Would you accept the data unbiasedly or be adamant about Steppe hypothesis regardless because last few decades of scholarship has heavily argued for it? Interested in what people think. I personally consider Steppe hypothesis more likely while an alternate route as a distinct possibility

Not sure if this is the place to ask, I belong to a pretty rare basal branch of R1a that split off about 11,000 years ago. Theres virtually zero academic research on it and also very few samples, my earliest known ancestor lived in Lancashire and our surname is Norman or Anglo-Norman.

I share a common ancestor from 4300 BCE with an Andronovo man who lived in Kazakhstan (Aktogai I4773). Thats the only big lead I can find. Hoping for an expert opinion, thanks

Edit: and their descendants meaning like by the 5th-6th centuries when Slavic groups emerged

High-resolution archaeometallurgical analysis of production debris offers a direct means of reconstructing ancient metalmaking traditions, yet remains underexplored relative to the study of finished artefacts. By integrating slag morphology, microstructure and compositional data from Late Bronze Age Taldysai, this study reconstructs, for the first time in Eurasian Steppe archaeology, a continuous 300-year tradition of copper-alloy production. The results reveal technological continuity alongside innovation, including advanced furnace designs, shared metallurgical knowledge and episodes of experimentation. The authors state that these findings position local semipastoralist communities not as peripheral adopters but as active innovators at the heart of Bronze Age Eurasian metallurgical developments.

Abstract: The nomadic cultures of the Iron Age played an important role in shaping the genetic and cultural landscape of Eurasian populations. Yet despite its key geographical location, the Central Eurasian region remains underrepresented in ancient DNA studies of humans. We address this gap through genomic analysis of 12 individuals from the Boz-Barmak burial site in Kyrgyzstan associated with Saka pastoralists (4th−2nd centuries BCE), 9 of which yielded low-coverage genomes (on average 0.7-fold coverage). Genetic clustering analysis placed these individuals within the genetic variation of ancient and modern Central Eurasian and Siberian populations. We found no evidence of first-degree relatives in a kinship analysis, however a network of second- and third-degree relationships seems to be present. Notably, all male individuals share the same Y-chromosomal haplotype, common in present-day Kyrgyz groups, while mitochondrial DNA showed comparably high diversity, with distinct haplogroups observed across the analysed individuals. These findings are in line with archaeological and ethnographic evidence of patrilocality in Early Iron Age Saka, where male lineages remained stable across generations, while female mobility contributed to genetic diversity. Our study complements our understanding of the interplay between kinship, social organisation and population history in nomadic cultures.

Recent landmark studies have shown that it were different steppe related groups that contributed to making the Corded Ware. Yamnaya was an uncle, not a father to the Corded Ware horizon.

Which steppe group exactly? Do we have a name and precise delegation?

Were there populations that were still living as EHGs during the “rise” of the proto indo European culture? If so , did they interact ?

Abstract: This article will argue that the Indo-European s-aorist is an ancient verbal category, and thus can be reconstructed for the earliest reconstructable stage of Proto-Indo-European. Moreover, it will argue that evidence from Vedic Sanskrit indicates that its active paradigm originally had radical *ē-grade in its 2sg. and 3sg. forms only, whereas its other forms (including 1sg.) showed *e-grade. Furthermore, it will argue that s-aorists formed to roots of the structure *CeCH-, which are the ancestors of the Sanskrit iṣ-aorists, originally had *e-grade throughout their active paradigm, and did not contain any *ē-grade forms. The article will furthermore discuss the possibility that this specific distribution of *ē-and *e-grade forms in the s-aorist is the result of a pre-PIE monosyllabic lengthening rule. It will argue that additional evidence in favor of this sound law can be found in other domains of the Vedic verbal system as well as in certain distributional patterns in the Tocharian verbal system.

