GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-12 > 1291538647


From: "Lancaster-Boon" <>
Subject: [DNA] R1b and R1a fate
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 09:44:07 +0100


Dear Anatole

I'm going to start by defending myself, before going on to admit that in a
more important point a wording error by me have caused some
misunderstanding...

1. You write: "to write that IE language was "originated in the
steppes" is an awful slang again".

As you yourself write of language origins, I can only imagine that you are
saying that my wording implies over-simplification on my part which you do
not make, and indeed you go on to exagerrate:-

"To draw a red-color spot in the middle of the steppes as "IE language" with
a multitude of arrows coming from that spot in all directions and not a
single one coming in - it is for a kindergarten. That is what IS relevant in
this discussion."

I would humpby beg to differ. I do not think anything in my post indicates
any red spots or arrows. I am not so sure about your own hypotheses. Please
do read the actual post I wrote whenever you claim to replying to it. It was
here:
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2010-12/12914087
14

Somehwat in contrast to this criticism, you go on to write:

"Take "Iranian" branch of Indo-European family of languages. Where was its
"origin"? I will tell you - along the route of R1a1 from Altai across
Eurasia to Europe and back to "Russia" being carried by R1a1 to Central Asia
and to the Iranian Plateau. What "single ancestral language"? Those
"ancestors" spread over thousands of miles and thousands of years. What
"single geographical area"? The "origin" can be with R1a1 in Central Asia,
with R1a1 in the East European Plain, with R1a1 in "Germany", with R1a1 in
the Balkans, with R1a1 in Anatolia, etc."

You then say that this paragraph above, summarises why it is unacceptable to
you to say, as I had written, that Iranian is "thought to descend from a
single ancestral language, which was spoken by a single population, that
lived in a single geographical area - the origin."

But this is frankly illogical, treating different periods as different
places. Saying that a language family was in different places AT DIFFERENT
TIMES, and that it split up AFTER its origins, clearly does NOT have
anything to do with the sentence you say your remarks are in conflict with.
Indeed, your own hypotheses clearly fit my generalization as well as pretty
much any hypothesis. Discussions about how large or stable or dispersed the
EARLIEST identificable Indo-Iranian or Iranian language population is a side
issue.

I put it to you that this line of criticism is over-stretched. It does not
really apply to anything relevant in this particular discussion.

2. Next, I have to grant you my terminological error as you explain in the
following. I have already noted my error to Dienekes also:-

"For starters, Iranian is a branch of not "Indo-Aryan" but of Indo-Iranian.
Indic and Iranian are different branches, the first split on some accounts
2900 ybp, the second 2500 ybp. Indo-Iranian split about 4600 ybp. Yes, it
came from (not "originated in") the East European Plain. By the way, 4600
ybp is nicely coincides with the timespan to a common ancestor of R1a1 on
the East European Plain, which is around 4750 ybp. To me, it is fairly
uncontroversial indeed."

"Again, Iranian language split from the Indo-Iranian not "2000 BC" but 500
BC (2500 ybp), according to linguists, you can check it with the Atkinson &
Gray family of languages. Its precursor, Indo-Iranian, split 4600 ybp (see
above), which nicely fits with the chronology of the Aryan (R1a1) route from
the Russian Plain (4800 ybp) to "India" (3500 ybp). So, what I need to
re-check, please?"

Sorry about that. Yes, this seems fine by me concerning R1a1, although to be
less controversial my intention was to make a more general remark about R1a.
Please let me go back to what I actually wrote:-

First my attempt at an uncontroversial starting point was:-
<< There is also very little doubt that IE languages in Europe spread from
the above-mentioned sedentary region which was an area where steppe dwellers
hit a bigger population, and apparently mixed in (and maybe took over, but
that speculation is not necessary here).>>

I then speculated:-
<<R1a [that is, a branch or branches of it] became common in an IE
population on the steppes which spread in one of the later waves which
affected especially Baltic, Slavic, and Indo Aryan speaking areas, from
Afghanistan to Byelorus for example.>>

The point I was making is that concerning OLDER ancestry of BOTH R1a
branches and IE branches, we only confuse discussion by even considering
them. Nearly all the evidence we have comes from the time AFTER this "wave"
(or waves) of dispersal which made increased the presence of certain types
of R1a and certain branches of IE, at the expense, we presume, of older
diversity.

3. I note that concerning R1b you are involved in another more specific
thread, which shows bigger disagreements. I'll discussion of that to the
other thread.

Best Regards
Andrew


This thread: