David W. Anthony’s view:The Corded Ware culture formed from non-elite, peripheral offshoots of Yamnaya-related steppe society such as client groups or mixed communities rather than the dominant elites. These groups branched off early, moved north and west, and mixed with local Neolithic populations. Their distinct genetic profile, including strong R1a frequencies, reflects founder effects and social position, not elite continuity.
>>18277429The trouble with this is the evidence that they were a substantial portion of Yamnaya specifically to begin with is slim. Although we do find alternative R1b subclades on rare occasions among Yamnaya and Afanasievo, it might be easier to unify Yamnaya and Corded Ware with a parent steppe group (like Sredny Stog for instance).Linguistically one has to really wonder how it would be the case that Corded Ware dialects do not share certain linguistic features Yamnaya and Afanasievo have if Corded Ware is supposedly an offshoot of Yamnaya and not a sibling. For example, Tocharian, Armenian, and Hellenic all show evidence of laryngeal breaking. (See Birgit Rasmussen's work). These branches must have come from related Proto-Indo-European dialects, and this is now supported by genetics. The Corded Ware branches do not show evidence of laryngeal breaking however.This creates a potential chronological problem: Afanasievo broke off from the steppe relatively early (perhaps ~3300 BC). If the Yamnaya-Afanasievo dialect already possessed this innovation, why does Corded Ware—which formed later (perhaps ~3000 BCE)—lack it? Unless we assume CWC had already differentiated within the Yamnaya horizon to the point of missing certain shared innovations, the timeframe might suggest they represent a separate, parallel steppe group from a common ancestor rather than a linear descendants. If we insist Corded Ware descends from Yamnaya, then can the timeframe in which Afanasievo broke off be made to agree with the timeframe in which Corded Ware formed?
>>18277429CWC was derived from Yamnaya
>>18277533>Although we do find alternative R1b subclades on rare occasions among Yamnaya and AfanasievoYes. There's no problem here
>>18277548What does that even mean?
>>18277533Didn't we already tell you to stop talking about genetics when you don't have the capacity to understand it? Stick to linguistics, which is your field of expertise. Do you want to debate genetics itself? But only genetics; I won't be obligated to answer anything involving linguistics.
>>18277429The yamnaya began their migrations 5000 years ago
>>18277550This means that the arguments you use are based on the lack of haplos, but it turns out that there are in fact exclusive Ydna in Yamanya in older branches of corded ware, in addition to the practically identical similarity of the so-called "early corded ware" with Yamanya. SS is a dead end.
>>18277580No. 3300 BC
>>18277584Oh, so 5300 years ago.
>>18277550He's saying that genetically there's not necessarily an issue because you can technically find alternative haplogroups among Yamnaya. This positive seems defensible with only genetics in mind but I have some reservations about the apparent dialectal differences. The steppe groups may have been separate for quite some time thereby allowing some dialectal innovation among Yamnaya.>>18277566You don't think it's a problem that Afanasievo + Yamnaya has a certain degree of dialectal innovation absent in Corded Ware? For example, the Italo-Celtic pronunciation of laryngeals seems older and more conservative because of examples of "laryngeal hardening". In some ways, it seems closer to the state of affairs when Anatolian broke off.
>>18277597Did you have the ability to study the available samples? Or are you going to play at being a cult again when your knowledge in this area is low at best? You didn't even have the ability to cite which R1b clades we are talking about here.It is necessary to keep in mind that the oldest CWC samples are just a mixture of Yamnayitas with some Polish and Baltic women (probably GAC) see this model.Target: Corded_Ware_POL_early:poz81(2900BC)Distance: 2.6418% / 0.0264181792.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara5.0 Baltic_LVA_HG2.4 POL_Globular_Amphora
>>18277597>This positive seems defensibleposition
>>18277605Note that I am not strictly against any scenario which genetics says is possible. If CWC can be descended from Yamnaya, then they can be. If you want them to be, then you could consider advocating the scenario I mentioned: the CWC ancestors had differentiated themselves within Yamnaya early enough that they didn't share certain innovations that Afanasievo took with them.You might find this scenario appealing because1. It upholds a conventional relationship between CWC and Yamnaya2. It may help explain why CWC haplogroups are few and far between among Yamnaya. E.g., the CWC ancestors had separated themselves to a certain location, and we don't have many samples with their haplogroups because they lived in a slightly different place where not many samples have been taken.3. The idea that the CWC ancestors were "non-elites" is just fiction. They were Yamnaya but didn't live in the exact same location as the Yamnaya we are familiar with, or they were all concentrated in one place like a clan or territory.
