World Families Forums - An IE Thread That Began on 03 April 2012

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 10, 2014, 09:26:42 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  An IE Thread That Began on 03 April 2012
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12 Go Down Print
Author Topic: An IE Thread That Began on 03 April 2012  (Read 12386 times)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« on: April 03, 2012, 10:25:05 AM »

If Basque represents that sole surviving vestige of the language spoken by the predominantly R1b population of most of western Europe, then how and why did the massive switch to Indo-European languages take place, and who was responsible for it?

I suggest that the Basque language derived from that of the Copper Age Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture, which collapsed in large part c. 4000 BC due to climate change. Refugees from this culture could have sought  literally greener pastures. I don't imagine that they settled the whole of western Europe, but that some travelled via Sardinia and the Garonne to what became Aquitaine, and others northward up the Danube to feed into the TRB.

Meanwhile the remains of the Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture was absorbed by Yamnaya. Picture a lot of intermarriage with patrilocality, so we could have Yamnaya-born mothers teaching R1b sons to speak PIE. Then we have further waves of departures westward and up the Danube 3,100 and 2,800 BC, this time by people genetically closely related on the male line from the ones who left before, but speaking a different language.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2012, 10:30:03 AM by Jean M » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #1 on: April 03, 2012, 10:29:01 AM »

The Basque Country had similar prosperity, especially due to the natural port of Bilbao.
On place-name evidence, there were no Basques in Bilbao and most of the rest of the Spanish Basque Country in the pre-Roman period. They seem to have moved west from France or from Navarre in the upheaval following the collapse of the Western Empire. See Basques.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2012, 04:56:29 PM »

...I don't think genetic drift can be dismissed as "an argument when you don't have an argument".
It seems to be the preferred explanation by someone when the data doesn't fit their hypothesis.... but it is a an argument without evidence and is therefore meaningless. It doesn't mean drift doesn't or can't happen but I'm not sure how we know it was drift versus some unknown bottleneck or founder effect.

Besides, it seems to me those early papers explained away young haplogroup ages not so much by genetic drift as by the convenient "genetic bottleneck".
Every time I look at Basque R1b I always think to myself that it looks really young so a few months ago I went back to look at earlier studies to see how they handled that.
 
I don't know if this paper is from a credible researcher but it based on a compilation of earlier works.

"The Basques in the Genetic Landscape of Europe" by Young, 2009.
Quote from: Young
In reference to the Basques, based on the archaeological evidence, the entire Iberian Peninsula was little affected by the Neolithic  transition, lending credence to the idea that the Basques are a remnant population, although one which has experienced some admixture since the end of the Last Glacial Maximum...

Analysis of the molecular systems does not support a recent common ancestor between the Basques and populations either from the Caucasus or North Africa. While analysis of classical markers reveals the effects of genetic drift
on the Basque population as a whole...
I counted that Young used the word "drift" 24 times in the paper.

Below is the more well known paper.

"The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective" by Semino et al - 2000.
Quote from: Semino
However, the origin of Paleolithic European groups and their contribution to the present gene pool have been debated. Assuming no selection, local differentiation occurred in isolated and small Paleolithic groups by drift...

The smaller effective population size of the NRY enhances the consequences of drift and founder effect relative to the autosomes, making NRY variation a potentially sensitive index of population composition...

The previously categorized Sardinians, Basques, and Saami outliers share basically the same Y binary components of the other Europeans. Their peculiar position with respect to frequency is probably a consequence of genetic drift and isolation."

I see that the "drift" argument is used in conjunction with smaller population sizes (i.e. the Mesolith) and "isolation."  My point is that "drift" as a argument is not positive evidence, it's just an explanation of how low diversity could've been achieved if you don't have supportive data.

I guess the part Semino failed to recognize is that the "drift" that occurred in Sardinia, Aquitania and the Isles all resulted in AMH (Atlantic Modal Haplotype) in their "isolated" areas.  

What a coincidence?

The same problem occurs for those who argue R1b looks falsely young in Europe because of bottlenecks. By great luck,  the isolated bottleneck survivors and new dominant lineages were all AMH.

Ultimately this is the crux of the problem for those who argue R1b is indigeneous or pre-Neolithic to Europe -  it's "strikingly similar" and all about the same age, relatively young when compared to other haplogroups, and its spread across a large area.

I think Jean has a point.
...My unashamed theme is migration ...
« Last Edit: April 03, 2012, 05:49:03 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2012, 08:08:13 PM »

I'm not sure I get your point. Drift never occurs, it's just a lame excuse when one has no evidence? The Basques always have been mostly R1b and did not experience drift because there is no such thing?

I think drift is a reasonable hypothesis, since it is certainly easy to understand how it could happen. It would take other types of corroborating evidence to prove that it did occur in a particular instance.

Bottlenecks are the same sort of thing. One can theorize that a bottleneck occurred, but some real hard evidence would be required to actually prove it.

I think drift very well could have occurred among the Basques and could be responsible for the fact that they are predominantly R1b today. They may have been predominantly something else in the distant past.

If that is not true, if the Basques have always been mostly R1b, then it doesn't seem likely that R1b brought PIE to western Europe but was Indo-Europeanized over the course of time.

I also don't see how migrationism and drift are in conflict - just the opposite. Newcomers, even though small in numbers at first, could replace or at least eventually outnumber the natives by means of genetic drift, i.e., the luck of the draw when it comes to having male offspring who survive to reproduce. Of course, "luck" is shorthand for any number of advantages it would be tedious to list.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2012, 08:14:45 PM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #4 on: April 03, 2012, 08:41:34 PM »

If Basque represents that sole surviving vestige of the language spoken by the predominantly R1b population of most of western Europe, then how and why did the massive switch to Indo-European languages take place, and who was responsible for it?

