46 Pra-Słowianie, co żyli jeszcze przed Yamnaya culture,.. czyli Sredny Stog i Dereivka culture 02


http://www.vera-eisenmann.com/dereivka-photos

Oto kolejna część wiadomości o tzw. kulturze Sredny Stog, a właściwie o jej najbardziej znanym stanowisku archeologicznym zwanym Dereivka. Proszę zwrócić uwagę na strzałki, które wskazują skąd pojawili się w tym miejscu ludzie z haplogrupą R1a… Jak widać nie jest to południe… 🙂 Dodatkowo pragnę zwrócić uwagę na to, jak bardzo zawężony został obszar występowania rzek, których nazwy mają słowiański źródłosłów…

Przypominam, że to nie jest prawda, co twierdzą różni tacy jedni uprzedzeni przeciw-słowiańsko, jakoby Słowianie nie znali słów odpowiadających tzw. PIE… hm… zaraz zaraz… o co tu chodzi? Sami zobaczcie…

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/horse

(…)Etymology 1

From Middle English horse, hors, from Old English hors (horse), metathesis from Proto-Germanic *hrussą (horse), from Proto-Indo-European *ḱr̥sos (horse), from Proto-Indo-European*ḱers- (to run). (…)

Etymology 2

Unknown (…)

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=horse

horse (n.) „solidungulate perissodactyl mammal of the family Equidæ and genus Equus” [Century Dictionary], Old English hors „horse,” from Proto-Germanic *hursa- (source also of Old Norse hross, Old Frisian, Old Saxon hors, Middle Dutch ors, Dutch ros, Old High German hros, German Roß „horse”), of unknown origin, connected by some with PIE root *kurs-, source of Latin currere „to run” (see current (adj.)).

The usual Indo-European word is represented by Old English eoh, Greek hippos, Latin equus, from PIE *ekwo- „horse” (see equine). In many other languages, as in English, this root has been lost in favor of synonyms, probably via superstitious taboo on uttering the name of an animal so important in Indo-European religion. For the Romanic words (French cheval, Spanish caballo) see cavalier (n.); for Dutch paard, German Pferd, see palfrey; for Swedish häst, Danish hest see henchman. As plural Old English had collective singular horse as well as horses, in Middle English also sometimes horsen, but horses has been the usual plural since 17c. (…)

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=equine&allowed_in_frame=0

equine (adj.) 1765, from Latin equinus „of a horse, of horses; of horsehair,” from equus „horse,” from PIE root *ekwo- „horse” (source also of Greek hippos, Old Irish ech, Old English eoh, Gothic aihwa-, Sanskrit açva-, Avestan aspa-, Old Church Slavonic ehu-, all meaning „horse”).

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/equus#Latin

(…)Etymology

From Proto-Italic *ekwos, from Proto-Indo-European *h₁éḱwos (horse). Cognates include Ancient Greek ἵππος (híppos), Sanskrit अश्व (áśva), Persian اسب (æsb), Old Armenian էշ (ēš, donkey), Tocharian B yakwe, Gaulish epos. (…)

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h%E2%82%81%C3%A9%E1%B8%B1wos

Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h₁éḱwos

Alternative reconstructions

Etymology

Usually explained as a derivation of the adjective *h₁eḱus (quick, swift), also seen in e.g. Ancient Greek ὠκύς (ōkús), Latin ōcior (faster) and Sanskrit आशु (āśú, fast, quick) (all < PIE *h₁oh₁ḱus (swift)). The thematic derivation would express association with a root noun *h₁eḱ- (swiftness, celerity), thus denoting „that which has swiftness” or „the swift one”. The adjective would have to be derived from the root by reduplication, which is unusual in PIE nominal word formation. Many linguists therefore reject it as popular etymology and suggest other sources:

  • Kulanda 2008 argues that the PIE word is borrowed from North Caucasian, since there are no known Nostratic cognates; compare Kabardian шы (šə), Abkhaz аҽы (āčə), Avar чу (ču), Karata ичва (ičʷa, mare), Lezgi шив (šiv, horse) etc. (NCED 520). This etymology has been criticized by Matasović 2012:291 who argues that the direction of borrowing is probably from PIE into North Caucasian: steppe horses were probably traded for Mesopotamian imports on the North Caucasus in the eneolithic period. The fact that we find fricatives and affricates in the Caucasian reflexes of this word indicates that the source could have been an IE dialect of the satem type.
  • Bomhard connects it to Proto-Altaic *èk‘á (to move quickly, to rage) with the original meaning not „the swift one” but „the spirited, violent, fiery, or wild one”, both deriving from Proto-Nostratic root *ʔekʰ- „to move quickly, to rage; to be furious, raging, violent, spirited, fiery, wild”

The original thematic form is also disputed – according to Kloekhorst (2008), the original derivation was a u-stem, to which point Anatolian reflexes which presume Proto-Anatolian u-stem *h₁éḱu-, as opposed to the thematic (o-stem) derivation in all the other PIE branches. There is no known phonological development through which PIE *h₁eḱwo- could yield PAnat. *h₁eḱu-, and in view of the productivity of the o-stem inflection in Anatolian it is unlikely that PIE *h₁eḱwo- would have yielded PAnat. *h₁éḱu- through secondary developments. We therefore must conclude that the Proto-Anatolian u-stem *h₁éḱu- reflects the original state of affairs and that the thematicization as visible in the non-Anatolian IE languages (which is a trivial development) must be regarded as a common innovation of them. In other words, this is one of the evidences supportive of the Indo-Hittite hypothesis. The original paradigm was probably thus *h₁éḱ-u-s, *h₁éḱ-u-m, *h₁ḱ-u-és, from the stem *h₁eḱ-u- (swift).

Noun

*h₁éḱwos m (non-ablauting)[4]

  1. stallion, horse

Inflection

Thematic
singular dual plural
nominative *h₁éḱwos *h₁éḱwoh₁ *h₁éḱwoes
vocative *h₁éḱwe *h₁éḱwoh₁ *h₁éḱwoes
accusative *h₁éḱwom *h₁éḱwoh₁ *h₁éḱwons
genitive *h₁éḱwosyo *? *h₁éḱwooHom
ablative *h₁éḱwead *? *h₁éḱwomos
dative *h₁éḱwoey *? *h₁éḱwomos
locative *h₁éḱwey, *h₁éḱwoy *? *h₁éḱwoysu
instrumental *h₁éḱwoh₁ *? *h₁éḱwōys

Synonyms

Descendants

  • Anatolian: *ʔeḱu-
    • Hittite:  (ANŠE.KUR.RA-us, /ekkus/) (only attested with Sumerogram)
    • Luwian:
      Cuneiform Luwian:  (ANŠE.KUR.RA-us, /aššus, azzus/)
      Hieroglyphic Luwian: EQUUSásù(wa)
    • Lycian:  (esbe)
  • Armenian:
    • Old Armenian: էշ (ēš, donkey)
      • Armenian: էշ (ēš)
  • Balto-Slavic:
    • Lithuanian: ašvà (mare)
    • Old Prussian aswinan (mare’s milk)
  • Celtic: *ekʷos (see there for further descendants)
  • Germanic: *ehwaz (see there for further descendants)
  • Hellenic: *íkkʷos (see there for further descendants)
  • Indo-Iranian: *Háćwas (see there for further descendants)
  • Italic: *ekwos
    • Old Latin: equos
    • Venetic: ekvon (acc.)
  • Phrygian: [script needed] (es’)
  • Thracian: [script needed] (esvas)
  • Tocharian: *yä́kwë

References

  1. ^ Ringe, Don (2006) From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic, Oxford University Press
  2. ^ Kloekhorst 2008:239
  3. ^ De Vaan, Michiel (2008) Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages (Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series; 7), Leiden, Boston: Brill
  4. ^ EIEC p. 273

