, as neither can you. The table from Amirkhanov's ХРОНОЛОГИЯ КУЛЬТУРНЫХ ОТЛОЖЕНИЙ ЧОХСКОГО МНОГОСЛОЙНОГО ПОСЕЛЕНИЯ shows a large gap between 6000 and 3000 BC. Your suggestion that Chokh has continuous habitation from the Paleolithic to the Iron Age is dumb, no site in the world has such continuity.
If you want to show 6000 bc pastoralists in the northern Caucasus, then show primary evidence - sites, sample IDs and dates.
@Rob - Not well but we don’t have an abundance of samples either. Like I said the Balkans route is probably more solid.
Merry Christmas all.
😧👈what a brain this man has, he writes such smartthings, he is probably the smartest in Europe
Are there any Ancient Human Samples from Perm and Yekaterinburg areas ? Who were the people who made the Shigir Idol ?
@ Mr Funk
''Let's imagine this situation: we start digging a Neolithic burial site from the North Caucasus, or to be more precise, cattle breeders, and bam, we stumble upon a couple dozen ancient skeletons. What do you think is the probability that among them there will be individuals from the R-BY15337 subbranch, as well as something like ancestors for R1b-M269?
if someone answers in a sarcastic manner I will break their jaw 🙂''
Who do you think you are coming onto a blog for Europeans, presuming to educate us about our history and then threatening us for laughing at your silly theories ? It looks like you don't even have a grip of your own regional history.
R1 is from Eastern Europe and before that Siberia, not the Caucasus or Middle East. R1b-M269 reached the north Caucasus when Yamnaya moved into those lands. Frankly I don't care as I'm more interested in R1a-M17, but I'm sure somebody can explain to you why your theory is probably untenable based on the calculated expansion dates of M269. On the other hand, whatever early farmers lived in the north Caucasus (again I don't care what date you claim, because it's irrelevant) are going to be linked to the Near East, something under Y-hg J2 seems the most likely probability.
@CordedSlav
Calm down, it's just a joke.
Thanks for answering, when do you think I could ask you again?, I need proper coordinates.
in general, what is the most plausible model for different EHG groups? for those from Peschanitsa, Sidelkino, Minino, Karelia, as well as from Satanay and Labazi (I6910)? could you create a table of qpadm graphs?
where they could have mixed, where a group of hunters from Siberia successfully met a group of hunters from Europe, it must have been some kind of mountainous region or river, what do you think?
@GNT23
At this time I'm only running ancient samples in the G25.
It's not currently available for individuals. We'll see what happens next year.
@ Ryan
“ Not well but we don’t have an abundance of samples either. Like I said the Balkans route is probably more solid.”
I think V88 moved into Northern Africa via Iberia, because it is present there and there is archaeological and autosomic evidence for movement Iberia Cardial -> Morocco Neolithic
Anatolia Neolithic is heavily sampled btw
@Rob - it’s present in the Balkans too and earlier than Iberia. Not to mention Central Europe during the Neolithic. Are those from Iberian sources too?
Is there any autosomic evidence for Iberia->Morroco->Sudan or Cameroon? I already said I’d buy an Iberian origin for Berbers. Make the case for an Iberian origin for V88 in Chadic and Nilo-Saharan populations (for example)
@Ryan
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/10/global-distributions-of-lactase.html
@David - that suggests European ancestry for the Chadic populations, but not necessarily Iberian I would think?
I took a quick look at the supplementals though and there are a lot of populations with decent amounts of R1b and 0 of the European version of lactase persistence in that paper though. Im not saying that rules out a Balkan or Iberian route but it doesn’t really support it either I would think?
Still on my phone while I’m away for Christmas - I can break down the populations I’m referring to better when I’m back home tomorrow. Not trying to be vague - it’s just not easy to flip between papers on an iPhone.
@Ryan
On that link to the post that David shared, I saw your questions, they are the same as you asked here, that is, for 7 years you have not found anything about this issue, how R1b got to Africa ?
@ Ryan
Why would Berbers be from Iberia if they speak Afro-Asiatic and bear E-M78?
I think the west Asian entry for V88 was prominent a few years ago because of the now debunked theory that R1b as a whole was from Western Asia, but it could be a small founder effect from Northern Africa hitching along in Chadic ethnogenesis. But it’s not something I have strong conviction about
In Europe, V88 is from hunters in Lepeneki Vir and the dereivka region. A handful then moved to Italy, Iberia and Central Europe with farmers
@Rob
"In Europe, V88 is from hunters in Lepeneki Vir and the dereivka region. A handful then moved to Italy, Iberia and Central Europe with farmers".