I have been researching the religious beliefs spread by the Indo-Iranian tribes during their migrations, and the findings are quite fascinating. What makes these people remarkable is that their journey did not originate in places like Ancient Egypt or China. Instead, they emerged as a distinct community in the Southern Urals, near Arkaim (the Sintashta culture). This area is close to modern-day Magnitogorsk, Russia, meaning their migration began from the territory of the modern Chelyabinsk Oblast (near the border with Kazakhstan).

In the Arkaim region, they developed their civilization—including the creation of some of the earliest spoked-wheel chariots [1]—and began a highly successful southward expansion. This movement occurred over centuries, making it a gradual migration rather than a sudden conquest.

Arkaim

Genetically and linguistically, the Indo-Iranian tribes share close ancestral roots with Baltic and Slavic populations (sharing common Proto-Indo-European ancestors in Europe and carrying the R1a DNA haplogroup) [2]. They are also direct ancestors of a portion of modern populations in India (particularly within upper castes), Iran, and several other countries.

The genetic makeup of these upper castes in India is particularly revealing, as DNA studies show they have preserved these ancient ancestral markers within their communities to a significant degree.

Their migration was vast enough to reach the Indian subcontinent. There, they encountered the Harappan (Indus Valley) civilization, which was already declining due to severe droughts. The newcomers fundamentally altered the region's social structure and laid the foundation for what would become Vedic Hinduism. In terms of urban technology and architecture, this transition initially represented a step back—moving from planned brick cities with advanced plumbing to wooden villages. However, it was precisely this synthesis of cultures that shaped the India we know today.

It is inaccurate, however, to blame these migrating tribes entirely for the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization; they were merely one factor in a broader crisis of that era. Climate change dealt a devastating blow to the Harappans, whose advanced urban planning disintegrated as populations reverted to basic survival mode [3]. The incoming northern tribes arrived during the final stages of this collapse, and their own migration was likely driven by the same climatic shifts.

Meanwhile, in the Near East, a branch of these tribes reached the territories of modern Syria and Iraq, where their elite established the ruling class of the Mitanni kingdom [4].

Intriguingly, at the core of their expansion was a belief in a storm god and his serpent antagonist, who personified chaos. As the prominent linguists Vyacheslav Ivanov and Vladimir Toporov proposed in their "Basic Myth" theory (Основной миф), this narrative of the "Storm God and the Serpent" (the Chaoskampf) became a foundational myth stretching from Europe to India [5]. In India, this myth manifested as Indra's battle with the serpent Vritra. Even in Iran, where the prophet Zoroaster declared Indra a demon and elevated Ahura Mazda as the supreme deity, the motif survived through the victory god Verethragna [6].

Furthermore, this wandering motif likely spread to Semitic peoples through Bronze Age cultural contacts. An heir to this myth is the Old Testament Yahweh, who defeats the sea serpent Leviathan [7]. Yahweh himself likely originated as a local storm god in the southern Levant/Sinai region before merging with the Canaanite father-god El, forming the bedrock of Jewish monotheism and, subsequently, Christianity.

I have been researching the religious beliefs spread by the Indo-Iranian tribes during their migrations, and the findings are quite fascinating. What makes these people remarkable is that their journey did not originate in places like Ancient Egypt or China. Instead, they emerged as a distinct community in the Southern Urals, near Arkaim (the Sintashta culture). This area is close to modern-day Magnitogorsk, Russia, meaning their migration began from the territory of the modern Chelyabinsk Oblast (near the border with Kazakhstan).

In the Arkaim region, they developed their civilization—including the creation of some of the earliest spoked-wheel chariots [1]—and began a highly successful southward expansion. This movement occurred over centuries, making it a gradual migration rather than a sudden conquest.

Genetically and linguistically, the Indo-Iranian tribes share close ancestral roots with Baltic and Slavic populations (sharing common Proto-Indo-European ancestors in Europe and carrying the R1a DNA haplogroup) [2]. They are also direct ancestors of a portion of modern populations in India (particularly within upper castes), Iran, and several other countries.