Czyli co… ten tzw. PIE miał na określenie KL”oS+aKa, KL”aC”y, Ko”Ca,.. kilka różnych słów, jak *h₁éḱwos albo *ekwo-, albo *ḱr̥sos, albo *kurs-,.. nie zapominajc, o *h₁eḱus, czy  *h₁oh₁ḱus,.. czyli  słowiańskim SoKoLe i tzw. rough breathing wymianie dźwięku tzw. PIE zapisywanego znakiem S na późniejszy zapisywany znakiem H?!! 🙂 LOL „:-)

Pisanie o tym, że te fszystkie ałtorytety nie znajo słowiańskich słów, jak te powyżej jest już straszliwie nudne, bo pisałem już o tym wiele razy…

https://skribh.wordpress.com/2015/12/01/222-kola-kouvla-kolano-gola-gouvla-gala-sola-sala-sila-ziola-ziala-zale-hala-hela-chula-czyli-dlaczego-germanskie-jezykoznawstwo-to-klamstwo-i-niedziala/

https://skribh.wordpress.com/2015/11/02/201-czy-kara-za-swiadome-gloszenie-nieprawdy-winno-byct-topienie-w-bagnie-nabijanie-na-pal-czy-stratowanie-a-potem-wlouvczenie-za-klouvsownikiem-klouvsouvjacym-w/

…ale jak widać już czas, żeby napisać o tym znów, bo ilość mondrość poświęconych temu zagadnieniu gwałtownie wzrasta, jak trujące grzyby po deszczu…


A,.. strona poświęcona Dereivce nie występuje na wikipedii w języku polskim… no bo i po co, nieprawdaż? 😦

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dereivka

Dereivka (Ukrainian: Деріївка) is an archaeological site located in the village of the same name in Kirovohrad Oblast, Ukraine, on the right bank of the Dneiper. The site dates to ca. 4500—3500 BC and is associated with the Sredny Stog culture.

This site is known primarily as a probable site of early horse domestication due to a high percentage of horse bones found at the site. A horse burial with bit wear and cheek pieces was long considered evidence for horseback-riding at an early date, but in 1997 radiocarbon dates showed that the burial was intrusive, the horse having died circa 700-200 BC, thereby re-opening the question of when horseback-riding was invented.[1]

Of interest is some apparently equivocal evidence for fenced houses. Two cemeteries are associated, one from the earlier (neolithic) Dnieper-Donets culture and one from the aforementioned Sredny Stog culture, of the Copper Age. The habitation site included three dwellings and six hearths, each containing hundreds of animal bones. Of all the bones, approximately 75% came from horses, possibly exploited by the inhabitants only as food staple.

As a part of the Sredny Stog complex, it is considered to be very early Indo-European, and probably, Proto-Indo-European, within the traditional context of the Kurgan hypothesis of Marija Gimbutas, though Sredny Stog is itself pre-kurgan as to burial rite.

See also

References

  1. Jump up^ Drews, Early Riders, page15

Sources

…..


http://www.anthrogenica.com/archive/index.php/t-8408.html


http://www.suduva.com/virdainas/proto.htm


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X16305934
New insights into the subsistence economy of the Eneolithic Dereivka culture of the Ukrainian North-Pontic region through lipid residues analysis of pottery vessels
Simona Miletoa, Elke Kaisera, Yuri Rassamakinc, Richard P. Evershedb
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.03.028