I suggest that the Basque language derived from that of the Copper Age Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture, which collapsed in large part c. 4000 BC due to climate change. Refugees from this culture could have sought  literally greener pastures. I don't imagine that they settled the whole of western Europe, but that some travelled via Sardinia and the Garonne to what became Aquitaine, and others northward up the Danube to feed into the TRB.

Meanwhile the remains of the Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture was absorbed by Yamnaya. Picture a lot of intermarriage with patrilocality, so we could have Yamnaya-born mothers teaching R1b sons to speak PIE. Then we have further waves of departures westward and up the Danube 3,100 and 2,800 BC, this time by people genetically closely related on the male line from the ones who left before, but speaking a different language.



So, basically you have embraced the idea that R1a is the PIE y haplogroup. R1b learned it and took it west.

I guess something like that would have to happen for the Kurgan Theory to be correct, since obviously not much R1a made it very far west. It's pretty plain the old idea of horse-riding conquerors from the steppe imposing their language and culture throughout Europe is not correct. So, the current form of the Kurgan Theory modifies that a bit. It's kind of a combo of limited conquering followed by cultural diffusion.

I just don't find it compelling or very believable (if those two things are different).

On the other hand, I am about ready to surrender the whole Indo-European thing to whomever wants it. The same goes for "deep ancestry" as a whole. Call me a "Basque". If I am lucky, maybe I'll get to retire in the Pyrenees.

Perhaps good ol' genealogy is a better and more productive pursuit.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2012, 08:50:05 PM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2012, 09:18:36 PM »

I'm not sure I get your point. Drift never occurs, it's just a lame excuse when one has no evidence? The Basques always have been mostly R1b and did not experience drift because there is no such thing?

I think drift is a reasonable hypothesis, since it is certainly easy to understand how it could happen. It would take other types of corroborating evidence to prove that it did occur in a particular instance.

Bottlenecks are the same sort of thing. One can theorize that a bottleneck occurred, but some real hard evidence would be required to actually prove it.

I think drift very well could have occurred among the Basques and could be responsible for the fact that they are predominantly R1b today. They may have been predominantly something else in the distant past.

If that is not true, if the Basques have always been mostly R1b, then it doesn't seem likely that R1b brought PIE to western Europe but was Indo-Europeanized over the course of time.

I also don't see how migrationism and drift are in conflict - just the opposite. Newcomers, even though small in numbers at first, could replace or at least eventually outnumber the natives by means of genetic drift, i.e., the luck of the draw when it comes to having male offspring who survive to reproduce. Of course, "luck" is shorthand for any number of advantages it would be tedious to list.
Of course drift can occur, as I've noted.

Migrationist theories and drift theories are not necessarily in conflict.

However, the anti-migrationalists, at least the "R1b is Paleothic" folks (or at least Semino and Young),  use the drift argument to explain the apparent youth of R1b among Basques.

They really don't have evidence to say that. That is just an escape option for them to avoid the genetic data indicating the apparent youth of R1b vis-a-vie other haplogroups in Europe.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2012, 09:30:50 PM »

I guess if they really believe what they apparently believe, i.e., that R1b is the Paleolithic western European y haplogroup, then drift and bottlenecks seem like reasonable hypotheses to them. They could be right, after all. (I don't think they are, but they could be.)

I think they could be right about drift in the case of the Basques, but not for the same reasons. Again, I am positing an hypothesis to explain why the Basques are mostly R1b and yet speak a non-IE language. I'm not arguing that I know or can prove that is what happened.

If I am wrong, and if most of predominantly R1b western Europe once spoke a Vasconic language, then I would just as soon the "Paleolithic R1b" crowd were ultimately proven right. At least there is some glamor in being the descendant of a Cro-Magnon!

Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #7 on: April 03, 2012, 09:49:00 PM »

If Basque represents that sole surviving vestige of the language spoken by the predominantly R1b population of most of western Europe, then how and why did the massive switch to Indo-European languages take place, and who was responsible for it?

I suggest that the Basque language derived from that of the Copper Age Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture, which collapsed in large part c. 4000 BC due to climate change. Refugees from this culture could have sought  literally greener pastures. I don't imagine that they settled the whole of western Europe, but that some travelled via Sardinia and the Garonne to what became Aquitaine, and others northward up the Danube to feed into the TRB.

Meanwhile the remains of the Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture was absorbed by Yamnaya. Picture a lot of intermarriage with patrilocality, so we could have Yamnaya-born mothers teaching R1b sons to speak PIE. Then we have further waves of departures westward and up the Danube 3,100 and 2,800 BC, this time by people genetically closely related on the male line from the ones who left before, but speaking a different language.



So, basically you have embraced the idea that R1a is the PIE y haplogroup. R1b learned it and took it west.

I guess something like that would have to happen for the Kurgan Theory to be correct, since obviously not much R1a made it very far west. It's pretty plain the old idea of horse-riding conquerors from the steppe imposing their language and culture throughout Europe is not correct. So, the current form of the Kurgan Theory modifies that a bit. It's kind of a combo of limited conquering followed by cultural diffusion.

I just don't find it compelling or very believable (if those two things are different). ...
I don't find it compelling. It is possible, but I'm quite skeptical. R1b's conversion to IE had to have been comprehensive with very limited R1b leaking away (the Basques I guess)  before the wholesale conversion by the rest back home. It would seem like the Western Europe R1b block would have more R1a among it.

