tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post8322943567939444522..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: The Bronze Age Indo-European invasion of EuropeDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-32922693611684379052012-11-07T19:24:59.643+02:002012-11-07T19:24:59.643+02:00Hello,
First of all I would like to thank the m...Hello, <br /><br /><br />First of all I would like to thank the moderator and author of the study, for the effort, and really for opening up such a debate.<br /><br />Secondly, I speak as no expert in the domain, but as a passionate of the historic truth and knowledge about our ancestors. With an expertise in Sociology & Communication studies, during a private academic research period in Eastern Europe, I got the chance to explore the regions rich folkloric heritage and, through Romanian friends, I also received alot of information regarding an important debate about ancient history of Romania and of their nation. Entire episodes in local pre-history and history are revealed as missinterpreted or as being on purpose hidden or missconstruded ( archeological evidence and scientific reasoning contradict established history ).<br /><br />Regarding the IE debate, and their DNA traces in modern European populations; has anyone really followed the linguistic connection between ancient european languages, PROTO-Thracian/Dacian, Pelasgian traces, in conconrdance with the IE archaic languages ? This connection might also find its value in genetic studies, as populations close to the Black Sea shore might be able to reveal more information about migration routes, time period, and overall DNA mutation traces. Furthermore, remains found in regions of what is now Romania and Moldavia seem to point out to local archeological and antrhopological disputes ( Romanian history) regarding ancient writings in clay that resemble ancient summerian/asyrian/proto-greak writings. Also, ancient Paleolithic human remains have been uncovered in cave systems such as the the cave known in local Romanian folklore as "Pestera cu Oase" / "en. The Bone Cave". Even though local Romanian research is ideologically biased and financially hindered, such facts shoudl not ignored. <br /><br />It is my firm belief that further study on ancient Romanian and overall Pontic populations might be able to reveal interesting connections and information regarding our early human history. Such scientific endeavours are still in infancy in the Eastern European region, but still interest exists and there is an abundance of local help and resources that can be accessed..<br /><br />Also, such a pluri-disciplinary approach would be able to exemplify for a wider picture of the domain, at least helping to back-up data with scientific reasoning..<br /><br />I woud very much want to thank anyone who'd spare the time to give me any kind of feedback regarding such approach. Also, many thanks for the opportunity to get in contact and share information.<br /><br />Respectfully, <br />Razvan BeraAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08868719238585432967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-89980938270863241912012-07-05T11:58:30.965+03:002012-07-05T11:58:30.965+03:00I see no contradiction originating from a farming ...I see no contradiction originating from a farming community and trading with farming products or products that are produced within a farming community. For instance my Grandfather was a landowner but didn’t till the soil himself, though he was a merchant for agricultural commodities. I wouldn’t be surprised if Ötzis likely higher status within his farming community got him killed.Katharóshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16649693310029639154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-17943671796534847722012-07-03T15:15:01.119+03:002012-07-03T15:15:01.119+03:00"One definite hunter-gather from transitional..."One definite hunter-gather from transitional period in Oetzi (I could accept that he might be from farming stock, but that is not the life he led)."<br /><br />If he wasnt Farmer, then he definately traded with Farmers, because he clearly had Farmer produced products with his corpse.<br /><br />Maybe he is something like an American "trapper".<br /><br />"Trappers" came from Farmer (european) stock, not from HG Stock (native North-Americans), but lived the life of a Hunter Gatherer, with Farmer produced weapons and tools.Fantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07969348276219179258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-5320226156596893752012-07-03T10:33:32.917+03:002012-07-03T10:33:32.917+03:00Correction:
BRA1 is followed by AJV52 and only the...Correction:<br />BRA1 is followed by AJV52 and only then by LatviansProject "Magnus Ducatus Lituaniae"https://www.blogger.com/profile/06764361071403376842noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-67737327427637131072012-07-03T10:18:39.281+03:002012-07-03T10:18:39.281+03:00I think it wasn't a good idea to make the comp...I think it wasn't a good idea to make the composite individual from La Brana samples, for they are not very homogenous.<br /><br />Although my results are somehow similar to yours, i've discerned a visually observed pattern in the smooth gradient of North European mesolithic genetic component.<br /><br />According to the Admixture K=4 results, the Mesolithic component is modal in BRA1, immediately followed by Latvians,Lithuanians,Estonians, Karelians, Belorussians, Finns and Samis.<br /><br />On other side of the spectrum we have Cypriots, Öetzi, Gök4 and Ste7 - Neolithic farmers who have 0% of North European component.<br /><br />http://image-upload.de/image/bUVw9q/179189e059.pngProject "Magnus Ducatus Lituaniae"https://www.blogger.com/profile/06764361071403376842noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-28220416081983242162012-07-03T02:28:23.335+03:002012-07-03T02:28:23.335+03:00From my alternatively-biased point of view:
We ha...From my alternatively-biased point of view:<br /><br />We have a mesolithic Hunter-Gatherer in the La Brava samples.<br /><br />Two probable hunter-gathers from the transitional period in the AJ samples.<br /><br />One definite hunter-gather from transitional period in Oetzi (I could accept that he might be from farming stock, but that is not the life he led).<br /><br />I am not sure about GOK but farmer for the sake of argument.<br /><br />The oldest samples, La Brava Mesolithic Hunter Gatherers do indeed look like a mating between the AJ like folk and the GOK/Oetzi folk. This suggests to me that both groups may have been around in the mesolithic. Which makes them both pre neolithic.<br /><br />I too am curious about the EAst African. I could believe West African (via Gibralter) more easily. East Africa seems a long way away.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11000684388615334278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-36460302610305335632012-07-03T02:27:37.026+03:002012-07-03T02:27:37.026+03:00@Atle OStern
Hi, your theory had already been prop...@Atle OStern<br />Hi, your theory had already been proposed by Hard Goodenough, in his book "The Evolution of Pastoralism and Indo-European Origins"<br /><br /> Thus, the majority of scholars see the introduction of Indo-European languages to western Europe as coming after the spread of agriculture in a piecemeal process starting before 3000 BCE and continuing until the present. An eclectic hypothesis I see no reason why the hypotheses of Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, Renfrew and Gimbutas cannot be reconciled or fruitfully combined. We all accept the origin of Indo-Hittite in Anatolia, against the traditional vision of an Urheimat in the steppe. Where Gamkrelidze and Ivanov see “Greek” as having moved across the Aegean, however, I agree with Renfrew that the initial move was made much earlier with the spread of agriculture. I differ from Renfrew in seeing the migrants’ language not as Proto-Greek but as a branch of Indo-Hittite. Peoples speaking forms of this language spread north to create the Neolithic civilizations of the Sixth and Fifth Millennia BCE in the Balkans. Here I differ from Gamkrelidze, Ivanov and Gimbutas. I then follow the scheme set out by W. H. Goodenough in 1970. He argued that people from these agricultural civilizations on the edge of the steppe developed techniques of nomadism. From this mixed agricultural and nomadic population that spoke Indo-Hittite the Kurgan culture formed and Indo-European, in the narrow sense, developed in the Fourth Millennium.27 At this point, I accept the conventional view that the Kurgan culture and Indo-European languages spread out from the steppe. What Gamkrelidze and Ivanov call the Ancient European Dialects (Celtic, Italic, Illyrian, Germanic, Baltic Slavic and, probably, the Tocharian families) derived from northern dialects and migrated earlier, while the Indo-Aryan (Armenian and Greek) came from the southern. It seems that Indo-Iranian speakers had penetrated Iran from the north by the end of the Third Millennium BCE. During the Second Millennium, they entered the Near East and conquered much of northern India. Already they appear to have been calling themselves Arya or Aryans.crishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01232905237272530506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-38815171515015303222012-07-03T00:26:55.103+03:002012-07-03T00:26:55.103+03:00The ancient samples have a limited number of SNPs ...The ancient samples have a limited number of SNPs and once you intersect all individuals you're left with pretty much nothing; that's why it makes little sense to run ADMIXTURE with them alone.