search this blog

Thursday, September 5, 2019

On the surprising genetic origins of the Harappan people (Shinde et al. 2019)


The long awaited paper with ancient DNA from the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) site of Rakhigarhi has finally arrived. Courtesy of Shinde et al. at Current Biology:

An ancient Harappan genome lacks ancestry from Steppe pastoralists or Iranian farmers

The bad news is that the paper features just one low coverage IVC genome, and it belongs to a female, so there's no Y-haplogroup. However, importantly, this individual is very similar to genetic outliers from Bronze Age West and Central Asia known as Indus_Periphery. So much so, in fact, that they could easily be from the same gene pool.

This, of course, gives strong support to the idea that Indus_Periphery is a useful stand-in for the real IVC population (see here).

Surprisingly, despite being largely of West Eurasian origin, the IVC people possibly didn't harbor any ancestry from the Neolithic farmers of the Fertile Crescent or even the Iranian Plateau.

That's because, according to Shinde et al., their West Eurasian ancestors separated genetically from those of the early Holocene populations of what is now western and northern Iran around 12,000 BCE. In other words, well before the advent of agriculture.


This surely complicates matters for those arguing that Indo-European languages may have arrived in the Indian subcontinent with early farmers via the Iranian Plateau. The more widely accepted theory is that Indo-European languages spread into South Asia with Bronze Age pastoralists from the Eurasian steppes. See here...


Update 05/09/2019: I had a quick look at the ancient Rakhigarhi individual with qpAdm, just to confirm for myself that she was indeed largely of West Eurasian origin and practically indistinguishable from Indus_Periphery. The genotype data that I used are freely available here.

IND_Rakhigarhi_BA
IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N 0.711±0.065
Onge 0.232±0.067
RUS_Tyumen_HG 0.057±0.059
chisq 13.251
tail prob 0.0392147
Full output

Indus_Periphery
IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N 0.674±0.015
Onge 0.237±0.014
RUS_Tyumen_HG 0.090±0.012
chisq 14.877
tail prob 0.0212326
Full output

Indus_Periphery
IND_Rakhigarhi_BA 0.946±0.074
Onge 0.054±0.074
chisq 10.358
tail prob 0.169152
Full output

This does appear to be the case, although it's also obvious that my models are missing something important because their statistical fits are rather poor. I'm guessing the main problem is trying to use the Onge people of the Andaman Islands as a proxy for the indigenous foragers of the Indian subcontinent.

See also...

Y-haplogroup R1a and mental health

536 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 536   Newer›   Newest»
Tesmos said...

@Davidski,

Did they also publish new CWC samples from Czech Republic? I am talking about I7207,
I7208 and I7209. All of them are atleast R1a. I6696 is also from CWC Czech Republic and belongs to I2a1.



Davidski said...

@Tesmos

The genotype data haven't been uploaded online yet, if that's what you mean?


Archi said...

@Davidski They were uploaded, I wrote above.

indic vidula said...

@Mattheyichen Renaming as Sarasvati civilization is justified because most of the IVC sites have been found to be close to the dried Sarasvati river bed. It is a mistake to base conclusions on whether the argument is made by a Hindu or non Hindu, the logic in the argument is a better criteria.

Samuel Andrews said...

Looks like the Anatolian branch derives from Yamnaya who traveled through the Caucasus into the Middle East.

Think about it. R1b Z2103 is common in Iraq, Armenia, and Turkey. How did this happen? At somepoint Yamnaya R1b Z2103 went through the Caucasus into the Middle East.

I bet they migrated into the Middle East because they were being invaded by Abashevo R1a Z93.

Hence, all IE languages derive from Corded Ware except Anatolian whcih derives from Yamnaya. This explains why Anatolian is so basal and diferent from other IE languages.

Samuel Andrews said...

R1b M269 in Bronze age Israel. Where did that come from? It came from Yamnaya decendants who travelled into the Middle East. The Middle East has minor Kurgan ancestry 5-10%. I don't think Iron age Iranians from southcentral Asia can explain all of it.

Archi said...

@Samuel Andrews
"from Yamnaya who traveled through the Caucasus into the Middle East."

There is no data on the migration of R1b-Z2103 through the Caucasus. R1b-Z2103 runs along the West coast Black sea through Usatovo culture into the culture of Ezero. It's not the Yamnaya cultures, they are considered to be Hittite-Luwians.

Chad said...

Hard for PIE to be from Russia if no Bronze Age Anatolians have any ancestry from there... Just saying. This isn't really any more solved yet. However, Balkans and Anatolia were pretty connected from 5700-4200BCE, then a rupture with the climate deteriorating. Varna and CT both are about 30% Krepost. Sredny Stog can be modeled as about 40% Varna or CT and even more so for Steppe_MLBA. Krepost is probably from the Eastern half of Anatolia around 5700BCE. She plots with Minoans. Going from Krepost to Bronze Age Anatolians requires just some Levant BA ancestry and maybe a smidge of Kura Araxes. Could just be late Ubaid though.