>>18277654I'm not the OP, my position is that it makes no sense to say that CWC is derived from SS or that we have to make EPIE even older. Let me explainLinguistics should follow genetics.Please consider that haplogroup r1b L51 has been found in both Afanasievo (a branch of the Yamanya culture) and western Yamanya, and later in the early CWC. Furthermore, the CWC shares the largest IBD (≥15 cm) only with Yamanya, which basically means fourth-generation relatives (separated by 250 years)... Have you considered this? IBD >15 cm doesn't even exist in certain modern European populations. This is obviously problematic for your hypothesis of them being separated by SS (from 4000+ BC) considering that SS is the source for PA, but there is Yamanya Ydna in anatomical samples so it's more complex.>Corded Ware share high rates of long IBD (15–25 cM) with Yamnaya herders of the Pontic steppe, signaling a strong bottleneck and a recent biological connection on the order of only few hundred years, providing evidence that the Yamnaya themselves are a main source of Steppe ancestry in Corded Ware people.>Such long IBD links must be recent as recombination ends an IBD segment ca. 20 cM long on average every five meiosis. This IBD sharing signal therefore clearly indicates that ancient individuals were closely related and ancestral.
>>18277708>>18277654Obviously, things got out of hand. We can and SHOULD examine all the nuances, including these linguistic arguments you presented, because it's useful to discuss how different these Yamanya groups were from the early Corded Ware Culture groups. Yes, what I'm saying is that they are closely related, and it makes no sense to claim that the SS group or an even older group than 4000 BC should be a link between them. We have a strong population bottleneck and a very recent biological connection, of only a few hundred years (250). It is evident that the Yamanya themselves are a major source of steppe ancestry in the CWC peoples. This is my argument only.These long IBD links are quite recent, as recombination closes an IBD segment of approximately 20 cM in length, on average. This IBD sharing signal, therefore, clearly indicates that the ancient individuals were closely related and ancestral. This makes it difficult to use SS from 4000 BC as the source.PPN Ancestry found in CWC is only found in yamanya earlier and early CWC is closer to yamnaya classical than other yamnaya groups were. (For exemple, core yamanya)Distance to:Yamnaya_RUS_Samara0.032233Corded_Ware_POL_early:poz810.033091Yamnaya_RUS_Caucasus0.037655Yamnaya_KAZ_Mereke
>>18277708>>18277761If you think CWC as an offshoot of Yamnaya is the strongest hypothesis, then that is what must be followed. I mentioned SS as an example of one way to make sense of the linguistic situation. Perhaps you will come up with better ideas.I wanted to bring up the dialectal differentiation because it is a curious feature I noticed that nobody else has mentioned. David Anthony has promoted the "non-elites" hypothesis because the CWC haplogroups are not found in Yamnaya burials frequently. It could be correct, but this hypothesis is inherently weak because it is based on the absence of evidence. Pointing out linguistic data is one way to reorient ourselves to face what we *do* know.If we keep in mind dialectal differences, I'm not so sure that it makes sense to paint broad strokes over the CWC by claiming they were descended from the Yamnaya lower classes. One would expect the lower classes to speak the same dialect as the population as a whole, and it would be quite mysterious if only the "elites" were responsible for the Tocharian, Armenian, and Hellenic branches. The bulk of the population should have been responsible for spreading IE languages to different locations, and the lower classes are always most numerous.There should be more than one way to reconcile the genetic data with the linguistic data. Understanding history is a multidisciplinary effort where harmony between different types of data should be sought. If we have reason to believe there was a dialectal distinction between these groups, then it might provide new hope that archaeologists simply haven't yet stumbled upon the "hotspot" for burials with CWC haplogroups.
There is a clear gap between linguistic theory and genetics here. Problem stems from linguistic side here, as it forces us to believe there was pinpoint source called PIE, while in reality no such language has ever existed. This PIE is the pinpointed to Yamnaya. Real life how ever shows us that there most certainly was wider dialectical area that covered wider area than just the Yamnaya people.Since Yamnaya and CWC don't share patrilinears, it's reasonable to assume that CWC forebears were speaking simply different dialect of "PIE" and living perhaps north of Yamnaya people. Autosomal relationship is also there, maybe more on the EHG side, less of CHG (if any).
>>18278459It's a bit unfortunate you chose to post like that because your post might be misconstrued as a continuation of my post here: >>18278418For anyone observing:I would never say something to the effect that no such language as PIE ever existed. These dialectal differences I brought up are minor. They have to do with the pronunciation of certain consonants. Using this to say PIE never existed is a bit like saying English never existed as a unified language because we have American and British English now, but these dialectal differences I am pointing out are even more minor than those among English dialects. It is simply conspicuous that Afanasievo broke away with the sound change I mentioned while Corded Ware did not pick it up. The dialects would have been mutually intelligible though.