Abstract
The Dereivka site of the North-Pontic forest-steppe has been widely investigated because of its potential as a centre for horse domestication (Levine, 1990; Telegin, 1986). Despite the significant archaeological evidence available, Dereivka is considered a contradictory and complex site (Rassamakin, 1999: 143) due to a range of challenges connected with reconciling the various lines of available archaeological evidence. Consequently, a generally acceptable subsistence economic model has still to be developed, with contrasting theories remaining unresolved. This paper presents new results of organic residues analyses from the site. Forty potsherds were submitted to biomolecular and stable carbon and hydrogen isotope analyses and the results discussed in relation to previously published zooarchaeological evidence (Bibikova, 1986; Levine, 1999; Kaiser, 2010). The findings offer a further perspective on the overall subsistence economic strategies of the community, particularly in relation to the exploitation of the horse. Significantly, the biomolecular and stable carbon isotope results confirmed that Dereivka community consumed horse products predominantly, together with smaller proportions of ruminant and non-ruminant products. Interestingly, although ruminant adipose fats were recovered from some vessels, evidence of ruminant dairy product exploitation was insignificant, with only one residue displaying a possible ruminant dairy fat origin. Hydrogen isotope analysis of lipids was applied to investigate equine milk processing in pots (Outram et al., 2009) but these analyses did not offer significant new insights.

Keywords
Horse domestication; Fatty acids; Compound-specific stable isotope analyses

http://ehrafarchaeology.yale.edu/ehrafa/citation.do?method=citation&forward=browseAuthorsFullContext&id=e075-031
Dereivka: a settlement and cemetery of Copper Age horse keepers on the middle
Telehin, D. IA. Mallory, J. P. Pyatkovskiy, V. K.
Published By: Oxford, England: B.A.R., 1986. i-vi, 1-126, 183-186 p.: ill., maps

Abstract: Telegin discusses the excavations and findings from the settlement and cemetery at the site of Dereivka in the Ukraine. Dereivka is a major site of the Sredny Stog culture and has some of the earliest evidence of domestic horse. The entire settlement was uncovered. ‚The dwellings and other…domestic features of the habitation site constitute a single … household unit. The settlement was laid out as a…rectangular courtyard surrounded by various structures. The settlement was…enclosed by a fence … as] marked by the area of shell accumulation.’ (page 35). Artifacts found at the settlement site include ceramics, clay sculptures, tools such as hammers and mattocks of antler, early bridle cheekpieces, stone tools, and faunal remains. Fourteen internments have been uncovered at the Eneolithic cemetery.

https://www.waterstones.com/book/dereivka/d-y-telegin/dmitriy-yakolevich-telegin/9780860543695
Dereivka: A Settlement and Cemetery of Copper Age Horse Keepers on the Middle Dnieper – British Archaeological Reports International Series 287 (Paperback)
D.Y. Telegin (author), Dmitriy Yakolevich Telegin (author), V.K. Pyatkovsky (translator), J. P. Mallory (author), V. K. Pyatkovsky (translator)

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/dereivka-and-the-problem-of-horse-domestication/CC3FE6E556FB1A2B287374E6CDAB0953
Dereivka and the problem of horse domestication
Marsha A. Levine (a1)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00078832
Published online: 02 January 2015

The domestication of the horse was revolutionary in its consequences – as much so as the spread of agriculture, trade, warfare, metalwork and the other more usual subjects addressed by archaeologists studying post-Neolithic human development. For not only did it directly cause important changes in peoples’ relationships to the world around them by the mobility it conferred, but also it was deeply implicated in all those other developments. In spite of that, in the past 15 years very little has been done to extend our knowledge of the subject. This study, if anything, shows that we probably know even less about the earliest domestication of the horse than we thought

Linked references
D.W. Anthony 1986. The ‘Kurgan Culture’, Indo-European origins, and the domestication of the horse: a reconsideration, Current Anthropology 27(4): 291–313.

http://oxfordindex.oup.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095711844
Dereivka, Ukraine