Anyhoo, data is available. I have it now.

Samuel Andrews said...

Just so everyone knows, this is what Chad is proposing.....

PIE language originated in Eastern Anatolia in the Neolithic era around 5700 BC. IE language travelled from Eastern Anatolia to southeast Europe between 5700 and 4200 BC. Then, Balkan farmers migrated into Ukraine, mixed with Sredny Stog, Sredny Stog adopted IE language. Then Sredny Stog created Corded Ware who then spread most IE languages around today.

Chad, even if your insane theory is correct, Corded Ware is the main spreader of IE languages. You aren't able to explain that away. The reason is there's no questioning Corded Ware spoke IE considering.....

Andronovo derived from Corded Ware and is easily linked with Indo-Iranian languages.
East Baltic Bronze age derives from Corded Ware and is easily linked with Balto-Slavic languages.

Samuel Andrews said...

But, Chad you need to consider that Corded Ware had *NO* Balkan farmer ancestry. Corded Ware's farmer ancestry comes from Globular Amphora. This is obvious when looking at mtDNA and genome-wide data. It is not just about the high levels of WHG in Corded Ware's farmer ancestors. It is specific drift unique to Globular Amphora.

Also, the oldest Corded Ware genomesa are 90-100% Yamnaya-like. The single Sredny Stog sample you mention is an outlier. I guarantee most other Sredny Stog samples will come out identical to Yamnaya. Corded Ware & Bell Beaker & Andronovo had no southeast European farmer ancestry.

JuanRivera said...

First, the statement that Chalcolithic/Bronze Age Anatolians lack steppe ancestry is false, given that Kumtepe_N_low_resolution has steppe ancestry and the main Anatolia_MLBA cluster has Kumtepe_N_low_resolution admixture in turn. Second, the Armenian Chalcolithic (such as Areni_C) has Steppe Maykop admixture, while the Armenian Bronze Age has steppe proper admixture.

Archi said...

Remember that the period since 1600-1300BC is the period when most of the Indo-European peoples are cremated, the Hittites cremate, Aryans cremate, the Central Europeans cremate, Dorians cremate.


Darra.I.Kur is only R1b-M269 level, but may be contaminated.


Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,
"However, Balkans and Anatolia were pretty connected from 5700-4200BCE"

I'm be open to looking at the evidence you have for this but I'm skeptical. I've also looked at Balkan farmers (the easy way, with David's G25 PCA). Only Peloponnese_N_o in Greece and Krepost_o from Bulgaria had recent Anatolian ancestry. None of the dozens of other samples from Bulgaria ranging from 6000 to 3000 BC have recent Anatolian ancestry.

Drago said...

Zardos
You’re completely missing the point
You’re not too sharp buddy

Samuel Andrews said...

There's enough evidence to say IE language originated in Kurgan cultures of Eastern Europe. The question now is how a basal IE language got to Anatolia so early. I'm pretty sure Anatolian one way or another is from Yamnaya R1b Z2103+. Maybe, a Yamnaya-admixed group in the Caucasus moved to Anatolia. Maybe, when they arrived in Anatolia they already were 75%+ Middle Eastern.

Archi said...

@Samuel Andrews "Corded Ware's farmer ancestry comes from Globular Amphora."

No, Corded Ware's farmer ancestry comes from TRB. The CWC absorbed the Globular Amphora much later.

Romulus said...

I think this is an interesting post to reflect on at this point and supports Chad's theory.

I re-read the conclusions from this paper which appear on page 146-147 and they're very insightful.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/12/mixed-marriages-on-early-eneolithic.html?m=1

Drago said...

I think the data is pretty clear that pre- IE began in an EEF rich groups near the Black Sea; but from a HG group
Khvalynsk and maybe even Yamnaya were not IE
Nuclear IE emerges at CWC - northern/east Farmer interaction zone

Archi said...


Mereke_BA (Poltavka culture) is not Finno-Ugrians. They have very rare pure European haplogroup N2a https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-P189.2/ with TMRCA 4400 ybp came from Altai.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10uEE4YovereBpEDWB4O_W7LjmvPhjcsmmx7kvMmhB20/edit#gid=1533574591

Archi said...

@ Drago Any data is saying exactly the opposite. EEF has never been IE.

Chad said...

Lol. Sredny stog farmer ancestry predates Globular Amphora by 500 years. Globular Amphora reached Ukraine rather late. There is no evidence of some early IE in northern Europe predating LBA. No PIE under Celtic or Germanic. Celtic probably split after 800 BCE most likely. It's not from Bell Beaker. Bell Beaker is rather early for IE in northern Europe. Corded ware is even earlier. Put two and two together. Anyway, IE doesn't matter to me but some damn logic should be used here. Languages don't drag out for 2000 years then diverge.

Chad said...

Sam, the problem is that you don't know what you're looking at. Barcin is in a different sphere than European farmers. EN Greek samples are key. Not LN Peloponnesian. Balkan farmers are significantly closer to Iran and Levant than the EN Greeks. Even some are significantly closer than Barcin is. By the Chalcolithic this increases. It's most pronounced in the Black Sea group.

Kumtepe is a garbage sample. Anyway, it isn't far removed from Krepost. The better Kumtepe sample is by Tepecik. That makes more sense.

Drago said...

Archi
Learn how to read buddy

Davidski said...

@Chad

No need for the Globular Amphora straw man, because as we both know there were farmers with high ratios of Anatolian-derived ancestry near the Dnieper just before Sredny Stog II appeared there. I'm sure you're familiar with Ukraine_N_o.

And it's not impossible to explain Hittite and other Anatolian languages with, say, Yamnaya_Bulgaria, even without any significant steppe ancestry in Middle to Late Bronze Age Anatolia. It's close enough in time and space, and, as we all know, genes don't speak languages, people do.

Carlos Aramayo said...

Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, the leading archaeologist and expert on the Indus Valley Civilization at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, commented on the Rakhigarhi´s findings:

"[...] these conclusions should be viewed as tentative [...] Archaeological evidence suggests that Indus Valley cities were cosmopolitan places populated by people from many different regions, so one person's genetic makeup might not match the rest of the population [...] burial was a less common way of dealing with the dead than cremation. So whatever we do have from cemeteries is not representative of the ancient populations of the Indus cities, but only one part of one community living in these cities [...] And though the Indus individual and the 11 potential migrants found in other areas might have been related, more ancient DNA samples will be needed to show which way people, and their genes, were moving".

And even Vageesh Narasimhan opined:

"[ I compare] the cities of the Indus Valley to modern-day Tokyo or New York City, where people gather from around the world. Ancient DNA is a tool for understanding these complex societies".

I agree with Kenoyer that "Indus Valley cities were cosmopolitan places populated by people from many different regions" and that "one person's genetic makeup might not match the rest of the population", and also that "burial was a less common way of dealing with the dead than cremation", but I' m sure that the now 12 individuals in Indus Valley Civilization Cline belong to the most prototypical population and elite-related people of this Civilization, and of course many more people, from different cultures, could have lived there in substantial numbers, but I disagree with Kenoyer when he says "more ancient DNA samples will be needed to show which way people, and their genes, were moving", because I see Narasimhan, Reich, and their team are establishing in a very professional manner the ways in which those ancient people were moving.

See the full article here:

https://tinyurl.com/y4yxlnf5

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,
"Lol. Sredny stog farmer ancestry predates Globular Amphora by 500 years."

I never said Sredny Stog had Globular Amphora ancestry. The *single* farmer admixed Sredny Stog sample had Balkan farmer ancestry. What I said was Corded Ware had Globular Amphora ancestry & NO Balkan farmer ancestry. Hence, your theory Balkan farmers spoke IE doesn't work.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,
"Celtic probably split after 800 BCE most likely. It's not from Bell Beaker. Bell Beaker is rather early for IE in northern Europe. Corded ware is even earlier."

It's important to remember that Europe entered history late. The first written records of languages in Europe outside the Mediterranean date to 500 BC.

Sure, Celtic formed around 800 BC. But that doesn't mean there weren't IE languages in Western Europe before Celtic. Slavic expanded in 500-800 AD. But, there were IE languages all over eastern Europe before Slavic.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,
"There is no evidence of some early IE in northern Europe predating LBA"

There's no evidence of any languages in northern Europe before LBA because there's no written records of northern European languages till 500 BC!!

There's no written records of Balto Slavic languages in eastern Europe till the Middle Ages!!

Forget written records because they are scarce. The evidence we need to look at are archaeology & genetics.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,
Where's the recent Anatolian ancestry in Balkans Chalcolithic? I dos see only 3%.

1.3338"

Balkans_ChL

Anatolia_Barcin_N,87.5
Romania_HG,9.1
Anatolia_ChL,3.4
Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N_2019,0
Anatolia_EBA,0
Anatolia_MLBA,0
Anatolia_BA,0
Iron_Gates_HG,0
Lepenski_Vir:I5407,0

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,

Minoans had about 30% recent Anatolian ancestry & 0% Kurgan ancestry. They spoke a non-Indo European language.

Myceneans had 30% recent Anatolian ancestry & 15% Kurgan ancestry. They spoke an Indo Euroepan language.

a said...

@Drago

So far with the data from the latest paper, we can say that R1b-Z2109+[a great number of modern day Bashkir's] was found in burial rites of the following cultures, over a span of thousands of years-on the steppe.
-Novotitorovka culture 3300–2700 BC, Yamnaya culture 3300–2600 BC, Afanasievo culture 3300 BCE — 2500 BCE, Vucedol culture-3000 BC – 2200 BC, Catacomb culture-2800–2200 BC, Okunevo culture-2859-2350BC, Eastern Bell Beaker culture-2800–1800 BCE, Poltavka culture-2700—2100 BC, Potapovka-Grachyevka culture 2121-1942 BC, Sintashta-culture 2100–1800 BCE, Sarmatian culture-4th, 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE....

