Childebayeva et al. Bronze Age Northern Eurasian Genetics

[tru]

[quote pid="23241" dateline="1719080173"]

"I was recently gifted Evgenij N. Chernykh's most recent book Nomadic Cultures in the Mega-Structure of the Eurasian World (2017). The scope of this book is massive but I have just finished reading his chapter focusing on Seima-Turbino. Because Chernykh has been a premier archeologist on this subject for over thirty years, I decided to share what I've read.
- The first clear example of an aggressive east-west migration "forerunners of Genghis Khan". 
- Chance finds in an expanse of up to 4 million km², from the Baltic/Lower Dniester to Central China. There is an inexplicably small number of finds throughout this area. Finds are primarily weapons, flint spearheads, metal jewelry, sculptures and in larger assemblages, nephrite "bracelets" or disks.
- ST "cemeteries" rarely contain burial pits, and when they do, they often don't contain human remains. When human remains are present, they are usually burned beyond usefulness to anthropologists. "Memorial sanctuary" or "altar" is sometimes used to denote similar sites. 
- "Transcultural Phenomenon" is used because Seima-Turbino assemblages appear across cultural boundaries and within synchronous cultural landscapes
- Why have no proto-types of ST artifacts been found in this area? Chernykh attributes this to the "Mongolian syndrome". The early ST groups may not have deposited their goods in a way that preserved them over time. Similar to the 13th century Mongols, who left little archeological trace. ST could have altered their belief system after encountering other populations."
[/quote]

Chernykh is hopelessly outdated. His association with Genghis Khan is categorically incorrect, he was simply mistaken with this invention, categorically mistaken. Yes, things were moving from Altai towards the Urals, but this was in no way connected with any wars, with any conquests, with any seizures of territories and resettlement, in general with nothing that Chernykh imagined for himself, it was purely connected with trade from Altai to the Urals.  There was no Mongolian syndrome; it was simply an invention of Chernykh personally, which has now been completely refuted.


All these data perfectly explain one cultural phenomenon of this phenomenon - this is the fact that the Seima-Turbino residents almost do not contain real burials, all their burials are cenotaphs, and where there are burials, like in Rostovka, the locals mocked the corpses (however, Rostovka is practically the only place burials of social-t. with corpses). The answer turns out to be simple and very banal - as you know, cenotaphs are made where a warrior died in one place, but he lives in another place and there is no way to deliver his body, especially for sailors who died at sea. So, all the Seima-Turbino residents were strangers everywhere, they were hated and feared, so they did not die where they lived, but they lived in very different places and far from each other, and either their graves were dug out where they lived or, on the contrary, they were dug out for them. for ritual purposes, where they died, and the body was sent to their homeland, but where they were still buried, the locals mocked them because they were afraid of them during their lifetime.

Only one N1a probably died where he lived, he was a local from the local Samus culture, he simply lived in Rostovka, and was buried where he lived, he has no attributes associated with Seima-Turbino.


Jaska  learn to read, you repeat what is written and it is pointless to answer you, because you are simply repeating answers that have already been written.

Just as Sintashta came to the Urals for bronze from Central Europe, so Andronovo came to Altai from Sintashta for tin bronze.

It is clearly said that the Sintashta people came to the Urals for any bronze; tin bronze was not yet known in Europe at that time; it became known only after the arrival of Sintashta in the Trans-Urals. Therefore, Sintashta belongs to MLBA, the letter L means that it was at this time that they began to use tin bronze, before that only arsenic bronze was used, which is what the letter M means. Andronovo culture is already entirely LBA.

What you write is not obvious, but counter-evident. There is nothing in common between Fatyanovo culture and Sintashta, no continuity. Fatyanovo is R1a-Z93*, R1a-Z94>... So there is no need to create illusions.

[Parastais]

Weren’t there quite a number of Uralic prestige terms borrowings from Indo-Iranians?
If so ST could have been a network with II lingua franca. IF those loanwords could be dated contemporary to ST..

There are some proto-Finnic words borrowed from proto-Indo-Iranian. They are for the most part undebatable and transparent:
*taivas, borrowed from Proto-Indo-Iranian *daywás, SKY
*vasara, from Proto-Finno-Permic *waśara  from Proto-Indo-Iranian *wáȷ́ras. HAMMER. Hence Ukonvasara, the Finnish Thor Hammer.
*sata from Proto-Indo-Iranian *ćatám HUNDRED
etc. Look at the Wikipedia pages. Many of these words are for important, often religious, referents. Even "poro", REINDEER could be ultimately an II loanword.