Settlement and cemetery of Copper Age date on the middle Dnieper. Excavations between 1960 and 1983 directed by D. Y. Telegin revealed an extensive cultural layer dating to 4570–3380 bc comprising a single household unit set with a fenced enclosure bounding three sunken‐floor dwellings, two domestic activity areas, hearths, pits, and a small ritual space within which was a horse‐skull and hooves and the fore‐parts of two dogs. Horse bones were common amongst the faunal assemblage, and it has been suggested that the remains indicate early domestication of the horse for riding. An alternative view is that intensive horse‐hunting across the steppes during the late 5th and early 4th millennium bc provided the context for horse domestication in the late 4th millennium bc.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=0FDqf415wqgC&pg=PA213&lpg=PA213&dq=dereivka&source=bl&ots=2Zb_oOHLRx&sig=P8lsEIO74O_0DCM0TyaUlE4rE2k&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiGzZ-unr_TAhVpBsAKHasNAeMQ6AEITDAJ#v=onepage&q=dereivka&f=false
The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World
David W. Anthony

http://www.vera-eisenmann.com/dereivka-introduction
Dereivka Introduction
Friday 18 November 2011 by Véra Eisenmann
Since the 1960ies, the site of Dereivka in Ukraine, referred to the Sredni Stog culture, has been considered as the first center of horse domestication. The datations of 4200-4000 BC seem well founded and numerous cultural, anatomic and taphonomic arguments has been advanced in support (Bibikova, 1967, 1970). But Dereivka has also bebefited of a large interest because it was allegedly not only the craddle of the domestic horse but also of the first mounted horse. That was evidenced by the electron micropscopic studies of the bit wear patterns on the lower second premolars (Anthony, 1991).

Remarks.
– Skull of a stallion about 7-8 years old, intentionally buried at distance of the main site, together with a fragmentary left anterior limb;
– Numerous remains of horses in less defined burial conditions. Among the 19 preserved entire third metacarpals, 18 are of left side; they were found in groups of two or three, beside skull fragments (Bibikova, 1969). Most were referred to young males.

Only part of the material was available for study when I visited the collection: the buried bones (cranium, mandible, left anterior digit) and 19 third metacarpals. Measures of the material, in particular phalanges were published by Bibikova, 1970 and Nobis, 1971.

– It is only the lower P2 of the buried skull that evidence bit wear patterns.
– According to my observations, the buried stallion third metacarpal (n° 1171-1) is smaller (211mm) then the mean of the 19 other (221mm); it differs also by its gracility suggesting a subadult age. Bibikova (1969) expressed the same opinion. According to its length, the withers height would have been 135cm while the withers height estimated from the skull basilar length is 144cm.
– Bibikova mentions that a left digit was found next to the skull – not the bones of two limbs framing the skull, supposedly buried with the skin as suggested by Anthony (1991). In short, the anatomical association of the adult skull with the left digit (posiibly subadult, and in any case too small) is very doubtful.
– The sample of 16 adult third metacarpals I studied does not show any abnormal variability contrary to the suggestions of Anthony (Anthony, 1991, p. 269); the variation coefficients are quite close to my sample of 36 modern E. przewalskii. According to the length of the Dereivka metacarpals, the withers height can be estimated at 142cm.
– The buried third metacarpal de Dereivka differs from Würmian Western European horses by a more gracile diaphysis and larger epiphyses. The gracility, possibly related to a subadult age, is not evidenced by the adult metacarpals. Even the adult metacarpals, however, have rather large epiphyses.

References.
Anthony D.W., 1991.- The domestication of the Horse. In : R.H. Meadow & H.P. Uerpamann, Equids in the Ancient World, volume II. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients, Reihe A, 19/2, Wiesbaden : 250-277, 1 fig., 7 tabl.

Bibikova V.I., 1967 – K izucheniu drevnejshikh domashnikh loshadej vostochnoj Evropy. Byulleten’ moskovskova obshchestva ispytatelej prirody, otdel Biologii, 72 (3) : 1O6-118, 2 fig., 2 tabl.

Bibikova, V.I. 1969 – Do istorii domestikatsii konja na pidvennomu skhodi Evropy. Arkheologija, 22 : 55-67, 2 tabl., 1 fig.

Bibikova V.I., 1970 – K izucheniu drevnejshikh domashnikh loshadej vostochnoj Evropy. Soobshchenie 2. Byulleten’ moskovskova obshchestva ispytatelej prirody, otdel Biologii, 75 (5) : 118-126, 3 fig., 4 tabl.