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,

Where's the Anatolian ancestry in India? Also, you know Brahmins have twice as much Kurgan ancestry as other Indians. More evidence the Indo European language in India is derived from Kurgan people.

Let's assume Andronovo spoke Indo European. You think they inherited it from Balkan farmer ancestry. But where's the Balkan farmer ancestry in Andronovo? Where's the recent Anatolian ancestry in Andronovo?

2.3071"

Karagash_MLBA

Yamnaya_Samara,65.2
Globular_Amphora:ILK001,22.4
Romania_HG,8.7
Poland_GAC:N38,3.7
Balkans_ChL,0
Varna,0
Trypillia,0
Sweden_TRB:Gokhem2,0
Globular_Amphora:ILK002_3,0
Iron_Gates_HG,0

Chad said...

European Neolithic isn't from Barcin. How many times should I repeat it? You're lacking in knowledge on archaeology and you don't know how to use qpAdm or qpGraph. European farmers are Greek EN related with extra flow from Tepecik, the Levant and Iron Gates. Barcin had a completely different development and models as it should with archaeology. Way more Boncuklu and less Levant and Iron Gates. Different spheres, once again. Use the EN and MN Peloponnesian, with Ravenia. You'll see. Danubian culture has roots around Tepecik. None of that in Barcin.

As for Iranian, I'm okay with that Satemization occuring with IE transferring to MBA steppes after long dependence on the Balkan Chalcolithic. Anyway, CT, GAC, all mostly develop from Linear pottery expansion. Also C3 Cucuteni pottery in late Sredny Stog.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,

You also know Bronze age East Baltic share lots of drift with modern eastern Europeans. They also share specific mtDNA lineages with eastern Europeans. There's a 99% chance Bronze age East Baltic spoke Proto Balto Slavic. If you see other explanation for the origins of Balto Slavic languages please explain....

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,
"European farmers are Greek EN related with extra flow from Tepecik, the Levant and Iron Gates."

I'll test that using David's G25 PCA. I'll model LBk as Anatolia BArcin+Euro HGs and then as Teppe-Levant-Bonuk+Euro HG. The fit is much better with just Barcin_N.

LBK
Barcin+HG=%=1.7726
Tepecik-LevantN-Boncuklu+HG=%=3.8062

"As for Iranian, I'm okay with that Satemization occuring with IE transferring to MBA steppes after long dependence on the Balkan Chalcolithic."

Let's say Andronovo picked up Indo European language from Balkan farmers. What about Italic languages? How did they get to Italy. Italic tribes in Italy had significant (like 35%+) Beaker R1b P312+ ancestry. Etruscans did to. This isn't a deal breaker as native Neolithic Italy ancestry survived well into Iron age Italy. Some turned IE, some kept old language.

And what about Celtic languages? There's no ]signal of Anatolian_BA ancestry in western Europe. I guess if you really wanted to you could fit in 5-10% in models.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,

What you've suggested is....

PIE originated in Eastern Anatolia in 5700 BC.
IE languages entered Southeast Europe in 5000-4000 BC.
IE languages entered Sredny Stog in 4000 BC. Therefore, its decendant Andronovo spoke IE.

Yet, there's no strong signal of recent Anatolian ancestry in Chalcolithic SouthEast Europe. There's no signal of Balkan ancestry in Andronovo. DNA does not support any of the IE migration movements you are supposing.

You haven't given explanation for Germanic, Celtic, or Italic languages. Where in DNA is there evidence for your model of IE language origins for the population movements which created Germanic, Celtic, Italic?

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,

The Kurgan hypothesis makes a lot more sense from a genetic point of view. It explains the expansion of IE languages as the mass movement of people who caused large demographic changes which allowed IE languages to replace native languages.

Your Anatolian hypothesis involves small scale movement of people. Kurgan ancestry links together the Myceneans, Andronovo, East Baltic Bronze age, Celtic, and Germanic.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Chad,

You clearly just don't like that Indo European languages originated in Europe. The evidence is overwhelming. You have a strange bias against your own people which is a mental illness which is typical for educated western Europeans and Americans. I'm an American who has lost all tolerance for that way of thinking.

Romulus said...

Samuel Andrews said...

Thor & Pernun look like Corded Ware gods of war because they use axes/hammers which was the main weapon of Corded Ware.


Balkan Neolithic had metal hammers and axes 1000 years before the existence of Corded Ware. Varna man was even discovered holding a gold handled axe.

n the museum display, his hands are folded over his chest, clutching a polished axe with a gold-wrapped handle like a scepter; another axe lies just beneath. There’s a flint “sword” 16 inches long at his side and a gold penis sheath lying nearby. “He has everything—armor, weapons, wealth,” Slavchev says, smiling. “Even the penises of these people were gold.”
4,600 BC to 4,200 BC

The tools are dated to the Late Chalcolithic (Late Copper Age), more specifically, 4,500 – 4,200 BC.

http://archaeologyinbulgaria.com/2019/01/09/europes-largest-hoard-of-copper-age-axes-ax-hammers-discovered-in-northeast-bulgaria/

https://www.academia.edu/443072/Flint_axes_ground_stone_axes_and_battle_axes_of_the_Copper_Age_in_the_Eastern_Balkans_Romania_Bulgaria_

Andrzejewski said...

