Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ancient genomes in Hungary from different times, Neolithic to Iron Age

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    It doesn't matter as the new paper out states that R1b-M269 came from Armenia to Europe. I posted it today.
    From what I have seen of it, and I have not had time to read the whole thing, it sees R1b-M269 entering Europe in the late Neolithic from eastern Anatolia.

    So, if you plan to use that paper to bolster your R1b-M269-in-the-FC-Ice-Age-Refuge theory, you're out of luck.

    Are you aware that two of the most renowned Indo-European experts, Ivanov and Gamkrelidze, believe the Proto-Indo-Europeans came out of Armenia?

    I'm not saying they are right, nor that R1b-M269 came out of Armenia (or elsewhere in eastern Anatolia), but that is one major Urheimat hypothesis.

    From what I saw of that paper, they are basing their R1b-M269 theory on modern M269 haplotype variance. I'm not sure that is such a good idea. The SNP trail, IMHO, is a better indicator, and it leads to the shores of the Caspian, as I recall.
    Last edited by Stevo; 30 November 2014, 02:00 PM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Stevo View Post
      From what I have seen of it, and I have not had time to read the whole thing, it sees R1b-M269 entering Europe in the late Neolithic from eastern Anatolia.

      So, if you plan to use that paper to bolster your R1b-M269-in-the-FC-Ice-Age-Refuge theory, you're out of luck.

      Are you aware that two of the most renowned Indo-European experts, Ivanov and Gamkrelidze, believe the Proto-Indo-Europeans came out of Armenia?

      I'm not saying they are right, nor that R1b-M269 came out of Armenia (or elsewhere in eastern Anatolia), but that is one major Urheimat hypothesis.

      From what I saw of that paper, they are basing their R1b-M269 theory on modern M269 haplotype variance. I'm not sure that is such a good idea. The SNP trail, IMHO, is a better indicator, and it leads to the shores of the Caspian, as I recall.
      "Our observation of the Y-chromosomal structure in geographically different Armenian populations suggests that the Armenian Highland served as a transitional corridor for at least two distinct pathways of migration for Neolithic farmers from the Near East westward and northward. The movement to Europe took place predominantly via the western region of the Armenian Highland alongside the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea, which is supported by the spatial distribution pattern of the haplogroup R1b1a2-M269. The migration to the North Caucasus occurred mainly across the central and eastern regions of the Armenian Highland, which is shown by the geographical distribution of haplogroup G-M201. In addition, we identified a distinct Neolithic wave of bidirectional expansion to Europe and the North Caucasus associated with haplogroup J2-M172."

      You are stuck on the PIE thing. R1a is a better fit for PIE if you so inclined to associate one haplogroup to a language.
      In this paper they ignored the M269 bottleneck.

      Comment


      • #78
        Use that paper to defend your "Paleolithic European R1b" theory. You can't.

        If M269 originated in eastern Anatolia and entered Europe in the late Neolithic, that doesn't do your ideas any good at all, regardless of whether it traveled along the Mediterranean littoral or straight up the Danube Valley.

        Even if it originated in eastern Anatolia, that doesn't mean R1b-M269 didn't go to the steppe first, perhaps via the Maikop culture, and enter Europe from there.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Stevo View Post
          Use that paper to defend your "Paleolithic European R1b" theory. You can't.

          If M269 originated in eastern Anatolia and entered Europe in the late Neolithic, that doesn't do your ideas any good at all, regardless of whether it traveled along the Mediterranean littoral or straight up the Danube Valley.

          Even if it originated in eastern Anatolia, that doesn't mean R1b-M269 didn't go to the steppe first, perhaps via the Maikop culture, and enter Europe from there.
          If M269 moved west through the Mediterranean 8000 ybp then that is your clan's "out of the Steppe" theory done and dusted.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by 1798 View Post
            If M269 moved west through the Mediterranean 8000 ybp then that is your clan's "out of the Steppe" theory done and dusted.
            Good thing that's not what happened.

            One of the problems with the idea that R1b entered Europe as part of the movement of Neolithic farmers from the Near East is that no ancient R1b has been recovered from any of the numerous Neolithic sites in Europe from which y-dna has been recovered.

            Maybe it will turn up in a Neolithic site eventually, but one would think that the most populous y haplogroup in Europe would have turned up at one of the Neolithic sites by now, if in fact it was present in Europe during the Neolithic or earlier.

            But the only ancient R1b thus far recovered in Europe came from a Bell Beaker site, and the Beaker Folk are believed to be connected to the spread of Indo-European in Europe and were a horse-riding, kurgan culture people.