I can see how the whole idea has support or perhaps inspiration from David Anthony. I posted this elsewhere today.

I found the following highlights related to the Cucuteni-Tripolye from “The Horse The Wheel and Language” by David Anthony. These qotes are from from pp. 227-238 in the chapter “The End of Old Europe.” Anthony says the Tripolye B1 period was about 4300-4000 BC and the B2 period was from around 4000-3700 BC.
Quote from: Anthony
…extremely cold years happened first in 4120 and 4040 BCE. They were harbingers of the 140-yeard-long, bitterly cold period lasting from 3960 to 3821 BCE… Quickly these and perhaps other stresses accumulated to create an enormous crisis....
in the lower Danube valley and the Balkans… The cultures that appeared after about 3800 BCE did not regularly use female figurines in domestic rituals, no longer wore copper spiral bracelets… made relatively plain pottery.. did not live on tells, and depended more on stockbreeding.

’We are faced with a complete replacement of the culture,’ E.N. Chenykh said. It was ‘a catastrophe of colossal scope’… according to ... H. Todorova.

The Old European traditions of the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture also survived and, in fact, seemed curiously reinvigorated. After 4000 BCE, in its Tripolye B2 phase, the Tripolye culture expanded eastwards towards the Dnieper valley....

In a database of 2,017 Cucuteni/Tripolye settlements compiled by the Moldovan archaeologist V. Dergachev, half of all fortified Cucuteni/Tripolye sites are dates just to the Tripolye B1 period. About 60% of all flint projectile points from all the Cucuteni/Tripolye culture also belonged just to the Tripolye B1 period. There was no corresponding increase in hunting. Probably it was associated with increased warfare…. Compared to its past and its future, the Tripolye B1 period was a time of sharply increased conflict in the Eastern Carpathians. Simultaneously with the increase in fortifications and weapons, Tripolye B1 towns showed widespread evidence of contact with steppe cultures...

Many Cucuteni C pots look like they were made by Sredni Stog potters. This suggests familiarity with steppe cultures..

During Tripolye B2, around 4000-3700 BC, there was a significant migration out of the Prut-Seret forest-steppe uplands, the most densely settled part of the Tripolye B1 landscape, eastward into the South Bug and Dnieper valleys….

The number of fortified settlements decreased sharply. These signs of demographic expansion and reduced conflict appeared after the tell settlements of the Danube valley were burned and abandoned. It appears than any external threat from the steppes, if there was one, turned away from Cucuteni-Tripolye towns. Why?

A mutualist interpretation of steppe/farming-zone relations is one alternative. Conflict is not denied, but it is downplayed, and mutually beneficial trade and exchange are emphasized. Mutualism might well explain the relationship between the Cucuteni-Tripolye and Srdeni Stog cultures during the Tripolye period.

It is possible, no doubt, that R1b converted during the transformation at Cucutnei-Tripolye. I'm still not buying that is most likely though.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2012, 09:53:27 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #8 on: April 03, 2012, 09:56:33 PM »

Some ancient y-dna from Cucuteni-Tripolye would come in handy. That area today is not exactly overflowing with R1b, though it's not totally absent either. But, personally, I wouldn't expect aDNA from Cucuteni-Tripolye to be R1b. I would expect it to be I2a, G2a, and maybe E1b1b.

Of course, I could be wrong.
Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 03, 2012, 10:44:47 PM »

... Meanwhile the remains of the Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture was absorbed by Yamnaya. Picture a lot of intermarriage with patrilocality, so we could have Yamnaya-born mothers teaching R1b sons to speak PIE. Then we have further waves of departures westward and up the Danube 3,100 and 2,800 BC, this time by people genetically closely related on the male line from the ones who left before, but speaking a different language.

Jean, you say "remains of the Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture were absorbed by the Yamnaya."  I think that you are leaning towards, and David Anthony seems to lean towards the concept that the Yamnaya got the upper hand, at least in terms of the military conflicts.

It also looks like Anthony's opinion is the pottery came from the Yamnaya which I think you'd say was passed along from the maternal side of things.

Quote from: David Anthony
Many Cucuteni C pots look like they were made by Sredni Stog potters. This suggests familiarity with steppe cultures..

However, the specifics of this patrilocal inter-marriage situation are still a bit confusing to me. If the women from Sredni Stog brought along their pottery and language and to non-IE R1b men and their sons.....

What happened to all of the women from the Cucuteni-Tripolye? Their population was numerous.  Eventually the Cucuteni-Tripolye expanded east to the steppes. These Cucuteni-Tripolye women came from an old maternal emphasis culture so why wouldn't their pottery become dominant?

I admit that I've lost the trail on this so please bear with me. The specifics of the picture I'm getting is the Yamnaya R1a men fought the Cucuteni-Tripolye women, killed most of them, then the Cucuteni-Tripolye R1b men made peace with the Yamnaya women who taught their sons IE languages.  

... or perhaps it was somehow that the Yamnaya R1a men were pretty much destroyed, leaving their women unattended. The victorious Cucuteni-Tripolye R1b moved into to marry with the Yamnaya women and left the women raise the kids as they please.

... or perhaps the complexities of mutalism are escaping me and the Yamnaya R1a men won the battle with the Cucuteni-Trypolye R1b men but did not destroy them and the R1b men preceded to "win the peace" eventually taking over. Maybe the Yamnaya women didn't like the Yamnaya men and helped overthrow the elite with poisonings or what have you.

Help, I just can't make the cultures mesh with R1b lineages from non-IE tribes over taking R1a lineages from IE tribes but the offspring are all IE speaking and pottery based.  To me, that implies the R1b Cucuteni-Tripolye got the upper hand militarily.