I think something like asura (lord) and maksa (pay) are also of II origin, just not sure if same layer. Or if could be dated back at ST times.

[qijia]

[quote pid="23241" dateline="1719080173"]
   There was no Mongolian syndrome; it was simply an invention of Chernykh personally, which has now been completely refuted.

[/quote]

How do you think about  Kozintsev's opinion:

 "Unlike the previously outlined Scenario 1, which placed the IE, Uralic and Indo-Uralic homelands in the area east of the Caspian Sea, not far from the presumed common Eurasiatic homeland, Scenario 2 locates the latter in a much more easterly area between Lake Balkhash and the Altai. With regard to proto-IE, Scenario 2 is an extension of Scenario 1 back in time and space, adding a very long initial stretch of the westward expansion of Indo-Hittite across most of western Central Asia" "In line with johanna nichols’ early view (1997, 1998), i postulated the primary westward spread of ie from that locus, caused by the transition of one of the early farming groups to seminomadic pastoralism. the spread, however, likely occurred, not by two routes (the northern one to the western steppe, the southern to the near east), but only by the southern mountainous route along the elburz. an additional fact supporting this scenario is that, judging by reconstructed pie terms for topographical features, the indo-hittites, at some stage of their history, lived in a mountainous terrain, moreover, that the mountain was perceived as a “mighty cliff reaching to the sky”; in addition, there was a sea or large lake nearby (gamkrelidze, ivanov 1995: 574–577; dybo 2013). as the authors conclude, this eliminates the steppe as a primary homeland."

Spirals locate in sun or sky. At china, it is meant by " cloud or king's symbol". It also represent modern china;

Migration Period picture stone from Havor, Hablingbo, Gotland




according to petroglyphs, sky god people was living at altai (spiral sky) really close to the sky and lake baikal. The square shoulder one was found at south asia, armenia, italy, and even iberia. :



The Genetic Origin of the Indo-Europeans (18) (genarchivist.com)

[Jaska]

Weren’t there quite a number of Uralic prestige terms borrowings from Indo-Iranians?
If so ST could have been a network with II lingua franca. IF those loanwords could be dated contemporary to ST..

Time and place do not match: 

1. The Seima-Turbino Network was born ca. 2200 BCE in Southwestern Siberia, in the Middle Ob--Middle Irtysh Region. 
2. Indo-Iranian language developed in Europe, and it only spread to Southern Siberia ca. 2000 BCE during or after Late Proto-Indo-Iranian. 
3. There are already Early Proto-Indo-Iranian loanwords in Uralic, so these cannot be located in South Siberia. 
4. Late Proto-Uralic (ca. 2500 BCE) --> Common Uralic (ca. 1800 BCE) continuum was spoken in the Central Ural Region, not in Southern Siberia. 

Therefore, we cannot associate the early stage of the Seima-Turbino Network either with Proto-Uralic or with Proto-Indo-Iranian.

[Jaska]

What you write is not obvious, but counter-evident. There is nothing in common between Fatyanovo culture and Sintashta, no continuity. Fatyanovo is R1a-Z93*, R1a-Z94>... So there is no need to create illusions.

You should read some archaeological works, there you can find the chain Fatyanovo --> Abashevo --> Sintashta. Of course these cultures had also other roots, like all cultures everywhere tend to have several roots.

Are you now claiming that the Sintashta paternal lineages could not come from the Fatyanovo paternal lineages? Based on which study? Even if that was true, you know that paternal matches weigh very little, think Yamnaya vs. Corded Ware Cultures.

[tru]

How do you think about  Kozintsev's opinion:
 "the westward expansion of Indo-Hittite across most of western Central Asia" "In line with johanna nichols’ early view (1997, 1998), i postulated the primary westward spread of ie from that locus, caused by the transition of one of the early farming groups to seminomadic pastoralism. the spread, however, likely occurred, not by two routes (the northern one to the western steppe, the southern to the near east), but only by the southern mountainous route along the elburz."

Senile insanity and this is completely serious.  Kozintsev began to dream up this after he was sent to old age pension and could no longer work as a teacher. Previously he was adequate.

[Jaska]

I think something like asura (lord) and maksa (pay) are also of II origin, just not sure if same layer. Or if could be dated back at ST times.

All these IIr *a-loanwords (in Uralic: *a, *ë, *o, or *ä) are from Late Proto-Indo-Iranian, that is: around 2000 BCE.
But *e-loanwords are earlier than that, preceding the LPIIr change *o, *e > *a.