            Originally posted by Marija Gimbutas
            The Bell Beaker complex, an offshoot of the Vucedol bloc (more precisely of the Zok-Mako group in Hungary) continued Kurgan charateristics. The Bell Beaker of the second half of the 3rd millenium BC were vagabondic horse riders and archers in much the same way as their uncles and cousins, the Corded people of northern Europe and Catacomb-grave people of the North Pontic region. Their spread over central and western Europe to the British Isles and Spain as well as the Mediterranean islands terminates the period of expansion and destruction . . .


            In western Hungary and nothwestern Yugoslavia, the Vucedol complex was followed by the Samogyvar-Vinkovci complex, the predecessor of the Bell Beaker people. Furthermore, the exodus of the horse-riding Bell Beaker people in the middle of the 3rd millenium, or soon thereafter, from the territories of the Vucedol complex, may not be unconnected with the constant threat from the east. They carried to the west Kurgan traditions in armament, social structure, and religion. The fact of paramount importance of Bell Beaker mobility is the presence of the horse. Seven Bell Beaker sites at Budapest in Hungary have shown that the horse was the foremost species of the domestic fauna.
            From Gimbutas' The Kurgan Culture and the Indo-Europeanization of Europe.

            As I mentioned earlier, decorated horse phalanges of the type found among the Botai and Tersek peoples of the Kazakh steppe have been recovered from Beaker sites in Spain.
            Last edited by Stevo; 1 December 2014, 07:16 AM.

            Comment


            • #81
              From the end of the LGM until the Bronze-Age millions of people lived and died in western Europe and you are placing all your theories on a couple of dozen tested sites.It will only take one find to cause a major upset.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                From the end of the LGM until the Bronze-Age millions of people lived and died in western Europe and you are placing all your theories on a couple of dozen tested sites.It will only take one find to cause a major upset.
                Well, there has been enough ancient y-dna recovered now to be statistically significant, even if it does not amount to absolute proof.

                Interestingly, Russian archaeologist Alexei Kovalev is supposed to have recovered ancient R1b from Afanasievo and Okunevo sites in the Altai in Siberia dated to about 2800 BC, if I recall correctly. Unfortunately, his paper is in Russian and is not available publicly yet, so that information cannot be confirmed.

                If and when it is confirmed, it may cause one of those "upsets" of which you spoke, but not for me.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                  From the end of the LGM until the Bronze-Age millions of people lived and died in western Europe and you are placing all your theories on a couple of dozen tested sites.It will only take one find to cause a major upset.
                  Major upset? How?

                  I for one would change my view on R1b and M269 (and other things that you mentioned) if conclusive evidence came to light.

                  No evidence has been presented as yet, so there is no need to change my position.

                  Nor any reason conjure up theories that "it MUST be there...it just hasn't been found yet"

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by N21163 View Post
                    Major upset? How?

                    I for one would change my view on R1b and M269 (and other things that you mentioned) if conclusive evidence came to light.

                    No evidence has been presented as yet, so there is no need to change my position.

                    Nor any reason conjure up theories that "it MUST be there...it just hasn't been found yet"
                    I would change my views, too, if solid evidence that contradicted them came along.

                    Some contradictory evidence wouldn't surprise me at all, but I don't expect anything as radical as a Paleolithic or Mesolithic R1b in Western Europe. There is just too much evidence right now that makes those things really unlikely.

                    My own view is that R1b got into Bell Beaker via Yamnaya. The big question I have is if the Stelae People brought R1b to Iberia with them from the Pontic-Caspian steppe.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Stevo View Post
                      I would change my views, too, if solid evidence that contradicted them came along.

                      Some contradictory evidence wouldn't surprise me at all, but I don't expect anything as radical as a Paleolithic or Mesolithic R1b in Western Europe. There is just too much evidence right now that makes those things really unlikely.

                      My own view is that R1b got into Bell Beaker via Yamnaya. The big question I have is if the Stelae People brought R1b to Iberia with them from the Pontic-Caspian steppe.
                      You are not interested in the facts or the science but in tying R1b to the IE languages.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by N21163 View Post
                        Major upset? How?

                        I for one would change my view on R1b and M269 (and other things that you mentioned) if conclusive evidence came to light.

                        No evidence has been presented as yet, so there is no need to change my position.

                        Nor any reason conjure up theories that "it MUST be there...it just hasn't been found yet"
                        I have a simple question for you. Which R1b SNPs do you associate with the Neolithic Revolution?

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                          You are not interested in the facts or the science but in tying R1b to the IE languages.
                          That is not true.

                          I am interested in the facts and science, which I don't see as separate. It is precisely because of the overall evidence that I believe there is a link between R1b and the spread of Indo-European languages in Europe.

                          It seems to me you are the one who finds it impossible to cope with the evidence, beginning with your own y-dna test results.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Stevo View Post
                            That is not true.

                            I am interested in the facts and science, which I don't see as separate. It is precisely because of the overall evidence that I believe there is a link between R1b and the spread of Indo-European languages in Europe.