Of course it is possible, but R-L761 (15105 BCE) > PF6323 (14433 BCE) > V88 (11737 BCE) Padina 5235 (about 8900 BCE) i.e. 5000 years after Villabruna (Italy).
I discussed with ChatGPT-4o the potential significance of knot writing in historical contexts, and we reached a consensus on its possible role in preserving ancient traditions and influencing language dating, as summarized in the conclusions below. Nothing prevents Sredny Stog from being Indo-Slavic IMO.
Part1
“Your reflections on knot writing as a potentially underestimated means of recording information in the past are very intriguing and could shed new light on the dating of languages and their connections. Let me address these points step by step, incorporating your arguments and the current scholarly perspective.
________________________________________
1. Knot writing as a forgotten form of recording
If various forms of knot writing were used throughout Eurasia, this would imply the existence of a universal method of recording information that might have been as significant as traditional writing systems (e.g., alphabets or logograms). Here are some implications:
• Lost traces of knot writing: Knot writing, being made from organic materials (e.g., cords, fibers), left few permanent traces in archaeology. Thus, it may have been widespread but forgotten over time.
• Potential significance: If religious poems, genealogies, and other key information were recorded using knots, it would mean that cultures with such systems were more advanced in information storage than previously thought.
________________________________________
2. Dating languages and the absence of writing
The argument that a language cannot be "old" because it lacked writing is often used but has limitations:
• Writing as a criterion of historicity: Writing serves as evidence that a language existed at a certain point in time, but it is not the sole criterion for assessing its age. Languages existed long before the invention of any form of writing, and many languages never developed their own writing systems.
• Knot-based forms of writing: If knots are considered a valid form of writing, this could revise the dating of languages and their literary traditions. Religious poems recorded in this way might have origins much older than currently assumed.
________________________________________
3. Similarities in religious terms between Slavic languages and Vedic Sanskrit
The similarity of religious terms between Slavic languages and Vedic Sanskrit could indicate a shared cultural heritage. Considering the possibility of knot writing, we can propose several hypotheses:
• Shared Indo-European roots: Slavic languages and Sanskrit stem from the same Indo-European linguistic group. Religious terminology may have been transmitted both orally and through simple recording systems, such as knots.
• Religious poems: Religious poems, like Vedic hymns or Slavic ritual songs, may have been supported by knots as mnemonic tools. This could explain their ancient character and durability in transmission.
• Migration and cultural contact: Migrations and cultural exchange among Indo-European groups may have preserved shared religious terminology, with knot-based systems potentially playing a role in this preservation".
Part 2
"4. Religious poems and the antiquity of traditions
Religious poems, such as Vedic hymns or Slavic ritual songs, could have been transmitted for millennia. Here's how knot writing might have contributed to their preservation:
• Birth of mnemonic systems: Knot writing could have served as a bridge between oral culture and literacy. Knots helped reciters remember long texts, which was particularly important in religious traditions.
• Transition to phonetic writing: As phonetic writing systems (e.g., alphabets) developed, knot-based forms of recording may have gradually disappeared, but their earlier role in preserving information should not be overlooked.
________________________________________
5. Impact on modern linguistic and cultural studies
If knot writing were confirmed to have been widely used, it would significantly impact contemporary research:
• Rewriting the history of writing: The history of writing would need to include knot systems as equally important to graphic scripts.
• New dating methods: The dating of languages and literary traditions would need to consider periods during which non-graphic writing systems were used.
• Understanding Indo-European heritage: Shared elements in religious traditions could be explained as the result of long-term information transmission, aided by knot-based systems.
________________________________________
Conclusion
The hypothesis that knot writing was widely used in northern Eurasia and that religious poems recorded in this way could be ancient is fascinating and opens up new avenues for research. It could explain:
1. Similarities in terminology between Slavic languages and Sanskrit as a result of a shared, very old heritage.
2. The endurance of religious traditions due to mnemonic systems and possible forms of knot writing.
3. The need to revise how we date languages and literary traditions, taking into account systems other than conventional forms of writing.
While there is currently no direct evidence for large-scale use of knot writing in northern Eurasia, your hypothesis is an important prompt for further interdisciplinary research. If you’re interested in exploring this topic further, additional information could be sought in historical, archaeological, and linguistic literature.
Post a Comment