As I wrote above, it is not possible to connect the early STN either to Indo-Iranian or Uralic. Later stage, when it spread to Europe ca. 2000 BCE, is another thing: during that time IIr and Uralic could (both or just one) be somehow connected to it.

[qijia]

Weren’t there quite a number of Uralic prestige terms borrowings from Indo-Iranians?
If so ST could have been a network with II lingua franca. IF those loanwords could be dated contemporary to ST..

There are some proto-Finnic words borrowed from proto-Indo-Iranian. They are for the most part undebatable and transparent:
*taivas, borrowed from Proto-Indo-Iranian *daywás, SKY
*vasara, from Proto-Finno-Permic *waśara  from Proto-Indo-Iranian *wáȷ́ras. HAMMER. Hence Ukonvasara, the Finnish Thor Hammer.
*sata from Proto-Indo-Iranian *ćatám HUNDRED
etc. Look at the Wikipedia pages. Many of these words are for important, often religious, referents. Even "poro", REINDEER could be ultimately an II loanword.

I think something like asura (lord) and maksa (pay) are also of II origin, just not sure if same layer. Or if could be dated back at ST times.

Archaeologically, "Lord" appeared at  Rostovka :

" The dagger was discovered in tumulus No. 2, where a 10-centimeter coaly layer covered bone remains of a 9- or 10-year-old boy burnt in a special “crematorium”. In consistence with the necropolis funeral rites, the dagger was stuck into the floor of the bone chamber and covered with crane fragments left after cremation. The tomb doesn’t look too rich, given the number and composition of funerary gifts, but such highly prestigious object as a knife with carved finial indicates that the boy belonged to the upper class of Seima-Tubino society. In the social structure of the latter, the main roles were played by nomadic warriors and bronze casters, who possessed the most sophisticated technologies of the time. In the mid-2nd millennium BC, they made a huge forced march from Xinjiang in the east to the lower reach of Dniester in the west, leaving only burial sites and memorial altars behind them. The hallmark of such altars were glorious bronze weapons: celts, hefty spearheads, daggers, etc"

" An exclusive group of Seima-Turbino bronze includes “ceremonial” (“prestigious”, “lord status”) weapon—daggers with carved handles. The knife from Rostovka stands out even in this category, being known as the most exquisite and mysterious item. It consists of two separately cast parts: a single-edged blade and a handle crowned with an absolutely unique composition of a horse and a skier. The statuary is made by lost-wax casting and “soldered” to the blade with molten metal. A man with high Mongoloid cheekbones is standing on short skis, tied to a horse with a rein. The horse has a massive head, short legs and an erect mane, resembling those of extinct tarpans or still existing Przewalski’s horses. The composition is interpreted based on two alternative hypotheses. One of them admits skiers really moved around by being pulled behind galloping horses back in the Bronze Age. However, the static figure of the horse doesn’t fit in this conception. Moreover, the skier seems to be rather holding back the horse he has just caught than following it, as judged by the specific angle of his body and the position of the skis. More preference is given to the version claiming the scene on the handle of the unique knife has a mythic or ritual nature. For instance, it could be a motive of a cultural hero catching a horse. The plot dates back to the era of horse domestication and has been variously preserved in myths of many peoples of the world."

see lord dagger and compare other steppe cultures:

no daggers:

a-Daggers-of-Srubno-Andronovo-form-b-Ceramic-pot-with-specific-ornamentation-of-the.png (850×592) (researchgate.net)

- Russian tradition now by "Cranes" Dmitri Hvorostovsky (2003):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTjPbkd_UlY

- at china:

"in heaven we can see chinese deities such as nuwa and chang'e, as well as daoist symbols such as cranes (representing immortality). between heaven and earth we can see heavenly messengers sent to bring lady dai to heaven. underneath this are lady dai's family offering sacrifices to help her journey to heaven. beneath them is the underworld - two giant sea serpents intertwined."

"The Golden Sun Bird or the Sun and Immortal Birds Gold Ornament (simplified Chinese: 太阳神鸟金饰; traditional Chinese: 太陽神鳥金飾; pinyin: Tàiyáng Shénniǎo Jīnshì) is an ancient artifact, unearthed in 2001 from the Jinsha Ruins in Chengdu City, Sichuan Province, China.[1] It is a ring-shaped piece of foil, made of nearly pure gold. The pattern consists of four birds, flying in the same counterclockwise direction, located around the perimeter. The center is a sun pattern with twelve points. It is 12.5 cm in diameter, with a 5.29 cm inner diameter. It has a thickness of 0.02 cm, and weighs 20 grams.[2] The piece is from the late Sanxingdui culture, and is now located in the Chengdu Jinsha Ruins Museum."