Nobis G., 1971 – Vom Wildpferd zum Hauspferd. Böhlan Verl. : 1-96, 6 pl., 58 diagr., 126 tabl., Köln, Wien.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=I91PZ6JVnR4C&dq=dereivka&source=gbs_navlinks_s
Europe in the Neolithic: The Creation of New Worlds
A. W. R. Whittle
Cambridge University Press, 23 May 1996

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aSLqxDmPL6MC&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=dereivka&source=bl&ots=aCd0_jTwrf&sig=_qxQ0_NXML-y0fosYTXg4kHpJtU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjO1pD6ob_TAhWkB8AKHTMlC4s4ChDoAQhIMAg#v=onepage&q=dereivka&f=false
Early Riders: The Beginnings of Mounted Warfare in Asia and Europe
Robert Drews
Routledge, 2 Aug 2004

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tcwAuKwSSz4C&pg=PA74&lpg=PA74&dq=dereivka&source=bl&ots=uV73sSJsbL&sig=HlZ0LizRB1CSQ6Z7yaFce097mhs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj11KT2or_TAhXhLsAKHYGGC_U4FBDoAQgjMAA#v=onepage&q=dereivka&f=false
Horses Through Time
Sandra L. Olsen
Rowman & Littlefield, 2003

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5eHoyZ0nTaoC&pg=PA100&lpg=PA100&dq=dereivka&source=bl&ots=GpfXojQiDV&sig=AL8KE8gljvKkXOtlHCKC2Pihzjc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj11KT2or_TAhXhLsAKHYGGC_U4FBDoAQglMAE#v=onepage&q=dereivka&f=false
Early Animal Domestication and Its Cultural Context
Pam J. Crabtree, Douglas V. Campana, Kathleen Ryan
UPenn Museum of Archaeology, 1989

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=SW2tAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1&dq=dereivka&source=bl&ots=-nfFXRzNRw&sig=T7_kAl3ltFGRTDUws0noPQ5szEw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjKy4eno7_TAhVqDsAKHXirDXc4HhDoAQgwMAM#v=onepage&q=dereivka&f=false
Warhorse: Cavalry in Ancient Warfare
Phil Sidnell
Bloomsbury Publishing, 10 Dec 2007

http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/2005/09/botai-and-horse-domestication.html

Reklamy

3 uwagi do wpisu “46 Pra-Słowianie, co żyli jeszcze przed Yamnaya culture,.. czyli Sredny Stog i Dereivka culture 02

  1. Jeśli ktoś teraz spyta mnie, gdzie była tzw. ojczyzna tzw. PIE… odpowiem, że tu:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sredny_Stog_culture

    The Sredny Stog culture seems to have had contact with the agricultural Cucuteni-Trypillian culture in the west and was a contemporary of the Khvalynsk culture.
    (…)
    The expert Dmytro Telegin has divided the chronology of Sredny Stog into two distinct phases. Phase II (ca. 4000–3500 BC) used corded ware pottery which may have originated there, and stone battle-axes of the type later associated with expanding Indo-European cultures to the West. Most notably, it has perhaps the earliest evidence of horse domestication (in phase II), with finds suggestive of cheek-pieces (psalia).

    In the context of the modified Kurgan hypothesis of Marija Gimbutas, this pre-kurgan archaeological culture could represent the Urheimat (homeland) of the Proto-Indo-European language. The culture ended at around 3500 BC, when the Yamna culture expanded westward replacing Sredny Stog, and coming into direct contact with the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture in the western Ukraine.

    …..