It would make more sense to me if there were some R1b among the Yamnaya or some of the people in SE Europe had been speaking IE or at least pre-IE (? Anatolian) all along.

Probably I'm too focused on the Cucuteni-Trypolae. They just seem like a key group early on that would have been a place where non-IE people could have learned IE but had enough substance and population to survive and eventually thrive again.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2012, 11:41:56 AM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #10 on: April 03, 2012, 10:56:58 PM »


Help, I just can't make the cultures mesh with R1b lineages from non-IE tribes over taking R1a lineages from IE tribes but the offspring are all IE speaking and pottery based. .

It is because this scenario you mention is not very likely, at least in my opinion. It is much easier to suppose that R1a tribes learned IE from R1b, and took the Indo-Aryan languages east. How much sense does it make that a population travels thousands of miles east, carrying Indo-European languages with it, but does not bother to go west?

I will use the argument posited by some I have seen on other forums - "They weren't interested in going west". And where is this phantom R1a among Armenians or other peoples of the Caucasus? Maybe India had more sun?
« Last Edit: April 03, 2012, 10:58:21 PM by NealtheRed » Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #11 on: April 03, 2012, 11:17:14 PM »


Help, I just can't make the cultures mesh with R1b lineages from non-IE tribes over taking R1a lineages from IE tribes but the offspring are all IE speaking and pottery based. .

It is because this scenario you mention is not very likely, at least in my opinion. ...
That scenario is the one I am skeptical about which is why I'm asking for help in understanding.

The Cucuteni-Trypolae is the culture that may have been a basis for the pre-Germanic and Balto-Slavic movements north and northwest.

From http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/indoeuropeans.shtml
Quote from: JeanM
Usatovo culture (pre-Proto-Germanic?)
The transformation spread along multiple routes. The next movement visible in the archaeology flowed to the western end of the steppes, integrating the lowland steppe and upland farming communities in the Usatovo culture around the mouth of the Dniester River. This culture may represent the first link in a long chain of migration that led to the Pre-Germanic dialect splitting away. [Later there was migration up the Dniester through Late Cucuteni-Tripolye territory into the widespread north European Corded Ware Culture[/i]...

Middle Dnieper (Pre-Proto-Balto-Slavic)
Steppe groups penetrated Late Cucteni-Tripolye towns on the Middle Dnieper, together with elements of Globular Amphora and Corded Ware, creating a hybrid that gradually became its own distinct culture. This seems to represent the dialect which became Proto-Balto-Slavic.

Meanwhile, Jean describes the Italo-Celtic lineages with this kind of European "launch."
Quote from: JeanM
Up the Danube (Pre-Proto-Italo-Celtic and Illyric?)

A more archaeologically visible flow westward between about 3,100 and 2,800 BC suggests the Pre-Italic and Pre-Celtic dialects splitting away. The two language families are closely related, so this might be better classed as pre-Proto-Italo-Celtic, or even just North-Western at this stage. Yamnaya herders moved through and past the Usatovo culture into the Danube valley ending up in what is now eastern Hungary. The evidence lies in their kurgan cemeteries. This was a true folk movement leaving thousands of burials. The earliest of the eastern Bell Beakers were found near Budapest in Hungary, and radiocarbon dated about 2,800-2,600BC. From there Bell Beaker ware spread into what is now Austria and South Germany, where we can imagine Yamnaya dialects eventually developing into Proto-Celtic.

Another part of the Proto-Italic-Celtic trail is more complex and is pursued in the Bell Beaker section. For the moment we note that a branch of the same movement of Yamnaya herders up the Danube introduced the Bronze Age into what is now Albania and Bosnia. Their characteristic tumulus burials mark their arrival. The abrupt incursion of the new culture is particularly clear at Maliq, Albania. The Vucedol Culture in Croatia begins at the right time to be Indo-European - c. 3,000 BC. Its people appear different from the preceding farmers of the region. Vucedol is followed by the Cetina Culture, where the elite were buried with archers' wrist guards, as in the Bell Beaker Culture.

Here is where the R1b, R1a and I haplogroup mixes don't make sense to me if R1b "learned IE" from R1a East/SE Europe on the edge of Old Europe.

David Anthony describes the Yamna herders heading up the Danube as a "true folk movement" whereas he describes the transformation of Crucuteni-Trypolae as an integration.

Where is R1b purest, of highest frequencies?   In the places where Celtic reached.

The Germanic and Balto-Slavic lineages are a mix of U106, some P312, Hg I and R1a1 to varying degrees.  The Celtic world ended up being very strongly P312.  This makes sense that the move up the Danube of the pre-Italo-Celtic dialect people was a "true folk movement" of P312 folks.

I may be looking at it to simplistically but I don't see how Celtic got such a heavy frequency of P312 unless the P312 people (or at least those associated with the Italo-Celts) were IE speaking for a long time, excluding other paternal lineages in their tribes. This does not mean that some P312 people couldn't have learned other languages back closer to the steppes or in Aquitania.

Where are the R1a1 Celts?
« Last Edit: April 03, 2012, 11:27:22 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #12 on: April 04, 2012, 03:47:11 AM »

So, basically you have embraced the idea that R1a is the PIE y haplogroup. R1b learned it and took it west.

Embraced it? I suspect that we are at cross-purposes here. Looks like you are under the impression that I have fallen in with "R1a1a cheer-leaders" with weird ideas of Aryan = Slavic and "true" IE = R1a1a. I have been fighting said weird ideas. They make no sense at all. To say that I am not in that camp is putting it mildly.