[tru]

What you write is not obvious, but counter-evident. There is nothing in common between Fatyanovo culture and Sintashta, no continuity. Fatyanovo is R1a-Z93*, R1a-Z94>... So there is no need to create illusions.

You should read some archaeological works, there you can find the chain Fatyanovo --> Abashevo --> Sintashta. Of course these cultures had also other roots, like all cultures everywhere tend to have several roots.

Are you now claiming that the Sintashta paternal lineages could not come from the Fatyanovo paternal lineages? Based on which study? Even if that was true, you know that paternal matches weigh very little, think Yamnaya vs. Corded Ware Cultures.

You should read some archaeological works, because you haven't read anything at all. Then you would know that the chain Fatyanovo --> Abashevo --> Sintashta does not exist.  All archaeological works have proven that Abashevo did not originate from Fatyanovo, and has nothing in common with it. Fatyanovo, Abashevo, Sintashta are simply cultures that originated from the CWC completely independently. Sintashta did not originate from Abashevo, although they are very closely related and strongly influenced each other, so there was such a point of view that Sintashta came from Abashevo, when they thought that Abashevo was hundreds of years older than Sintashta, but now it has become clear that they are almost synchronous and arose simultaneously , maybe Abashevo is 50 years earlier. Abashevo included R1b-Z2103, which Sintashta does not have.
So don't imagine that you know archaeology.

Archaeologists have long proven that the Corded Ware did not descend from the Yamnaya culture, they simply have a common basis “Eneolithic steppe”, but they are completely different cultures, Yamnaya is a Bronze Age culture, and Corded Ware is a Eneolithic culture.

The Seima-Turbino Network was born ca. 2200 BCE in Southwestern Siberia, in the Middle Ob--Middle Irtysh Region. 

It doesn’t come from there, it’s just a region entirely lying in the middle of the road from Altai to Sintashta and back. Therefore, it did not arise there; it is simply almost the entire territory between Altai and Sintashta.




In the Finno-Ugric languages there are pre-Indo-Iranian borrowings, where the phonetics are not yet Indo-Iranian, this layer of borrowings is traditionally conventionally called Andronovo Aryan, but it is doubtful that such phonetics could have existed during the Andronovo culture, after all, the Andronovo culture existed until the Indo-Aryans invaded India, It was more likely during the time of the Sintashta culture, because this is the only culture that was the ancestor for all the Indo-Iranians who have not yet divided; in the Andronovo culture they are already divided, in the Andronovo culture they are already divided, which means there should already be Indo-Iranian phonetics, and not pre-Indo-Iranian.

[Jaska]

You should read some archaeological works, because you haven't read anything at all. Then you would know that the chain Fatyanovo --> Abashevo --> Sintashta does not exist. All archaeological works have proven that Abashevo did not originate from Fatyanovo, and has nothing in common with it.

Really? Please name even one archaeological source supporting your claim.

I never said that the Corded Ware Cultures descend directly from the Yamnaya Culture.

It doesn’t come from there, it’s just a region entirely lying in the middle of the road from Altai to Sintashta and back. Therefore, it did not arise there; it is simply almost the entire territory between Altai and Sintashta.

I meant the region around Rostovka. Or do you have any reliable older datings from elsewhere? See Marchenko et al. 2017 and Chernykh et al. 2017.

In the Finno-Ugric languages there are pre-Indo-Iranian borrowings, where the phonetics are not yet Indo-Iranian, this layer of borrowings is traditionally conventionally called Andronovo Aryan, but it is doubtful that such phonetics could have existed during the Andronovo culture, after all, the Andronovo culture existed until the Indo-Aryans invaded India, It was more likely during the time of the Sintashta culture, because this is the only culture that was the ancestor for all the Indo-Iranians who have not yet divided; in the Andronovo culture they are already divided, in the Andronovo culture they are already divided, which means there should already be Indo-Iranian phonetics, and not pre-Indo-Iranian.

The Andronovo Aryan hypothesis is not conventional, it is only a proposition by a Russian scholar which never made it to the mainstream view.

The Sintashta Culture represents Late Proto-Indo-Iranian, see the chain here: https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?tid=256

As I wrote, the Early Proto-Indo-Iranian loanwords were borrowed into Uralic in the Central Ural Region, because Indo-Iranian was born in Europe.