                            It seems to me you are the one who finds it impossible to cope with the evidence, beginning with your own y-dna test results.
                            Where is the evidence that shows that R1b brought the IE language to Europe? That is a fantasy shared by some L21 people not them all.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                              Where is the evidence that shows that R1b brought the IE language to Europe?
                              To begin with, R1b was recovered from the two male Beaker Folk remains from the site near Kromsdorf, Germany, circa 2600-2500 BC. Many scholars, including David Anthony and the late Marija Gimbutas, attributed the spread of Italo-Celtic, one of the major early branches of Indo-European, to the Beaker Folk.

                              As you know, R1b has not been recovered from any earlier sites in Europe.

                              Second, in the realm of ancient y-dna, Russian archaeologist Alexei Kovalev is supposed to have recovered ancient R1b dated to about 2800 BC from Afanasievo and Okunevo remains in the Altai in Siberia. Those cultures are believed to have been composed of Indo-European speakers. Kovalev's paper is in Russian and not available publicly yet, so this cannot be confirmed. The sites where Kovalev recovered this ancient R1b are also supposed to have funeral stelae like those that spread from the Pontic-Caspian steppe across Europe all the way to Iberia and Brittany.

                              Third, R1b is the predominant y haplogroup in the regions to which the centum branch of Indo-European first spread, and centum is the older branch of Indo-European, the other being satem, which predominates in the East. The overall earliest homelands of Indo-European (from the European Atlantic coast to the Indian subcontinent and Central Asia) correspond to the distribution of y haplogroup R1. The centum branch corresponds very well with R1b, while the satem branch corresponds very well with R1a.

                              Indo-European got to Western Europe somehow, and there just isn't enough R1a in Western Europe to attribute its spread to that y haplogroup.

                              In addition, scientists at the recent ASHG conference (in October 2014) have attributed the ANE (Ancient North Eurasian) autosomal component in European populations to the Yamnaya cultural horizon. There is a lot of ANE in European populations with plenty of R1b but very little R1a. It seems likely that the people who spread Indo-European into Western Europe also spread the ANE component.

                              There is also a very obvious correspondence between y haplogroup R1b-U106 and the Germanic languages. It seems likely that U106 was very intimately involved in the spread of the Germanic branch of Indo-European.

                              Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                              That is a fantasy shared by some L21 people not them all.
                              That statement is simply proof that you do not know what you are talking about.
                              Last edited by Stevo; 2 December 2014, 02:42 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Stevo View Post
                                To begin with, R1b was recovered from the two male Beaker Folk remains from the site near Kromsdorf, Germany, circa 2600-2500 BC. Many scholars, including David Anthony and the late Marija Gimbutas, attributed the spread of Italo-Celtic, one of the major early branches of Indo-European, to the Beaker Folk.

                                As you know, R1b has not been recovered from any earlier sites in Europe.

                                Second, in the realm of ancient y-dna, Russian archaeologist Alexei Kovalev is supposed to have recovered ancient R1b dated to about 2800 BC from Afanasievo and Okunevo remains in the Altai in Siberia. Those cultures are believed to have been composed of Indo-European speakers. Kovalev's paper is in Russian and not available publicly yet, so this cannot be confirmed. The sites where Kovalev recovered this ancient R1b are also supposed to have funeral stelae like those that spread from the Pontic-Caspian steppe across Europe all the way to Iberia and Brittany.

                                Third, R1b is the predominant y haplogroup in the regions to which the centum branch of Indo-European first spread, and centum is the older branch of Indo-European, the other being satem, which predominates in the East. The overall earliest homelands of Indo-European (from the European Atlantic coast to the Indian subcontinent and Central Asia) correspond to the distribution of y haplogroup R1. The centum branch corresponds very well with R1b, while the satem branch corresponds very well with R1a.

                                Indo-European got to Western Europe somehow, and there just isn't enough R1a in Western Europe to attribute its spread to that y haplogroup.

                                In addition, scientists at the recent ASHG conference (in October 2014) have attributed the ANE (Ancient North Eurasian) autosomal component in European populations to the Yamnaya cultural horizon. There is a lot of ANE in European populations with plenty of R1b but very little R1a. It seems likely that the people who spread Indo-European into Western Europe also spread the ANE component.

                                There is also a very obvious correspondence between y haplogroup R1b-U106 and the Germanic languages. It seems likely that U106 was very intimately involved in the spread of the Germanic branch of Indo-European.



                                That statement is simply proof that you do not know what you are talking about.
                                ANE is more than 30,000 years old and it only made it to Europe within the last 4000 years.Is that it?
                                Numbers has nothing to do with the spread of language. A small Roman army changed the language in Britain in 400 years. Did they all belong in a single branch of one haplogroup?
                                You should be more specific. R1b is M343.
                                The Beaker folk is a myth. You are not serious about R1b being the only haplogroup that could use Beakers.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X