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-47166206989289644002012-07-03T00:08:21.984+03:002012-07-03T00:08:21.984+03:00Could you run ADMIXTURE with only the ancient samp...Could you run ADMIXTURE with only the ancient samples excluding modern samples?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-83957359128892833182012-07-02T22:06:00.577+03:002012-07-02T22:06:00.577+03:00Is it likely that expansion of groups from the Bla...Is it likely that expansion of groups from the Black Sea area might have brought the Indo-Europeans languages to Europe to such an extent that probably most of the former and potentially unrelated languages went extinct with few remaining traces (excluding some languages)? However, I find a combination of the two major theories (farmers vs animal husbandry) about the origin of the Indo-European language family more convincing, and compatible with the genetic data, than either one of them alone. It is conceivable that the widespread occurrence of Indo-European languages already in pre-roman times is chiefly due to migration of farmers associated with demic diffusion. Secondly, farmers on the boundary of the steppes may have developed a pastoral lifestyle. Somewhat later, perhaps in the Bronze Age, these semi-nomadic communities might have pushed into central Europe, either forcing other Indo-European speaking groups to migrate or implementing language shift where they settled down. Thus, through these mechanisms, the result would be an expanding range of people speaking Indo-European languages.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09953113179078211471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-91570292401684345512012-07-02T20:50:19.774+03:002012-07-02T20:50:19.774+03:00Repo Man
"Since it is looking as if R1B arriv...Repo Man<br />"Since it is looking as if R1B arrived late, during the bronze age with the Bell-Beaker culture, R1B is the most likely candidate signal for the Indo-European invaders."<br /><br />I think it's the other way round. I think the original clade of R1b was introduced by farmers coming round the atlantic coast and the spread of the specific clades associated with western europe was the result of the spread of a foraging / fishing / cattle raising culture associated with megalithism which happened to suit the climate. So a pre-IE (or southern wave IE) west to east expansion with the IE (or northern wave IE) coming later.<br /><br />###<br /><br />If the first farmers were in eastern Anatolia and the Minoans, Etruscans, Sumerians etc were non-IE and they were displaced by IE speakers then it does seem most likely to me that IE *originated* in the mountainous regions to the north and east of Anatolia with offshoots to the balkans and the steppe.<br /><br />It also seems likely to me that both the origin and the offshoots could have been the source for different expansions at different times with the steppe one - the one people usually associate with IE - coming last.<br /><br />So the sequence (maybe?)<br />1) non-IE first farmers in eastern anatolia spreading west and south<br />2) PIE in mountains north and east of anatolia adopt pastoralism under the influence of the first farmers<br />3) PIE split<br />- one branch to Anatolia<br />- one branch to the balkans (becoming the new main source)<br />- one branch to the steppe (becoming a new main source)<br />4) balkan IE split<br />- one branch follows the non-IE speakers west via Greece and the med (relatively rapidly)<br />- one branch expands up the danube (relatively slowly)<br /><br />[optional<br />5) west to east / south expansion of atlantic cowboys after the introduction of cattle]<br /><br />6) north-eastern IE expansion (now majority north european through mixture) from the steppe pushing south and west which is the one people generally associate with IE.<br /><br />So two IE expansions into Europe with different genetic signatures: an early, rapid mostly west asian southern one heading east to west followed by a much slower northwards expansion limited by latitude and a later, mostly northern euro, north-eastern one heading west and south.<br /><br />(Separately<br />3b) Semitic tribes to the south of Sumer do the same thing i.e. adopt pastoralism from the Sumerian farmers and eventually over-run them.)Greyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13398462488549380796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-27701826378862171472012-07-02T20:44:00.529+03:002012-07-02T20:44:00.529+03:00Hg U must have come from Asia, too. That's whe...