    … co nie oznacza, że Pra-Słowianie nie byli Pra-Słowianami wcześniej… Po prostu wcześniej nie udomowili koni… tylko na nie polowali, tak jak ich przodkowie polowali na mamuty…

    Polubienie

  2. Proponuję poczytać cały ten wątek, bo bardzo dużo jest tam ciekawostek, min od Atima… i innych, którzy go krytykują, patrz:

    http://eng.molgen.org/viewtopic.php?t=1620&p=24639
    Ludzie R1a – skąd i dlaczego przybyli do Europy

    (…) Warto zauważyć, ze najwcześniejszy znany przypadek R1a, znaleziony w Karelii (i datowany na ok. 7,5 tys lat temu) (…..) Nigdzie nie napisałem, że był kogokolwiek przodkiem, natomiast niewątpliwie musiał być potomkiem tego domniemanego „przodka z Bliskiego Wschodu”, ale w takim razie nie widać u niego żadnych śladów owego bliskowschodniego dziedzictwa.

    Nie wiemy, gdzie powstała linia Karelowca/Oleniowca, która pod M459 nie była zbyt krótka, jak na to czas wskazuje. Mało znamy też całego rodowego jego otoczenia, żebyśmy mogli wyrokować o jego aDNA. Ale wiemy, że miał mtC1 i że ono nie było jedyne mtC na Jeleniej Wyspie!!! A dziś najbliższe znane mtC1 jest nas Zabajkalu, dokładnie – nad Amurem, choć ich wylęgania mogła być około Bajkału (np. wyspa Olchon, jak napisałem)! Więc to zdradza, że Oleniowiec migrował raczej w grupie swoich współplemieńców i mógł mieć aDNA tej grupy, choćby po drodze nieco zmodyfikowane. (…)

    (…) Dla mnie jest to niestety przykład absolutnego braku logiki. Albo „R1a migrował dość szybko i w swojej grupie rodzinnej” (jak głosi jeden z wariantów Twojej teorii powstały w odpowiedzi na krytykę dotyczącą braku jakiejkolwiek bliskowschodniej lub kaukaskiej domieszki u wczesnego przedstawiciela M459 z Karelii), co jest zupełnie niezgodne ze scenariuszem zakładającym, że grupa ta obejmowała wszystkie wcześnie wydzielone linie znalezione później w Europie (a więc YP4141, YP1272, YP459*-Karelia, YP1051 i M417), albo też przez Iran i Bliski Wschód/Kaukaz przetoczyła się fala złożona z przedstawiciele wielu bardzo odlegle ze sobą spokrewnionych subkladów R1a, co w takim razie jest sprzeczne zarówno z dzisiejszym brakiem zdecydowanej większości tych subkladów (poza YP4141-A) na Bliskim Wschodzie oraz z brakiem jakiejkolwiek bliskowschodniej domieszki u wczesnego przedstawiciela linii M459 z Karelii.(…)

    (…)Nie wiem czy czytamy te same teksty, ale wydaje się, że większość komentatorów widzi już coraz wyraźniej, że jamowcy nie mogli odpowiadać żadnej formie PIE (co my obaj twierdziliśmy od dawna). Z drugiej strony, wydaje się niemal pewne, że tym pierwotnym źródłem DNA wspólnego dla wczesnych europejskich grup posługujących się językami indoeuropejskimi była populacja mieszkająca gdzieś w Europie Wschodniej (i to raczej w jej stepowej lub, ewentualnie, lasostepowej części), a nie na terenie Kujaw czy dzisiejszej Polski (jak zakłada Twoja teoria), choć poczekajmy na kolejne wyniki aDNA, które powinny jednoznacznie zweryfikować te przypuszczenia.(…)

    Polubienie

  3. Pingback: 49 Asybilacja, czyli w sumie to tak naprawdę co,.. no bo że to jest prasłowiańskie słowo, no to jest bardziej niż pewne… :-) | SKRBH

Odpowiedz na SKRiBHa Anuluj pisanie odpowiedzi

Wprowadź swoje dane lub kliknij jedną z tych ikon, aby się zalogować:

Logo WordPress.com

Komentujesz korzystając z konta WordPress.com. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Google

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Google. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie z Twittera

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Twitter. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Facebooku

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Facebook. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Połączenie z %s

Ta witryna wykorzystuje usługę Akismet aby zredukować ilość spamu. Dowiedz się w jaki sposób dane w twoich komentarzach są przetwarzane.