@archi “
@Samuel Andrews
"from Yamnaya who traveled through the Caucasus into the Middle East."

There is no data on the migration of R1b-Z2103 through the Caucasus. R1b-Z2103 runs along the West coast Black sea through Usatovo culture into the culture of Ezero. It's not the Yamnaya cultures, they are considered to be Hittite-Luwians.”

Catacomb Culture maybe?

Andrzejewski said...

@Sam “Hence, all IE languages derive from Corded Ware except Anatolian whcih derives from Yamnaya. This explains why Anatolian is so basal and diferent from other IE languages.”

What about the Tocharian branch?

Andrzejewski said...

@Sam “Corded Ware's farmer ancestors. It is specific drift unique to Globular Amphora.

Also, the oldest Corded Ware genomesa are 90-100% Yamnaya-like. The single Sredny Stog sample you mention is an outlier. I guarantee most other Sredny Stog samples will come out identical to Yamnaya. Corded Ware & Bell Beaker & Andronovo had no southeast European farmer ancestry.”

1. CWC’s farmer ancestry may be from GAC but Yamnaya’s is mostly mediated via CT; and Yamnaya was 18% EEF.

2. Corded Ware couldn’t be identical to Yamnaya b/c former was R1a, latter one was R1b

Andrzejewski said...

@Sam “They also share specific mtDNA lineages with eastern Europeans.“

As a Polish-American I’ll be thrilled if you could specify them (unique mtDNA lineages in Balto-Slavs), and what ones supposedly separate them from your (Scottish?-American) ancestors’ mtDNA

Andrzejewski said...

@Sam “Minoans had about 30% recent Anatolian ancestry & 0% Kurgan ancestry. They spoke a non-Indo European language.”

What’s the rest of their ancestry? I thought Anatolian was close to 85% like Sardinians

Arza said...

https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA2019/Programme.aspx?Program=3#Program

GENOMIC INSIGHTS INTO 3RD MILLENNIUM B.C. BOHEMIA
Author(s): Papac, Luka (Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena) - Ernée, Michal - Dobeš, Miroslav (Insti- tute of Archaeology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague) - Krause, Johannes (Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena; Faculty of Biosciences, University of Jena) - Schiffels, Stephan - Haak, Wolfgang (Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena)
Presentation Format: Oral

Beginning in the 3rd millennium B.C., the genetic makeup of ancient Europeans shows increasing affinity to contemporaneous individuals from the Eurasian steppe. This ‘steppe ancestry’ component subsequently spreads to every corner of Europe and is today a major component of the ancestry of most extant Europeans. In order to shed further light on the timing, dynamics and consequences of the introduction of this ‘steppe ancestry’ into central Europe, we analyse genomic capture data from 136 Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age individuals from 15 sites in central Bohemia. We find that, despite the sites being geographically close to one another, individuals are heterogeneous in relation to their local hunter-gatherer ancestries. Interestingly, we identify a possible admixture cline between our Late Neolithic Bohemian individuals and a source with high Eastern hunter-gatherer related ancestry, currently best represented by Lithuanian Neolithic individuals of the Narva culture. We first detect the presence of ‘steppe ancestry’ in individuals precisely dated to 2,900 BC found in Corded Ware archaeological contexts. Early carriers of this ‘steppe ancestry’ can be found buried in close proximity to individuals without ‘steppe ancestry’ at the same burial site. The genetic makeup of later Bell Beaker and Bronze Age individuals can be explained as mixtures of preceding Late Neolithic populations and a significant proportion of incoming steppe-related ancestry. We also detect a number of interesting outlier individuals which add to our understanding of the dynamics and regional nuances of population interactions in 3rd millennium B.C. central Europe.

Arza said...

^^^
Any ideas what kind of Y-DNA those Narva individuals could have brought to Bohemia?

Romulus said...

Blogger Arza said...
^^^
Any ideas what kind of Y-DNA those Narva individuals could have brought to Bohemia?

September 6, 2019 at 6:25 PM


only logical choice is R1b-L51

mzp1 said...

Sarazm is a highly developed settlement that opens to the Central Asian steppe. It was likely an early conduit of South Asian influence into the steppe. It could be the home of the Iranian languages and steppe culture. The site is from 3500BC.