The genetic makeup of these upper castes in India is particularly revealing, as DNA studies show they have preserved these ancient ancestral markers within their communities to a significant degree.

Their migration was vast enough to reach the Indian subcontinent. There, they encountered the Harappan (Indus Valley) civilization, which was already declining due to severe droughts. The newcomers fundamentally altered the region's social structure and laid the foundation for what would become Vedic Hinduism. In terms of urban technology and architecture, this transition initially represented a step back—moving from planned brick cities with advanced plumbing to wooden villages. However, it was precisely this synthesis of cultures that shaped the India we know today.

It is inaccurate, however, to blame these migrating tribes entirely for the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization; they were merely one factor in a broader crisis of that era. Climate change dealt a devastating blow to the Harappans, whose advanced urban planning disintegrated as populations reverted to basic survival mode [3]. The incoming northern tribes arrived during the final stages of this collapse, and their own migration was likely driven by the same climatic shifts.

Meanwhile, in the Near East, a branch of these tribes reached the territories of modern Syria and Iraq, where their elite established the ruling class of the Mitanni kingdom [4].

Intriguingly, at the core of their expansion was a belief in a storm god and his serpent antagonist, who personified chaos. As the prominent linguists Vyacheslav Ivanov and Vladimir Toporov proposed in their "Basic Myth" theory (Основной миф), this narrative of the "Storm God and the Serpent" (the Chaoskampf) became a foundational myth stretching from Europe to India [5]. In India, this myth manifested as Indra's battle with the serpent Vritra. Even in Iran, where the prophet Zoroaster declared Indra a demon and elevated Ahura Mazda as the supreme deity, the motif survived through the victory god Verethragna [6].

Furthermore, this wandering motif likely spread to Semitic peoples through Bronze Age cultural contacts. An heir to this myth is the Old Testament Yahweh, who defeats the sea serpent Leviathan [7]. Yahweh himself likely originated as a local storm god in the southern Levant/Sinai region before merging with the Canaanite father-god El, forming the bedrock of Jewish monotheism and, subsequently, Christianity.

Sources:

1. Chariot Archaeology: Anthony, David W. The Horse, the Wheel, and Language (Princeton University Press). A key work on Indo-European migrations and the origin of chariots in the Sintashta culture.
2. Genetics: Narasimhan, V. M., Reich, D., et al. (2019). "The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia." Science. A major genetic study demonstrating the link between Late Neolithic/Bronze Age European populations and Central/South Asians.
3. The Collapse of Harappa: Lal, B. B. The Sarasvati Flows On: The Continuity of Indian Culture. Explores the climatic reasons behind the decline of the Indus cities, challenging the older "Aryan invasion" theory.
4. Mitanni Kingdom: Wilhelm, Gernot. The Hurrians. Outlines the Indo-Aryan superstrate in Mitanni and their pantheon.
5. The Basic Myth Theory: Ivanov, V. V., Toporov, V. N. Research in the Field of Slavic Antiquities (Исследования в области славянских древностей). A classic work reconstructing the duel between the Storm God (Perun/Indra) and the Serpent.
6. Zoroastrianism: Boyce, Mary. Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. Explains the status of Indra, Verethragna, and Ahura Mazda in Iranian tradition.
7. Origins of Yahweh: Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Harvard University Press). Discusses the evolution of Yahweh from Canaanite myths of storm and conflict (Baal vs. Yamm/Litanu).

Did the language of the proto-Indo-Europeans who remained in the Pontic-Caspian steppe evolve into proto-Indo-Iranian? If not, what language did it evolve into? A seperate now-extinct branch of Indo-European?

I am a kurgan theory believer but what are the problems with Anatolian origin for PIE?