I have always believed that R1a and R1b carriers would have had to be in close contact for a long time for PIE to have spread with both. Yet the pattern of distribution suggested that R1a1a predominated in the tribes at the eastern end of the P-C steppe, with R1b more towards the centre and west. Long puzzling over this and the pattern of other branches of R1b suggested that R1b had entered the steppe with dairy farmers. This does not mean that R1b is not a "true" PIE haplogroup. For heaven's sake! If people have been  speaking a language for a thousand years, that's their language.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 05:01:10 AM by Jean M » Logged
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #13 on: April 04, 2012, 04:02:14 AM »

I think they spoke a pre Indoeuropean language at some time, that could or could not be related to the group of languages in which were Aquitanian and Iberian and of which Basque is the last remnant. I think that IE reached Western Europe from Eastern Europe but it was a cultural trait expanded through Elite dominance and cultural assimilation.
We will never know for sure since non written languages don´t leave behind archaeological remains. If R1b is found to be post-neolithic I will reconsider my position though, as there will be a clear sign of a massive replacement of populatioin. Still, even if that is the case, there is still the problem with Iberians and Aquitanians, do you think they were flooded with R1b IE speaking populations but still kept their non IE languages? And what about the Celts of Weswtern Iberia? they  were the carriers of an IE language but those regions had a lower percentage of R1b in  present day.

We can't look at these things in a vacuum. The top 15 areas of L11+ on the entire planet are all in the British Isles where all pre-Roman languages were IE. The areas of L11 in Ireland blow the doors off of Basque country L11 frequency, reaching more than 90%+ in some areas and over 73% in all areas. Besides, the level of L11 in Aquitanian/Iberian lands is not drastically different than in the NW or western Iberia.
Let´s see your alternative, if I understand correctly
IE R1b arrive to Western Europe in late Neolithic-Bronze age. They largely replace the previous population all over the place and their language, except for a region extending from the SE coast of Spain to the SW coast of France, where they replace people but not language. And for the following 2k years until Roman expansion things doesn´t change, do I understand this correctly?

No, I think the emigration to the Basque country was very gradual. Kind of like what we've seen in California, New Mexico and Texas over the past 50 years. Waves of immigrants from Mexico have brought back Native American Y-DNA to these areas. They've come seeking prosperity. The children of those immigrants speak English and their grandchildren no longer speak Spanish. Y-DNA replacement without language replacement.

The Basque Country had similar prosperity, especially due to the natural port of Bilbao. I have first hand knowledge as one of my great-grandparents was born in NE Burgos but lived in the Bilbao suburb of Barakaldo. He would grow his wheat in his Burgos farms and sell them for export in Basque country.
But that is a recent thing, since the late 19th century the Basque Country has been floodded with inmigrants from other regions of Spain, so that in  present day probably not even 1/4 of the population has Basque roots. However that is why researchers usually select their samples of Basque population including only people with well attested Basque roots.
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #14 on: April 04, 2012, 04:16:35 AM »

I suppose it is understandable for men who carry a particular haplogroup to want to believe that their direct ancestor had primacy in everything, but I'm getting a bit tired of R1a1a carriers fighting for the idea that 13910T lactase persistence arose in an R1a1a man, and R1b carriers fighting for the idea that PIE was first spoken by an R1b man. It doesn't matter. Not in the story of IE spread anyway. Both PIE and lactase persistence appear to have spread together east and west. For that to happen where carriers were predominantly R1a1a in the east and R1b in the west, then there cannot have been some rigid genetic and linguistic divide between R1a and R1b carriers.  
  
As like as not 13910T first occurred in a milkmaid. :) As for PIE - it developed in contact with Proto-Uralic around the southern Urals. I suggest that R1 had long moved between the steppe in summer and the south Caspian in winter, and that R1b cropped up among those who eventually settled at the southern end of the seasonal cycle while R1a distinguished those who settled at the northern end. Presumably they spoke the same language back in the Mesolithic - an ancestor of PIE. But those R1b V88 people (initially just just one man maybe) who moved south into the farming belt seem to have adopted Proto-Afro-Asiatic from other farmers before some of them moved to north Africa. There were probably many other languages among the farmers, only some of which survived. I'm suggesting that the ancestor of the language spoken in the Cucuteni Culture was one such.  

Yamnaya is seen not as a single culture, but as an "horizon" that spread west across the steppe, with a particular cultural package and (it seems) language. The package included much that had been acquired from adjacent cultures originally, including dairy farming, but not the concept of pottery-making, which had arrived earlier from the east.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 06:25:53 AM by Jean M » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #15 on: April 04, 2012, 06:06:05 AM »

Jean .. I think that you are leaning towards, and David Anthony seems to lean towards the concept that the Yamnaya got the upper hand, at least in terms of the military conflicts.

It is hard to say to what degree (if any) dominance was imposed by military means. Anthony sees the collapse of the tell cultures of Old Europe around 4,000 BC and largely climate-driven, which makes sense to me. Pastoralists would have an advantage, since they were more mobile and could move long distances to find pasture. Of course when times are hard, you do get conflict over scarce resources.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 06:09:57 AM by Jean M » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #16 on: April 04, 2012, 06:34:26 AM »

The Germanic and Balto-Slavic lineages are a mix of U106, some P312, Hg I and R1a1 to varying degrees.  The Celtic world ended up being very strongly P312.  This makes sense that the move up the Danube of the pre-Italo-Celtic dialect people was a "true folk movement" of P312 folks.