>>18278473PIE was the entire dialect continuum but reconstructed PIE does not reflect that reality. Thats what I ment by PIE never existing.
>>18277429Bump
Considering that Afanasievo likely descends from Ural Yamnaya this means that even if CWC is from Yamnaya there was still substructure in Yamnaya before CWC subpopulation broke off. So that allows for certain groups of Yamnaya to have complex genetic relationships to one another.
>>18278459A dialectal division may hint at there being parallel, independent steppe groups after a certain time, and it may also suggest the steppe groups are siblings rather than father and son. Earlier I said SS as point of origin is a way accommodate these details, but the requirements are abstract. Both of these scenarios fit the bill:1. Early Yamnaya breaks intoa) Late Southern and Eastern Yamnaya (Tocharian-Armenian-Balkanic/Hellenic)b) Pre-Corded Ware Culture (the other Yamnaya branch)2. Sredny Stog (vel sim) breaks intoa) Yamnaya (Tocharian-Armenian-Balkanic/Hellenic)b) Pre-Corded Ware CultureIt's up to the geneticists to decide which is correct, but offhand I don't know why it would be totally wrong to fill in the blanks on a template like this.
>>18279079Can linguistic difference be explained through different social classes having different dialects? Atleast to some extent. Poor people dont use same words and sentence structure as upper class
>>18279468An ad hoc approach like this is unlikely to have any merit.While it's not difficult to imagine that different social strata may have different manners of speech, it's important to keep in mind that the general rule is that upper classes in any stratified society are a minority. The lower classes make up the vast majority of a given population. If the upper classes are not a minority, then what you have is a society which isn't very stratified, and then there is no longer any motivation to hypothesize the society has dialects based on social classes.These dialectal differences are witnessed by observing the features of Tocharian, Armenian, and Hellenic, and these language branches can hardly be the result of just the upper classes of IE society. The IE migrant populations as a whole brought these languages to their respective regions, and there is no way to filter the language transfer such that only the upper classes are spreading their language.David Anthony's whole case is made by suggesting *burials* can be filtered based on social classes, but this hypothesis is based on the absence of evidence. The dialectal difference under discussion between major branches or subclades of PIE would seem to contradict Anthony's idea since that is most easily explained by parallel, independent steppe groups with a small degree of geographic separation.
>>18279689>The lower classes make up the vast majority of a given population. If the upper classes are not a minority, then what you have is a society which isn't very stratified, and then there is no longer any motivation to hypothesize the society has dialects based on social classes.Why is this a necessity, they couldve veen one of the lower classes, such as greeks being enslaved by romans doesnt mean theyre not lower class just becahse theres less of them
>>18277429>>18277533CWC could be yamnaya's vassal tribes that asked for too much livestock/grain tributes, grazing rights, etc, so they just simply moved out. They're separate tribes, but they might be culturally related.
>>18280469It's hard for me to find any value in such a fantasy.Hold on a sec. I'm gonna blow your mind. Proto-Indo-Europeans were nomadic pastoralists and roamed around a lot. They're called Western Steppe Herders because they herded cattle on the wide open steppe. That's why Tocharians ended up living far away by the Tarim basin. Their IE ancestors wandered freely.It is well established that CWC and Yamnaya are related genetically. If some minor dialectal differences popped up, the only thing you need to imagine is the Pre-CWC group wandered a bit away from the Pre-Afanasievo group, but the Pre-Armenians and Pre-Hellenics stayed near the Pre-Afanasievos.And to be clear, as far as I know, this is allowed to be a split of late Yamnaya into two branches: the Pre-CWC vs the Pre-Afanasievo/Armenians/Hellenics whereas early Yamnaya would have had a unified dialect. Sredny Stog doesn't seem favored here, so a distinction between the state of early and late Yamnaya is probably okay. (I haven't heard any objections yet.)
>>18280445Even in your example of Roman society, the lower classes, the plebeians, or the commoners are the majority. You wish to bring up the idea of an enslaved foreign minority, but they did not constitute the Roman lower classes as a whole. That is a minor subset of the lower classes.Such a scenario doesn't make sense in the context of the CWC. For one, they can't be particularly foreign. Their close genetic ties to the Yamnaya are well established, and their dialect has some conservative features which you wouldn't expect from a foreign minority speaking broken PIE. Also the prospect of an enslaved foreign minority receiving female-mediated ancestry from Yamnaya makes what you're saying sound even more ridiculous.https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6072757/>We identified, for the first time in ancient populations, the rare mitochondrial haplogroup X4 in two Bronze Age Catacomb culture-associated individuals. Genetic similarity analyses show close maternal genetic affinities between populations associated with both eastern and Baltic Corded Ware culture, and the Yamnaya horizon, in contrast to larger genetic differentiation between populations associated with western Corded Ware culture and the Yamnaya horizon. This indicates that females with steppe ancestry contributed to the formation of populations associated with the eastern Corded Ware culture
Crazy new sonichu lore
Tom Rowsell seems to be okay with Sredny Stog. Is he misinformed?