<i>Hg U must have come from Asia, too. That's where all the R lineages are. Where else could it come from? From Africa? No. From Neandertals? No.</i><br /><br />The difference being that mtDNA haplogroup U's earliest ancestor is one order of magnitude older than the earliest ancestor of European N-Tat. <br /><br /><i>But note the following structural pattern: mtDNA U is "rare" in Eastern Siberia, while Y-DNA N is "rare" in Western Europe.</i><br /><br />The pattern is not that difficult to explain, given that mt-haplogroup U originated in Western Eurasia and Y-haplogroup N in Eastern Eurasia.<br /><br /><i>Speaking about it, where's the American Indian component detected by multiple autosomal runs as also ranging from Eastern Siberia to West Asia?</i><br /><br />Remember that your Homo Sapiens Out of America theory is verboten here.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-67008362691047246332012-07-02T20:30:32.683+03:002012-07-02T20:30:32.683+03:00"N came to Europe from Asia, this is well kno..."N came to Europe from Asia, this is well known, and is also much more parsimonious than your alternative scenario whereby it represented an older stratum that survives only in NE Europe, was replaced everywhere else, but is surprisingly absent in ancient DNA samples from Europe."<br /><br />Hg U must have come from Asia, too. That's where all the R lineages are. Where else could it come from? From Africa? No. From Neandertals? No.<br /><br />Regarding ancient Y-DNA samples from Europe, we shall see. But note the following structural pattern: mtDNA U is "rare" in Eastern Siberia, while Y-DNA N is "rare" in Western Europe. This is a good example of differential, sex-biased lineage survival suggesting that Western Europe was colonized via a more male-dominant migration. mtDNA U and Y-DNA N overlap in between, which is, again, consistent with the retention by Uralic-speaking peoples of some of the essential genetic properties of that trans-Eurasian substratum.<br /><br />"I could argue parsimony with you, but it would be a wasted effort on someone who thinks modern humans originated in the Americas."<br /><br />Speaking about it, where's the American Indian component detected by multiple autosomal runs as also ranging from Eastern Siberia to West Asia?<br />See the latest admixture graph http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/06/population-replacement-in-neolithic-spain/German Dziebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10703679732205862495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-40668670600418782402012-07-02T20:08:18.553+03:002012-07-02T20:08:18.553+03:00Since nobody makes new mtDNA maps these days, I fi...Since nobody makes new mtDNA maps these days, I fixed us one, from U5 data I found on a table:<br /><br />http://www.freeimagehosting.net/zy6v3Fantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07969348276219179258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-14967053164146758142012-07-02T19:46:26.524+03:002012-07-02T19:46:26.524+03:00Repo Man:
"Since it is looking as if R1B arr...Repo Man:<br /><br />"Since it is looking as if R1B arrived late, during the bronze age with the Bell-Beaker culture, R1B is the most likely candidate signal for the Indo-European invaders."<br /><br />I think Bell Beaker is a very unlikely candidate. They seem to spread from Iberia to NW and Central Europe, which is not impossible, but not likely way of the IE "invaders", but more importantly, there are no know fact supporting this idea. <br /><br />Also I think they are too early for that and IE reached West Europe only later. <br /><br />My personal opinion is that Bell Beaker was local, developed from the Iberian Megalith and R1b is older in West Europe than Bell Beaker. <br /><br />Which Hg Y is from IE movement, this is a long debated question here. Maybe they were very inhomogeneous for Hg Y that makes this difficult.Slumberyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05139930329199925111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-67667214087876501772012-07-02T19:46:00.164+03:002012-07-02T19:46:00.164+03:00N came to Europe from Asia, this is well known, an...N came to Europe from Asia, this is well known, and is also much more parsimonious than your alternative scenario whereby it represented an older stratum that survives only in NE Europe, was replaced everywhere else, but is surprisingly absent in ancient DNA samples from Europe.<br /><br />Of course, I could argue parsimony with you, but it would be a wasted effort on someone who thinks modern humans originated in the Americas.