That is how I have it on my HIGHLY SPECULATIVE map of proposed movements of R1b. Why is this a problem? This movement came 1000 years after the collapse of Cucuteni and the absorbing of its remnants by the adjacent peoples. That composite culture seems to have invented wheeled transport, which gave birth to the more mobile Yamnaya Culture 3,300 BC which could actually live on the steppe.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 06:41:21 AM by Jean M » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #17 on: April 04, 2012, 04:27:44 PM »

So, basically you have embraced the idea that R1a is the PIE y haplogroup. R1b learned it and took it west.

Embraced it? I suspect that we are at cross-purposes here. Looks like you are under the impression that I have fallen in with "R1a1a cheer-leaders" with weird ideas of Aryan = Slavic and "true" IE = R1a1a. I have been fighting said weird ideas. They make no sense at all. To say that I am not in that camp is putting it mildly.

I have always believed that R1a and R1b carriers would have had to be in close contact for a long time for PIE to have spread with both. Yet the pattern of distribution suggested that R1a1a predominated in the tribes at the eastern end of the P-C steppe, with R1b more towards the centre and west. Long puzzling over this and the pattern of other branches of R1b suggested that R1b had entered the steppe with dairy farmers. This does not mean that R1b is not a "true" PIE haplogroup. For heaven's sake! If people have been  speaking a language for a thousand years, that's their language.


What I meant was, I thought, pretty plain. In what you posted earlier, about Yamnaya mothers teaching R1b sons IE, you seemed to be saying that PIE originated among peoples who were predominantly R1a.

Did I misunderstand you?

By now a lot of us have been speaking Indo-European languages for quite some time. What I thought we were discussing was who the original IE folk were. If R1b peoples learned it, however early on, from R1a peoples, then R1a is the PIE y haplogroup.

The R1a partisans would have no trouble acknowledging that. It's part of their argument.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 04:28:24 PM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #18 on: April 04, 2012, 05:12:50 PM »

I suppose it is understandable for men who carry a particular haplogroup to want to believe that their direct ancestor had primacy in everything, but I'm getting a bit tired of R1a1a carriers fighting for the idea that 13910T lactase persistence arose in an R1a1a man, and R1b carriers fighting for the idea that PIE was first spoken by an R1b man. It doesn't matter . . .

It isn't in the same league with having enough air to breathe or food and drink and shelter, but it does matter. Otherwise, there would be far fewer sales of y-dna tests and far far fewer posts here at World Families and elsewhere.

Maybe R1a was the original PIE y haplogroup. I don't know. I tend to think there wasn't much R1b, if any, in Cucuteni-Tripolye and that what was there will turn out to have been I2a, G2a, and E1b1b. So, if IE was transmitted rather than carried west, then perhaps R1b men learned it from I2a, G2a, and E1b1b middlemen, and not so much from the R1a originators themselves. Maybe R1b hasn't yet been found at Neolithic sites because our ancestors were the European aborigines, still at the hunter-gatherer stage, and thus rather scarce in farming communities.

« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 05:17:43 PM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #19 on: April 04, 2012, 05:20:31 PM »

... Help, I just can't make the cultures mesh with R1b lineages from non-IE tribes over taking R1a lineages from IE tribes but the offspring are all IE speaking and pottery based. .
.....
Where is R1b purest, of highest frequencies?   In the places where Celtic reached.

The Germanic and Balto-Slavic lineages are a mix of U106, some P312, Hg I and R1a1 to varying degrees.  The Celtic world ended up being very strongly P312.  This makes sense that the move up the Danube of the pre-Italo-Celtic dialect people was a "true folk movement" of P312 folks.

I may be looking at it to simplistically but I don't see how Celtic got such a heavy frequency of P312 unless the P312 people (or at least those associated with the Italo-Celts) were IE speaking for a long time, excluding other paternal lineages in their tribes. This does not mean that some P312 people couldn't have learned other languages back closer to the steppes or in Aquitania.

Where are the R1a1 Celts?

Here are the highlights I could find from David Anthony on the beginnings of the pre-Italic and pre-Celtic speakers from the "The Horse The Wheel The Language:

Quote from: David Anthony
“WESTERN INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES - THE YAMNAYA MIGRATION UP THE DANUBE VALLEY”
[p.361]
About 3100 BCE, during the initial rapid spread of the Yamnaya horizon across the Pontic-Caspian steppes, and while the Usatovo culture was still in its early phase, Yamnaya herders began to move through the steppes past Usatovo and into the lower Danube valley. The initial groups followed by a regular stream of people that continued for perhaps three hundred years, between 3100 and 2800 BCE. The passage through the Usatovo chiefdoms probably was managed through guest-host relationships. The migrants did not claim any Usatovo territory – at least they did not create their own cemeteries there. Instead, they kept going into the Danube valley, a minimum distance of 6000-800 km from where they began in the steppes east of Usatovo – in the South Bug valley and farther east.  The largest number of Yamnaya migrants ended up in eastern Hungary, an amazing distance (800-13,300 km depending on the route taken.)  This was a major, sustained population movement, and, like all such movements, it must have been preceded by scouts who collected information while on some other kind of business, possibly horse trading. The scouts knew just a few areas, and these became the targets of the migrants.
[p.367]
The many thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in eastern Hungary suggest a more continuous occupation of the landscape by a larger population through numerical weight. This regional group could have spawned the both pre-Italic and pre-Celtic. Bell Beaker sites of the Csepel type around Budapest, west of the Yamnaya settlement region, are dated about 2800-2600 BCE. They could have been a bridge between Yamnaya on their east and Austria/Southern Germany to their west, through which Yamnaya dialects spread from Hungary into Austria and Bavaria, where they later developed into Proto-Celtic. Pre-Italic could have developed among the dialects that remained in Hungary, ultimately spreading into Italy through the Urnfield and Villanovan cultures.