"The bracelets of the “great lady” are made from the shells of
Turbinella pyrum L., the Sanskrit _anka, the most important
ritual shell in the Hindu religion, extensively worked for
bracelets and trumpets in India since the 4th millennium BC. "

"This necropolis has similarities with those corresponding to the southern settled agricultural cultures, and the stone fence recalls associations with burial customs corresponding to the steppe zones of Eurasia.
All these findings reinforce the idea that since its first period, Sarazm had direct or indirect relationships with many other populations from the north, west and south. "

https://whc.unesco.org/uploads/nominations/1141rev.pdf

The rise of BMAC brings a new culture and identity to Central Asia, and begins the separation of East and West Iranian. They move away from the Deva worship that existed in Sarazm and spread into the steppes, and make a war with the steppe/indic religion. This begins a massive split in Iranian that leads us to the Persians and Scythians as two distant but related peoples.


If BMAC dominated Western India (Punjab), as mentioned in the Shahname, and and corroborated archeolically, then that would explain the movement of Vedic tradition into the SoutEast, during the post-Vedic period.

Anatolia is close to the Centum dispersal, so it could explain that. So Chad's theory could be relevant for Greek, Latin, Celtic, Anatolian and Tocharian. With IEs expanding on the Eastern Steppes and around the Caucuses, there are new opportunities in the Western Steppe that are taken advantage of by nearby groups. It is difficult to pin-down the linguistic affiliation of Yamnya, they could be Iranian or Centum speakers (like the Tocharians).


We have IE spreading out of South Asia along two vectors very early, possibly millenia before we see the clear links with Anau Tepe, IVC and Sarazm in the 4th millenia, as these would be driven by earlier developed trading relationships.

With academia considering a Caucuses Urheimat, we are moving in the right direction, but it is still far from a satisfactory solution. It seems to me even the Euro IE languages require two points of dispersal in Europe.

JuanRivera said...

Actually, F3 stats don't give support to Central Asian admixture. Also, it should show up in Botai, when it doesn't. Plus, now it has been shown that IVC's Iranian admixture split from Iranian farmers and even herders in the Mesolithic, while Anatolian farmers are also largely of local Mesolithic origin, which also happen to give further support to the idea that Piedmont is of local Mesolithic origin (Piedmont-like ancestry can be seen in Sidelkino too).

Samuel Andrews said...

@Andre,
"As a Polish-American I’ll be thrilled if you could specify them (unique mtDNA lineages in Balto-Slavs), and what ones supposedly separate them from your (Scottish?-American) ancestors’ mtDNA "

H1b1, H1b2, H1c, H28a, high frequency of T2b, U5a1c1.

T1a1b, H2a1a, N1a1a1a1 are specific lineages shared between Eastern Europe & Andronovo.

H1c, H1a are common in northwest Europe & Eastern Europe. Several examples of H1c from Baltic Brone age.

Davidski said...

@mzp1

Sarazm_EN is a now extinct, dead end population that didn't contribute any significant ancestry to extant Indo-Iranian speakers, or to anyone in fact.

And it's supposed to be Proto-Indo-Iranian? Way to go with the lateral thinking there and making awesome use of ancient DNA too.

JuanRivera said...

As for AASI-like ancestry, CHG, Iran and even (proto-)ANE (Yana RHS has AASI-like ancestry, with an increase in MA1 and AG3) have AASI-like ancestry, however, the AASI-like ancestry in all three are Paleolithic in age. On another note, steppe ancestry is actually much more widespread than just the IE range, being present in Sápmi, Basques, Lake Baikal and Mongolia, Tungusic peoples and even Magadan_BA.

JuanRivera said...

And for all, here are some models for Tungusic speakers I made:

Even/Evenk: (Yukagir_Tundra 100%)
Hezhen: (Devils_Gate_Cave_N+Afanasievo+Han+Baikal_MA, 2.0761, Devils_Gate_Cave_N 65% Afanasievo 0.83% Han 25.83% Baikal_MA 8.33%)
Ulchi: (Devils_Gate_Cave_N+Magadan_BA, 3.4271, Devils_Gate_Cave_N 79.17% Magadan_BA 20.83%)
Oroqen: (Devils_Gate_Cave_N+Han+Baikal_MA, 3.468, Devils_Gate_Cave_N 90.83% Han 5.83% Baikal_MA 17.67%)
Negidal: (Devils_Gate_Cave_N+Magadan_BA, 5.436, Devils_Gate_Cave_N 75% Magadan_BA 25%)
Daur: (Devils_Gate_Cave_N+Afanasievo, 1.7476, Devils_Gate_Cave_N 60% Afanasievo 3.33% Han 32.83% Baikal_MA 5.83%).

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Arza
That looks like a fascinating paper.
Maybe Gaska will be celebrating !?

JuanRivera said...

I guess the Afanasievo is what makes Hezhen a better fit for the extra Devils_Gate_Cave_N-like ancestry in Magadan_BA than Devils_Gate_Cave_N itself when penalty is 0.001, however, on 0 penalty the Han and Baikal_MA ancestries make Hezhen (along with Daur and Oroqen) a worse fit than Devils_Gate_Cave_N, with an Oroqen<Daur<Hezhen<Devils_Gate_Cave_N pattern of fits. The Afanasievo ancestry isn't responsible, in fact, if added (sadly at the expense of Devils_Gate_Cave_N, as there aren't means to put more than four populations) in a model with 0 penalty, the fits get better, suggesting that, if there was a way to put more than four populations, a Yukagir_Tundra+RUS_Kolyma_Meso+RUS_Devils_Gate_Cave_N+RUS_Sintashta+RUS_Afanasievo would fit better than the same model minus Afanasievo.