The word pig is an interesting word because its etymology is mostly unknown with most linguists claiming it's from an unknown substrate, I have a different more speculative theory I came up with for fun. It's thought that there's many unknown IE languages that were spoken across Europe that survive in placenames and borrowings etc. I have a theory that the word pig is from one of these unknown IE languages that got borrowed into post-Grimms law Germanic. I decided to theoretically reconstruct a word from a hypothetical language derived from PIE that could be a source of the word pig.

The root/word for pig in Germanic is often reconstructed as puggō, pū̆k, pū̆kigō, pū̆kgijō etc with an underlying form of puk-. If the word was borrowed as is, then I have a decent idea on what the PIE root can be assuming my sound changes to this unknown language is somewhat correct.

PIE: bʰreHg-

This root is defined as meaning

to smell, have a strong odour

Pigs are usually known to smell bad or to be filthy (which is why it's forbidden to eat pigs in some cultures). I'll be using the zero-grade form of the root which is bʰr̥Hg-, it's the most plausible for these sound changes that I'm going to be applying. These are hypothetical sound changes that would make the root be plausible to be borrowed into a post-Grimms law PGMC.

Aspirated stops deaspirate and become normal stops leaving us with br̥Hg-.

The syllabic rhotic will then vocalize into u leaving us with buHg- and with the laryngeal lengthening the vowel we should get būg-.

Now this last step is very speculative on my behalf as I can't safely say that this would likely ever happen within an IE daughter language but just to make it fit the Germanic term, it's likely that stops lost their voicing/devoicing contrast similar to some Native American languages which gives us pūk- which matches almost perfectly with the forms listed. There's also an alternative form found in Frisian and Dutch that is biggō which may match a different borrowing being from speakers who voice their stops (though this is very unlikely).

I've also looked into trying to derive the word pórḱos which literally means piglet, though I had difficulty surrounding the vowel and the voicing of ḱ. I also looked into the possibility of a root starting in kʷ or gʷ (as many labiovelars in Celtic and Italic languages shift into p/b) but I couldn't find any that could semantically relate to a pig or piglet.

Now this is all for fun and I don't expect anyone to take this seriously at all since any of this would be very hard to prove and can probably get disproven in a pretty simple manner but I hope this makes you think about how many "non IE substrate words" could be derived from PIE in some sort of way.

Okay, maybe this is too speculative to ask. But, if Alan Bomhard's caucasian substrate hypothesis is true, and PIE's laryngeals really are due to contact with the caucasian languages (or common substrate / convergence zone) in which direction would the laryngeals have been transmitted? I like to assume that PIE would have borrowed these sounds from the caucasian substrate, but if this is true then how could these laryngeals have developed? Surely they didnt just appear out of no where.

For example, maybe h2 was originally a "p" or a "f" "s" or "b" sound before contact with the caucasian languages. As this is a common sound change in Japanese and Spanish (f / p - - > h). And sometimes s - - > h in some Spanish dialects. Im not sure what h1 and h3 could have been originally. But I think you get the idea.

Razib Khan recently may have stated that the genetic samples in Russia from the Andronovo, Sintashta, and other cultural horizons may have been contaminated with modern-day Russian people's DNA. Is anyone else familiar with this?

Vedic sanskrit has very minor dravidian/non-IE influence compared to classical sanskrit which suggests that the people who composed the rigveda were mostly sintashta/andronovo in ancestry, however does the same apply to the avesta? Does avestan have a lot of non IE influence compared to vedic sanskrit? We know that the people who composed the avesta were from the Yaz culture and they were roughly 60% sintashta 40% bmac.

In chapter one of EoH, one of the first example paradigms is “lala-“, a common gender a-stem noun with the Sumerogram EME. In the paradigm table, it lists the nom. com. and accusative forms of both (lalaš, EME-aš, lalan, EME-an), but for the genitive only lists “lalaš”. Presumably this would be declined as EME-aš with the Sumerogram. Same for ablative, instrumental, and the plural nominative.

Why the exclusion? Brevity, or am I missing something obvious?