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-54198315640730914322012-07-02T19:41:57.910+03:002012-07-02T19:41:57.910+03:00Excellent work D. Thanks for organising all this i...Excellent work D. Thanks for organising all this information into a coherent and clear picture.<br /><br />It might be worth looking into the IE religions for indications of IE ideology and social organization. The elite ethnic IE caste system in India is well known because of its continued existence and because of the Vedas. There are some studies out there of more general IE ideology and religion, Greek, Roman, Slavic etc. I will see what I can dig up.apostateimpressionshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08992369104954433139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-10478025348081897732012-07-02T18:31:23.693+03:002012-07-02T18:31:23.693+03:00Mixing of the ANI and ASI did not happen 140 gener...Mixing of the ANI and ASI did not happen 140 generations before as was believed, but probably more than 500 generations back (12,000yrs). <br /><br />Metspalu et al. (2011)bmdriverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02175936825472291559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-53542724764890447282012-07-02T17:57:11.161+03:002012-07-02T17:57:11.161+03:00"What utter nonsense! Did you even bother to ..."What utter nonsense! Did you even bother to read the post you are responding to? The argument is purely genetic."<br /><br />Then don't use the linguistic label - "Indo-European." Indo-European is a category defined on linguistic grounds. You're just hijacking it to give a recognizable public meaning to your genetic "components" as in "The Bronze Age Indo-European invasion of Europe." If you want to understand the origins of Indo-Europeans, you need to build a solid linguistic argument, and then add a genetic argument to it. <br /><br />"Could very well be, but that's not helping your case."<br /><br />What case? You are the one building cases. Out of thin air, sometimes.<br /><br />"Absolutely no link. N is absent in most of Europe where the U stratum exists."<br /><br />N-M178 is found at 30-60% of Saami, Finns, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians. Exactly in the region where you have a mtDNA U-bubble in contemporary populations. It may have existed in wider Europe but was replaced by R-people. It's corresponding mtDNA U substratum survived better.German Dziebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10703679732205862495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-8181760627760289122012-07-02T17:35:14.173+03:002012-07-02T17:35:14.173+03:00The problem with that is that you continue to rely...<i>The problem with that is that you continue to rely on fringe linguistic theories and pseudo-linguistic statistics, while retaining the label Indo-European. Very few if any Indo-Europeanists support Dolgopolsky's belief that IE and Afroasiatic are related. You will be better off dropping the "Indo-European" label altogether and speak about the genetic populations illuminated by your analysis.</i><br /><br />What utter nonsense! Did you even bother to read the post you are responding to? The argument is purely genetic. <br /><br /><i>Indo-Europeans, as a linguistic communioty, likely expanded from north of the Black Sea at roughly 3600 BC. Genetically, they may have had a West Asian component through pre-existing admixture from agricultural expansions originating in the Near East, but they came from Eastern Europe, not West Asia.</i><br /><br />Those who believe in this theory (e.g., James Mallory) go at great lengths to deny influence from Near Eastern agricultural populations in the steppe. It seems we are making progress.<br /><br /><i>Yes, this seems to be the situation, and this has been "known," without the U label, for decades. The Uralic language family is the closest in providing the geographic match for this trans-Eurasian linguistic unity. And as Saami demonstrate, there may be a special association between hg U and proto-Uralic.</i><br /><br />Could very well be, but that's not helping your case.<br /><br /><i>Hg U seems to correspond to Y-DNA hg N as another pan-Northern Eurasian marker displaced by R in the west and C in the east.</i><br /><br />Absolutely no link. N is absent in most of Europe where the U stratum exists. N is unrelated to the U substratum; it came from the East and was added onto that stratum in the northernmost area of the boreal zone.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-66953608804931435662012-07-02T17:26:27.138+03:002012-07-02T17:26:27.138+03:00"the Indo-European speaking nucleus, original..."the Indo-European speaking nucleus, originally one among many linguistic groups of the prehistoric Near East..."