JuanRivera said...

Also, given the data collected from models of Tungusic peoples, Afanasievo people seem to have migrated along the eastern steppe up to a mountain range stretching from the Uda river (the Russian Far East one) valley to somewhat southwest of Badzhal'skiy Gosudarstvennyy Prirodnyy Zapovednik (name pulled from Google Maps). East of that range people show no Afanasievo admixture (nor Han or Baikal_MA ancestries), where instead people are a mixture between Magadan_BA and Devils_Gate_Cave_N (which corresponds to Nivkhs and Tungusified Nivkhs).

JuanRivera said...

Of course, the Magadan_BA admixture came later than the Afanasievo (5th century as earliest for the former, late 3rd millennium-early 2nd millennium for the latter).

Samuel Andrews said...

The First Italian samples from around Rome are interesting. 30-35% Beaker/North European. Other 70% is mostly akin to Classical Greeks and Minoans but there is also some Levant admix.

matthayichen said...

@vAsiSTha
"They deny that Indo-European exists separately from the Dravidian languages of south India."
"Not a single pro OIT in India believes this."

Of course. But if you reject the very existence of language families, you don't need migrations to explain their distribution, and therefore no need for Out-of-India Theory (OIT). You conveniently ignore that a large percentage of Hindutva people do exactly that. Either because they consider it all a conspiracy or because they are that ignorant.

Incidentally, David Reich talks about the political challenges of doing research in India in his book. Ancestral North Indian (ANI) was originally just West_Eurasian (this was before the term changed its meaning slightly to include some local ancestry) in the draft of Reich et al. 2009, but Indian researchers threatened to sabotage the paper if it wasn't changed. In the end, all statements that might hint at foreign origins of Indian groups in it were carefully negotiated political compromises.

Samuel Andrews said...

Final hypothesis on Italy......

30-40% Beaker impact into all of Italy in 2000-1000 BC.

Significant Greek/East Med ancestry in southern Italy. Some is ancient and some is from Greek colonies. Then in Roman era significant Levant admixture entered southern Italy.

In Roman era, lots of people from southern Italy migrated north bringing Greek/East Med and Levant admixture with them.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Frank
NB from Narasinham

New sample from Baalberg culture- I6677 (Bilina, Bohemia) hg H2

epoch said...

@Chad

"Hard for PIE to be from Russia if no Bronze Age Anatolians have any ancestry from there... Just saying. "

This is nonsense. The samples that you refer to aren't likely IE speaking and we know for sure that e.g. Hittites were a ethnically very divers lot. In other words, there hasn't been a Bronze Age sample that should have had steppe admixture that hasn't.

Also, during the early Bronze age in the Balkans there is steppe admixture and steppe Y-DNA. It's all there in Mathieson 2018.

epoch said...

@Chad

"There is no evidence of some early IE in northern Europe predating LBA. No PIE under Celtic or Germanic."

Yes there is. Toponymy. For one thing, the name of the river Meuse is can be explained from a IE root. The Germanic name for the river (Maso, cf Dutch Maas) must have gone through Germanic sound shifts whereas the Celtic name (Mosa) must have gone through typical Celtic sound shifts.

This is not an example that stands on its own. Some linguists (Gysseling for example) propose a pre-Celtic, pre-Germanic IE substrate. The theory is called the Northwestblock theory.

Similar pre-Celtic IE substrated and etymologies for toponyms are proposed elsewhere through Europe.

Chad said...

epoch,

That would be incorrect. The EBA of the Balkans has no steppe ancestry. They all plot with Varna and CT. No detectable ancestry from outside is in Ezero. I already showed David this. After 3000 BCE into the MBA, there are a few with some steppe ancestry. However, we have samples from Central Anatolia ranging from 3200-to possibly as late as 1200BCE. None have steppe ancestry or R1a or R1b. You think this is going to change? Even one showing up with 10% steppe ancestry doesn't mean anything for IE.

Let me share a little something I did share with David. He is more well-versed than some, but others keep rehashing some garbage from Anthony on the archaeology here.

There is no great Steppe migration into the Balkans in 4200 BCE. Anthony is willfully ignorant here or just fabricating. The climate changed horribly. It was basically a mini ice age for over 100 years. People switched more towards pastoralism during this time.

There was no abandonment due to some invaders. The whole Danubian chalcolithic is called the Burned House Horizon. It was practiced all throughout the land. Not just in CT. What happened is that they stopped rebuilding the big farming centers and went to smaller settlements dotting the edges of rougher terrain and left open the land for grazing. This is clear and covered by many.