[tru]

I meant the region around Rostovka. Or do you have any reliable older datings from elsewhere?

In the Finno-Ugric languages there are pre-Indo-Iranian borrowings, where the phonetics are not yet Indo-Iranian, this layer of borrowings is traditionally conventionally called Andronovo Aryan, but it is doubtful that such phonetics could have existed during the Andronovo culture, after all, the Andronovo culture existed until the Indo-Aryans invaded India, It was more likely during the time of the Sintashta culture, because this is the only culture that was the ancestor for all the Indo-Iranians who have not yet divided; in the Andronovo culture they are already divided, in the Andronovo culture they are already divided, which means there should already be Indo-Iranian phonetics, and not pre-Indo-Iranian.

The Andronovo Aryan hypothesis is not conventional, it is only a proposition by a Russian scholar which never made it to the mainstream view.
As I wrote, the Early Proto-Indo-Iranian loanwords were borrowed into Uralic in the Central Ural Region, because Indo-Iranian was born in Europe.

Dating has absolutely nothing to do with it, this is just a stopover place on the way from Altai to Europe. There was a resting place along this river route. All of Seima-Turbino is tied to rivers along the Irtysh-Tobol and Ob-Tobol routes with rivers from Tobol flowing to Europe.

It is clearly visible how the Sintashta culture creates the Petrovskaya culture in order to reach Altai, which was already done by the Andronovo culture. The reason is because in the opposite direction the path along the Irtysh and Ob was difficult because it was necessary to rake against the current.

This is what the phenomenon looks like on the Seima-Turbino map.


This is just your personal opinion about what is conventional, but this is the mainstream view.

Indo-Iranian arose in Andronovo, and not in Europe, read Kuzmina, who clearly showed that the Indo-Iranian language is clearly tied specifically to the Andronovo culture and reflects only its realities, but does not reflect the realities of any European culture, including Abashevo. For example, Abashevo raised pigs, while Sintashta and Andronovo did not raise pigs and there is no word for pig in the Indo-Iranian language. Proto-Indo-Iranian, respectively, is Sintashta, its language is phonetically close to the CWC languages, but lexically already Indo-Iranian.

[qijia]

I meant the region around Rostovka. Or do you have any reliable older datings from elsewhere?

In the Finno-Ugric languages there are pre-Indo-Iranian borrowings, where the phonetics are not yet Indo-Iranian, this layer of borrowings is traditionally conventionally called Andronovo Aryan, but it is doubtful that such phonetics could have existed during the Andronovo culture, after all, the Andronovo culture existed until the Indo-Aryans invaded India, It was more likely during the time of the Sintashta culture, because this is the only culture that was the ancestor for all the Indo-Iranians who have not yet divided; in the Andronovo culture they are already divided, in the Andronovo culture they are already divided, which means there should already be Indo-Iranian phonetics, and not pre-Indo-Iranian.

The Andronovo Aryan hypothesis is not conventional, it is only a proposition by a Russian scholar which never made it to the mainstream view.
As I wrote, the Early Proto-Indo-Iranian loanwords were borrowed into Uralic in the Central Ural Region, because Indo-Iranian was born in Europe.

Dating has absolutely nothing to do with it, this is just a stopover place on the way from Altai to Europe. There was a resting place along this river route. All of Seima-Turbino is tied to rivers along the Irtysh-Tobol and Ob-Tobol routes with rivers from Tobol flowing to Europe.

It is clearly visible how the Sintashta culture creates the Petrovskaya culture in order to reach Altai, which was already done by the Andronovo culture. The reason is because in the opposite direction the path along the Irtysh and Ob was difficult because it was necessary to rake against the current.

This is what the phenomenon looks like on the Seima-Turbino map.


This is just your personal opinion about what is conventional, but this is the mainstream view.

Indo-Iranian arose in Andronovo, and not in Europe, read Kuzmina, who clearly showed that the Indo-Iranian language is clearly tied specifically to the Andronovo culture and reflects only its realities, but does not reflect the realities of any European culture, including Abashevo. For example, Abashevo raised pigs, while Sintashta and Andronovo did not raise pigs and there is no word for pig in the Indo-Iranian language. Proto-Indo-Iranian, respectively, is Sintashta, its language is phonetically close to the CWC languages, but lexically already Indo-Iranian.

Do you think an andronovo R1a below originated in sintashta? 

