5 ms·

> It's that the PIE-speaking Yamnaya ... slaughtered mostly everyone (especially men) except the Basques. There is no evidence for that blanket claim, genetic

> It's that the PIE-speaking Yamnaya ... slaughtered mostly everyone (especially men) except the Basques. There is no evidence for that blanket claim, genetic or otherwise. No archaeologist or historical sociolinguist working with the spread of the IE languages would deny that some violence occurred in prehistory, but there is evidence for cultural diffusion – yes, even before writing. After all, there are numerous historical examples of language spread by cultural diffusion in the absence of writing, where violence was only sporadic, and the principle of uniformity leads us to posit that the same was possible for the Indo-European languages. Humans are social creatures just as much as they are violent ones, and social pressures lead to language change just as easily as force of arms. > swept in from the caucuses [sic] The consensus PIE Urheimat was well north of the Caucasus. The Caucasus is only relevant to IE linguistics for areal typology reasons.

0815test 7y ago
> There is no evidence for that blanket claim, genetic or otherwise. Strictly speaking, that's of course true; but the molecular-level evidence is pretty damning, and as close to "slaughtered all the men" as we'd ever be able to call in the first place. See the book Who We Are by David Reich for the full story. That pattern is really not that special, by the way - the very same conflict signature shows up in the PIE people themselves, which is how we know that they emerged after severe conflict with the ancient North-Eurasians. > The consensus PIE Urheimat was well north of the Caucasus It was north of the Caucasus, yes, but not that up north. Maybe parent should have said "Pontic steppe" instead of Caucasus, but he/she was in the ballpark.
- Mediterraneo10 7y ago
  I asked for a citation on your other post, and instead of providing one, you posted this reply elsewhere that simply repeats the claim. Please have some rigor. There are readers here sufficiently involved in the field that they are comfortable with the scholarly literature on the subject and, what’s more, expect it.
  - smallnamespace 7y ago
    This is devolving into a silly 'no, you need to prove your claim, not me!' back and forth. FWIW, I'm definitely not a scholar in this field, but I'd like a plausible hypothesis for the extinction of entire Y haplotype lineages without the elimination of maternal lineages through just 'cultural diffusion'. Slavery and genocide seem like much more likely, simple explanations. I've been reading Herodotus's Histories and he makes it pretty clear that mass enslavement of conquered populations was not exactly rare. What do you imagine happens to enslaved men and women?
nyolfen 7y ago
>There is no evidence for that blanket claim, genetic or otherwise. there's definitely evidence: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8152 https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8152 https://www.amphilsoc.org/sites/default/files/2018-08/attachments/Reich.pdf https://www.amphilsoc.org/sites/default/files/2018-08/attach... (p 50-54 for quick skim)

0815test 7y ago

> There is no evidence for that blanket claim, genetic or otherwise. Strictly speaking, that's of course true; but the molecular-level evidence is pretty damning, and as close to "slaughtered all the men" as we'd ever be able to call in the first place. See the book Who We Are by David Reich for the full story. That pattern is really not that special, by the way - the very same conflict signature shows up in the PIE people themselves, which is how we know that they emerged after severe conflict with the ancient North-Eurasians. > The consensus PIE Urheimat was well north of the Caucasus It was north of the Caucasus, yes, but not that up north. Maybe parent should have said "Pontic steppe" instead of Caucasus, but he/she was in the ballpark.

Mediterraneo10 7y ago
I asked for a citation on your other post, and instead of providing one, you posted this reply elsewhere that simply repeats the claim. Please have some rigor. There are readers here sufficiently involved in the field that they are comfortable with the scholarly literature on the subject and, what’s more, expect it.
- smallnamespace 7y ago
  This is devolving into a silly 'no, you need to prove your claim, not me!' back and forth. FWIW, I'm definitely not a scholar in this field, but I'd like a plausible hypothesis for the extinction of entire Y haplotype lineages without the elimination of maternal lineages through just 'cultural diffusion'. Slavery and genocide seem like much more likely, simple explanations. I've been reading Herodotus's Histories and he makes it pretty clear that mass enslavement of conquered populations was not exactly rare. What do you imagine happens to enslaved men and women?

nyolfen 7y ago

>There is no evidence for that blanket claim, genetic or otherwise. there's definitely evidence: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8152 https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8152 https://www.amphilsoc.org/sites/default/files/2018-08/attachments/Reich.pdf https://www.amphilsoc.org/sites/default/files/2018-08/attach... (p 50-54 for quick skim)