Anthony never looked at DNA and does not estimate the percentages of populations replaced versus integrated with but he uses the strongest wording about "true folk movements" in relation to the pre-Italic and pre-Celtic groups. Maybe it is just a coincidence, but P312 is of amazingly high frequency in some of the old Celtic and Italic lands.

These Yamnaya are people from the South Bug River valley and to the east. They were people that moved very quickly up the Danube valley. It doesn't sound like a type of movement that could spend much time integrating with existing cultures.

http://www.europeshoppe.com.au/images/maps/ukraine_map.jpg
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 05:30:13 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #20 on: April 04, 2012, 05:47:48 PM »


Help, I just can't make the cultures mesh with R1b lineages from non-IE tribes over taking R1a lineages from IE tribes but the offspring are all IE speaking and pottery based. .

It is because this scenario you mention is not very likely, at least in my opinion. ...
That scenario is the one I am skeptical about which is why I'm asking for help in understanding.

The Cucuteni-Trypolae is the culture that may have been a basis for the pre-Germanic and Balto-Slavic movements north and northwest.

From http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/indoeuropeans.shtml
Quote from: JeanM
Usatovo culture (pre-Proto-Germanic?)
The transformation spread along multiple routes. The next movement visible in the archaeology flowed to the western end of the steppes, integrating the lowland steppe and upland farming communities in the Usatovo culture around the mouth of the Dniester River. This culture may represent the first link in a long chain of migration that led to the Pre-Germanic dialect splitting away. [Later there was migration up the Dniester through Late Cucuteni-Tripolye territory into the widespread north European Corded Ware Culture[/i]...

Middle Dnieper (Pre-Proto-Balto-Slavic)
Steppe groups penetrated Late Cucteni-Tripolye towns on the Middle Dnieper, together with elements of Globular Amphora and Corded Ware, creating a hybrid that gradually became its own distinct culture. This seems to represent the dialect which became Proto-Balto-Slavic.

Meanwhile, Jean describes the Italo-Celtic lineages with this kind of European "launch."
Quote from: JeanM
Up the Danube (Pre-Proto-Italo-Celtic and Illyric?)

A more archaeologically visible flow westward between about 3,100 and 2,800 BC suggests the Pre-Italic and Pre-Celtic dialects splitting away. The two language families are closely related, so this might be better classed as pre-Proto-Italo-Celtic, or even just North-Western at this stage. Yamnaya herders moved through and past the Usatovo culture into the Danube valley ending up in what is now eastern Hungary. The evidence lies in their kurgan cemeteries. This was a true folk movement leaving thousands of burials. The earliest of the eastern Bell Beakers were found near Budapest in Hungary, and radiocarbon dated about 2,800-2,600BC. From there Bell Beaker ware spread into what is now Austria and South Germany, where we can imagine Yamnaya dialects eventually developing into Proto-Celtic.

Another part of the Proto-Italic-Celtic trail is more complex and is pursued in the Bell Beaker section. For the moment we note that a branch of the same movement of Yamnaya herders up the Danube introduced the Bronze Age into what is now Albania and Bosnia. Their characteristic tumulus burials mark their arrival. The abrupt incursion of the new culture is particularly clear at Maliq, Albania. The Vucedol Culture in Croatia begins at the right time to be Indo-European - c. 3,000 BC. Its people appear different from the preceding farmers of the region. Vucedol is followed by the Cetina Culture, where the elite were buried with archers' wrist guards, as in the Bell Beaker Culture.

Here is where the R1b, R1a and I haplogroup mixes don't make sense to me if R1b "learned IE" from R1a East/SE Europe on the edge of Old Europe.

David Anthony describes the Yamna herders heading up the Danube as a "true folk movement" whereas he describes the transformation of Crucuteni-Trypolae as an integration.

Where is R1b purest, of highest frequencies?   In the places where Celtic reached.

The Germanic and Balto-Slavic lineages are a mix of U106, some P312, Hg I and R1a1 to varying degrees.  The Celtic world ended up being very strongly P312.  This makes sense that the move up the Danube of the pre-Italo-Celtic dialect people was a "true folk movement" of P312 folks.

I may be looking at it to simplistically but I don't see how Celtic got such a heavy frequency of P312 unless the P312 people (or at least those associated with the Italo-Celts) were IE speaking for a long time, excluding other paternal lineages in their tribes. This does not mean that some P312 people couldn't have learned other languages back closer to the steppes or in Aquitania.

Where are the R1a1 Celts?


I take a similar Occam's razor view on this.  The David Anthony model just feels wrong.  its like a lot of sound and fury but ultimately it just is not believable as a model for Indo-Europeanisation of most of Europe.  I have never doubted that the steppe cultures and R1a are part of the IE story but I cant help feeling that a side show that only nibbled Europes eastern edges is being served as the main event.  I dont have the answers but I just intuitively feel that the Anthony model is like a sign with the words 'special pleading' balanced on a large house of cards with Occam's Razor lying blunted and tossed asunder on the floor.  Personally I think that the Indo-Europeanisation went the other way and was acquired by steppes groups (along with much else) from Neolithic farmers just to the west around Bulgaria, east Romania, Ukraine etc.  
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 05:57:14 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #21 on: April 04, 2012, 05:50:42 PM »

The Germanic and Balto-Slavic lineages are a mix of U106, some P312, Hg I and R1a1 to varying degrees.  The Celtic world ended up being very strongly P312.  This makes sense that the move up the Danube of the pre-Italo-Celtic dialect people was a "true folk movement" of P312 folks.
That is how I have it on my HIGHLY SPECULATIVE map of proposed movements of R1b. Why is this a problem? This movement came 1000 years after the collapse of Cucuteni and the absorbing of its remnants by the adjacent peoples. That composite culture seems to have invented wheeled transport, which gave birth to the more mobile Yamnaya Culture 3,300 BC which could actually live on the steppe.

The problem, or rather the logic I don't understand of your hypothesis is:
... Meanwhile the remains of the Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture was absorbed by Yamnaya. Picture a lot of intermarriage with patrilocality, so we could have Yamnaya-born mothers teaching R1b sons to speak PIE. Then we have further waves of departures westward and up the Danube 3,100 and 2,800 BC, this time by people genetically closely related on the male line from the ones who left before, but speaking a different language.

This seems plausible for the pre-Germanic group which does show a mix of haplogroups. The intense "integration" (what Anthony calls it) of the Cucuteni-Tripolye upland farmers and the Yamnaya Usatovo herders seems to fit.

On the other hand, the pre-Italic/pre-Celtic groups were NOT Usatovo, but a different kind of Yamnaya that were from further east and did NOT have contact with the Cucuteni-Trypolye. These pre-Italic/pre-Celtic Yamnaya from east of the Bug River were a "true folk movement" that involved "major, sustained population movement". He also says they "passed through" Usatovo lands. They were already speaking PIE so they didn't need to have picked it up from the Usatovo at that time.

How to or to who did they pass the IE language on if their major haplogroup group was not P312 or a pre-P312 R1b type?  Somehow, by the time they emanated out of Hungary they were P312 or pre-P312 R1b laden.

If we follow Anthony's model, it seems hard to understand how separate lineages of R1b in Old European cultures all learned IE from different migrations (pre-Germanic, pre-Italic, pre-Celtic and maybe pre-Balto/Slavic) of Yamnaya herders, unless of course they were among the Yamnaya herders in the first place.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 06:05:20 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #22 on: April 04, 2012, 05:56:04 PM »

I suppose it is understandable for men who carry a particular haplogroup to want to believe that their direct ancestor had primacy in everything, but I'm getting a bit tired of R1a1a carriers fighting for the idea that 13910T lactase persistence arose in an R1a1a man, and R1b carriers fighting for the idea that PIE was first spoken by an R1b man. It doesn't matter . . .

It isn't in the same league with having enough air to breathe or food and drink and shelter, but it does matter. Otherwise, there would be far fewer sales of y-dna tests and far far fewer posts here at World Families and elsewhere.

Maybe R1a was the original PIE y haplogroup. I don't know. I tend to think there wasn't much R1b, if any, in Cucuteni-Tripolye and that what was there will turn out to have been I2a, G2a, and E1b1b. So, if IE was transmitted rather than carried west, then perhaps R1b men learned it from I2a, G2a, and E1b1b middlemen, and not so much from the R1a originators themselves. Maybe R1b hasn't yet been found at Neolithic sites because our ancestors were the European aborigines, still at the hunter-gatherer stage, and thus rather scarce in farming communities.



That seems incredibly unlikely.  All the advantages would be with cultures who were used to farming products.  Lets put it this way, the mt DNA representative of the hunters (mainly U) did not prosper with the coming of farming.  U shrunk in size dramatically.  Its more likely by far that R1b hasnt been found simply because no yDNA from west European late Neolithic sites have been published as yet (other than one Corded Ware R1a family burial).  It may well be that it is associated with beakers and their post-beaker descendants in the same areas.   
Logged
MHammers
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


« Reply #23 on: April 04, 2012, 05:59:52 PM »

These Yamnaya are people from the South Bug River valley and to the east. They were people that moved very quickly up the Danube valley. It doesn't sound like a type of movement that could spend much time integrating with existing cultures.

They also didn't leave any traces of settlement in Hungary, if you exclude the kurgans.  It seems as if they were absorbed into other cultures in the region, bell beaker just being one of them.  From what little I've read about the Yamnaya in Hungary, there was little or no integration with the contemporary Baden and Vucedol people. 

I've found statistics for 6 ochre-grave or Yamnaya skeletons from there.  Only 1 or 2 showed the common steppe physical type.  The rest were much like the high-vaulted, gracile neolithics.  So, the idea of Cucuteni-Tripolye or other SE Europe people getting swept up in the Danube migration seems probable.
Logged

Ydna: R1b-Z253**


Mtdna: T

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2012, 06:12:14 PM »

... Personally I think that the Indo-Europeanisation went the other way and was acquired by steppes groups (along with much else) from Neolithic farmers just to the west around Bulgaria, east Romania, Ukraine etc.  
Anthony's description of the Cucuteni-Tripolye upland farmer and Usatovo herder integration could fit what you are saying as ultimately the resulting culture moved eastward and made incursions into the steppes.   However, as you said, Anthony has the language going east to west instead of west to east early on.

Did Central European lands east of the steppes have the all of the elements needed for PIE?  I mean the honey bees, and so forth.   Still, these Old European cultures were matriarchal, weren't they?  While PIE has patriarchal concepts in it, right?   I remain convinced by Anthony that PIE did not come out of the Old Europe cultures.   Are you saying that PIE slipped into eastern Old Europe farming cultures via Anatolia?   I suppose this puts us back on the dairy herding thing.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 06:12:55 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.207 seconds with 19 queries.