>>18277429>The Corded Ware culture formed from non-elite, peripheral offshoots of Yamnaya-related steppe societyWhy are the people who get obsessed with Yamnaya so averse to modern Europeans being descended from Steppe elites?Its obvious Yamnaya were a nothingburger, a dead end population who spread to browntown and were replaced by Corded Ware BVLLs.Why is (((Academia))) so afraid to admit Europeans descend from warrior aristocrats who had no equals and demonstrated this on the field of battle?
>>18280805The whole Corded Ware thing is something they hate because it's so similar to old Nordicist theories about Indo-European migrations. That's why they focus so hard on Yamnaya so nobody notices the elephant in the room.
>>18277429>non-elite, peripheral offshoots>fucked Yamnaya womenLol.>In an archaeogenetic study focusing on late Neolithic and Bronze Age individuals from Bohemia, Papac et al. (2021), which includes Haak and Heyd as co-authors, suggest that the early Corded Ware culture was a "polyethnic" society characterized by genetic, cultural, and linguistic diversity, resulting from the agglomeration of people of the Globular Amphora culture and Yamnaya-related migrants, who had highly differentiated genetic profiles, a different material culture, and probably spoke different languages. 100% of the Bohemian Corded Ware samples found without steppe-derived ancestry were female, indicating that this genetic diversity was a result of Corded Ware males marrying and assimilating local Globular Amphora females>The majority of CWC-men carried haplogroup R1a-M417, the remaining ones R1b and I2a. Note that, although related to the Corded Ware population, Yamnaya males mainly carried R1b-Z2103, while R1b-bearing Corded Ware males had R1b-L51, suggesting that Corded Ware culture males cannot be directly patrilineally descended from Yamnaya individuals. Yet, Linderholm et al. (2020) found seven CW males which were narrowed down to either R1b-M269 or R-L11, while Allentoft et al. (2015) report two CW males with R1b, and Furtwängler et al. (2020) report three CW males with R1b. According to Sjögren et al. (2020), R1b-M269 "is the major lineage associated with the arrival of Steppe ancestry in western Europe after 2500 BC[E].">>18280805>>18280816t. Gustaf Kossinna
>>18280777Lmao are u using that youtuber retard as someone whos opinion should matter. Or even funnier, is this you Tom?
>>18280845He seems like an example of someone heavily invested in genetics. Is he naive? Biased?
>>18280847Yeah a neo nazi whistling retard, the type thats unfortunately most imvested in these topics
>>18280835No evidence>>18280816How, cwc was more mixed with neolithic farmers then yamnaya. If anything it means europeans come from a more mixed population, hardly sounds like a nordicist "we used to be pure" theory
>>18280856>neo naziSredy Stog were the founding fathers of Proto-Indo-Europeans and they hold all the haplogroup secrets. They were also hateful neo nazi bigots who sent all the Euro natives on the trail of tears btw. Also everything Tom Rowsell has ever said is 100% correct and you lost.
>>18280867The nordicist theories I'm referring to placed the Indo-European urheimat in a vague northernish location. Sure, some people only remember the Scandinavian-centric ideas where some nordicists even entertained that PIEs came from Scandinavia and Denmark, but really there was a variety of ideas in circulation.In 1902, Gustaf Kossinna identified the Proto-Indo-Europeans with the Corded Ware culture. That was just based on archaeology. And really PIE = CWC is not the *worst* idea to ever come about. The CWC was just a secondary IE culture and it actually was responsible for spreading IE languages to a great extent.
>>18280885>look im retardedFuck off nazi loser. Sredny stog was also darkceyed and dark haired like EHG were. Their ancestors the Dnieper Donets even more. Keep crying about not looking like any bronze age people but as a result of farming and low bitamin d diet. Loser cuck hahaha
>>18280909Cwc comes from belarus/ukraine area, same place slavs come from, your pic is their maximum extent
>>18280933>Fuck off nazi loser.Tom Rowsell won. Again.
Bump
>>18280962>>18280933>>18280845Rowsell was right. Sredny Stog were PIE. Sredny Stog were white Europeans. One Stog woman is even predicted to have blonde hair!
>>18283286>One Stog woman is even predicted to have blonde hair!Really?