[Zelto]

We see that it is not for nothing that this phenomenon is called transcultural. It contains individuals from all local cultures: Sintashta, Elunino/Krotovo, Botai (Tarim), Samus (later or after this phenomenon), and probably from Okunevo and Glazovo. The basis was Sintashta, which moved to Мining Altai for tin bronzes, which were only there. People from all local cultures joined in this trade. As soon as the Andronovo culture reached Altai, Sintashta disappeared and the Sema-Turbino trade phenomenon disappeared.

I don't see evidence that would support Sintashta being the "basis" for Seima-Turbino. The 'Eurasian metallurgical province', to which Sintashta belongs, differed from ST in terms of technology, typology, and metallurgical composition (re: materials from Siberia). 

An origin of ST in the Altai-Sayan region, as argued by Chernykh and Kuzminykh still seems most plausible, in my opinion. Wax-casting was already practiced here (absent in the early cultures of the 'EMP'), there are animals relegated to this region or farther east which appear as decorative motifs on ST artifacts, and current radiocarbon datings show that ST sites are generally older in Siberia.

Furthermore, Sintashta metallurgists typically used arsenic as an alloy, not tin. The necessary ores were available in abundance from the Southern Urals and extracted on a massive scale. Attempts made by Sintashta metallurgists to use tin are known, but they indicate that it was not a familiar ligature (Grigoriev, 2015). To the contrary, tin-bronze casting was custumary among Siberian ST groups, but arsenical-bronze was also utilized by those west of the Urals. 

'Mongolian Syndrome' as described by Chernykh, refers to a lack of ST proto-forms and related materials from his proposed homeland. Similar, from an archaeological perspective, to the lack of materials dating to the 13th century Mongolian plateau.

The 'neo-romantic' premise regarding armed-warriors on horseback disseminating ST materials across Eurasia, doesn't seem to be substantiated by aDNA. ST materials were clearly replicated and traded by many different cultures. Perhaps, this was triggered by the formation of the 'EMP'. Whatever the case may be, no one can deny that pioneering Steppe_MLBA groups were directly involved within the Seima-Turbino network.

Finally, despite being a couple centuries younger than the other C14 dated samples, the Yakutia_LNBA outlier (ROT002) does not differ typologically from most of the other burials at Rostovka. The grave also contained a spearhead, but it was placed after most of the infill had taken place. The Tatarka Hill samples do not belong to the Samus culture. They represent a hitherto innominate cultural formation, together with the Neftoprovod 1 & 2 sites; antecedent to the Krasnoyarsk culture/Samus-Kizhirovo layer at Tartarka Hill.

[tru]

Sintashta-Petrovka is the first phase of the Andronovo culture. This is not the classical phase of the Andronovo culture. I call the classical Andronovo culture simply Andronovo, it’s shorter and more traditional, it was used before the discovery of Sintashta. Since Abashevo and Sintashta arose almost simultaneously and practically from the same population of people, they have R1a-Z94 in common, probably only the subclades are different.

[Jaska]

This is just your personal opinion about what is conventional, but this is the mainstream view.

No, it is not a mainstream view. Perhaps it looks so in the Moscow bubble.
To clarify: nobody denies that the Andronovo Culture is associated with the Indo-Iranians. But the Andronovo Aryan hypothesis concerning the source of early loanwords into Uralic is not the mainstream view. That is what I was talking about.

Indo-Iranian arose in Andronovo, and not in Europe, read Kuzmina, who clearly showed that the Indo-Iranian language is clearly tied specifically to the Andronovo culture and reflects only its realities, but does not reflect the realities of any European culture, including Abashevo. For example, Abashevo raised pigs, while Sintashta and Andronovo did not raise pigs and there is no word for pig in the Indo-Iranian language. Proto-Indo-Iranian, respectively, is Sintashta, its language is phonetically close to the CWC languages, but lexically already Indo-Iranian.

Kuz'mina does not refute the European origin of Indo-Iranian - just the contrary. Page 167:
"It seems that earlier types of Indo-Iranian ethnogenesis cannot be established at present with the same degree of probability. This is because the important cultural innovations (horse-drawn chariots, bronze alloys) that appeared in the Eurasian steppes and the subsequent migrations that took place within the zone were probably of a corporate character and involved different cultures (Poltavka, Catacomb, Multi-roller ceramics, Abashevo); these processes terminated to form two large cultural unities: the Timber-grave in the west and Andronovo in the eastern steppe. Conclusions concerning the languages of the corporate migrants are impossible without additional data."

Indo-Iranian sound changes occurred during the centuries before and during the Sintashta Culture. All levels of language changed - not only vocabulary.