<br /><br />The problem with that is that you continue to rely on fringe linguistic theories and pseudo-linguistic statistics, while retaining the label Indo-European. Very few if any Indo-Europeanists support Dolgopolsky's belief that IE and Afroasiatic are related. You will be better off dropping the "Indo-European" label altogether and speak about the genetic populations illuminated by your analysis.<br /><br />Indo-Europeans, as a linguistic communioty, likely expanded from north of the Black Sea at roughly 3600 BC. Genetically, they may have had a West Asian component through pre-existing admixture from agricultural expansions originating in the Near East, but they came from Eastern Europe, not West Asia.<br /><br />"U-dominated older mtDNA stratum in Central/North-eastern Europe can be reasonably extended to cover both North-western Europe and northern Eurasia up to Lake Baikal, the prehistoric limit between Caucasoids and Mongoloids."<br /><br />Yes, this seems to be the situation, and this has been "known," without the U label, for decades. The Uralic language family is the closest in providing the geographic match for this trans-Eurasian linguistic unity. And as Saami demonstrate, there may be a special association between hg U and proto-Uralic.<br /><br />On the east, this Paleolithic population was replaced/admixed with the carriers of Y-DNA hg C and mtDNA A, C, D, G, Y, Z, all of northeast Asian provenance. <br /><br />Hg U seems to correspond to Y-DNA hg N as another pan-Northern Eurasian marker displaced by R in the west and C in the east.German Dziebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10703679732205862495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-30437878171140235102012-07-02T13:35:30.140+03:002012-07-02T13:35:30.140+03:00Would this still live open the question of origina...<i>Would this still live open the question of original admixture of the first Indoeuropean speakers?</i><br /><br />All we can say at the moment is that their gene pool probably intersected to a substantial degree with the West_Asian component. There may have been other elements in it that were not captured by the West_Asian component, but we can exlude most of them by a process of elimmination, e.g., they cannot have come out from territories where there was substantial "Southern" influence, because "Southern" is lacking in Indo-Aryans. Conversely, they cannot have come out from territories with "South_Asian" influence, because "South_Asian" is lacking in Europeans.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-10067563104684974022012-07-02T13:03:46.716+03:002012-07-02T13:03:46.716+03:00Thanks for your reply, yes it makes sense.
Would ...Thanks for your reply, yes it makes sense.<br /><br />Would this still live open the question of original admixture of the first Indoeuropean speakers?Carloshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04768797187589534069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-27668149099951000332012-07-02T12:56:34.424+03:002012-07-02T12:56:34.424+03:00But the West Asian component also reaches its high...<i>But the West Asian component also reaches its highest occurrence among non-Indoeuropean speakes: Abkhazians and Georgians..</i><br /><br />Yes, of course, that's why I wrote: <br /><br />"the Indo-European speaking nucleus, originally one among many linguistic groups of the prehistoric Near East "<br /><br />A good way of looking at it is the following:<br /><br />Consider white North Americans: they have a lot of North_European. This North_European came mostly from British, Irish, Dutch and the like, and mostly with the English language, even though the groups with the highest North_European in Europe are Lithuanians, Russians, etc.<br /><br />Similarly, Spaniards brought Spanish and "Atlantic_Med" to South America, even though Sardinians and Basques have more of the "Atlantic_Med" there.<br /><br /><br />Of course we don't know how the situation was in West Asia 5,000 years ago, but we cannot expect that the Proto-Indo-Europeans were necessarily the "champions of the West_Asian charts".Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-3256985343761705062012-07-02T12:44:18.672+03:002012-07-02T12:44:18.672+03:00'It reaches its lowest occurrence in areas whe...'It reaches its lowest occurrence in areas where non-Indo-European languages have been spoken (Basques and Iberia in general, Sardinia, and Finland)'<br /><br />But the West Asian component also reaches its highest occurrence among non-Indoeuropean speakes: Abkhazians and Georgians..Carloshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04768797187589534069noreply@blogger.com