Now, competition did increase but the violence is between Balkan groups. No one comes in before 3000BCE. DNA makes that clear too. The so-called steppe ancestry in the Balkan Chalcolithic is only Ukrainian hunters and the Krepost stuff making it look like steppe. There was no Piedmont ancestry in Ukraine at this time. All Eastern basal stuff came from Anatolia between 5700-5000or4500BCE with Hamangia. Anatolia and the Balkans were heavily connected with trade and culture at this time.

The climate issue is the rupture between Anatolia and the Balkans and perfect timing for Anatolian to split from PIE around 4200BCE (Generally thought to be 4500BCE by linguists) Ukraine was at HG stage here. Anatolian speakers receive input from Mesopotamia and European branches mix with European farmers and finally into Iranians like Andronovo, whose largest component would be Danubian. Danubian ancestry is the largest chunk of known and most likely IE speakers. IE wasn't in Northern Europe and Scandinavia at 2800BCE. That's crazy talk.

vAsiSTha said...

It is clear that older IVC area samples will reveal almost 100% Iran like ancestry. AASI component moved north slowly, Iran like component moved South and east as well presumably.

We do find traces of AASI in other ancient dna, along with Iran farmer like component.

Have always been saying that the IE connection is much older and the Iran component is the conduit. AASI was hardly even a part of the NW India genetic makeup circa 4000-3000bc, given that it gives only 20pc to the 2500bc sample. The clue is in the Iran farmer like components.


Huck Finn said...

@ Archi: I may be all wrong, but according to reads in the file you posted vs. the latest ISOGG N-tree it seems to me that the guys in the Mereke kurgan are at least N-L708, if they don't even belong to some N-Z1936 lineage (modern Finns, Hungarians, Bashkirs, Tatars etc.). If I'm right, I'd say that in BA context of the greater Ural area they might very well be Uralic speakers. Mereke kurgan seems to be located in Taskala area of Kazakhstan, which is very close to Ural Mountains.

Cpk said...

I am open to assimilated Balkanians immigrate to Anatolia hypothesis but they were not real Hittites argument doesn't work. When steppe ancestry shows up it shows up everywhere. Compare Mycenean and Minoan samples.

Davidski said...

@vAsiSTha

Before you attempt to comment here again, read this carefully...

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/vagheesh/files/eaat7487.full_.pdf

vAsiSTha said...

@matthayichen
"Incidentally, David Reich talks about the political challenges of doing research in India in his book. Ancestral North Indian (ANI) was originally just West_Eurasian (this was before the term changed its meaning slightly to include some local ancestry) in the draft of Reich et al. 2009, but Indian researchers threatened to sabotage the paper if it wasn't changed. In the end, all statements that might hint at foreign origins of Indian groups in it were carefully negotiated political compromises."

Let's see now. Here's what all has been claimed by European 'scholars'
1. Aryans destroyed ivc - false, no such arch evidence, ivc depopulated due to disease and low rain
2. Aryan invasion was male mediated - vagheesh in his paper - steppe ancestry in swat valley LBA IA is female mediated
3. Steppe brought chariots to NW India. False, chariot burial has been found contemporary to Sintashta (2100bc) prior to the supposed Aryan migration.
4. Iranians brought farming into NW India. - false, shinde paper shows farming developed independently without Iranian Gene flow
5. Iranians brought dravidian into India - false, no Gene flow from Iran into rakhigarhi. Dravidian Brahui was most likely brought north by south indians who had higher AASI ancestry.
6. IVC people were mainly AASI who spoke dravidian - false, IVC people were distant cousins of Iran farmers, with very little AASI, and most likely had nothing to do with dravidian language. More likely that indo Aryan already existed in Iran and IVC.
7. High presence of steppe origin in brahmins (of UP and Bihar, which are in east India lol) proves external origin of IE. False - brahmins originated in NW India and moved east and south (this is well known Hindu history) Of course the northerners who encountered steppe people first have more steppe ancestry. Correlation doesn't mean causation. Jats (shudra varna), rors, gujjars are northern communities who have higher steppe component than brahmins. They're agricultural communities, and are not priestly castes. Plus, brahmins have at least 10 different y haplogroups today.
8. Why are fire altars found in IVC pre supposed 'aryan migration'?. Same for chariots

Sorry that we don't play along with your delusions

vAsiSTha said...

Same old same old language hypothesis based on old linguistic papers conveniences. Sorry, don't buy it. Funny how the mention of Sintashta chariots as 'evidence' has vanished nowadays.

Had always maintained that rakhigarhi will be majorly Iran like earlier on your previous posts. I have been proven right.

Davidski said...

The fact that this sample is largely Iran_N-like is nothing surprising. I said it would be like this.

But I also said that it would show a lot of ASI ancestry, and it does.

epoch said...

@Chad

Just to make sure I get this right.. This remark from Mathieson 2018 according to you is "crazy talk"?

Other Copper Age(~5000-4000 BCE) individuals from the Balkans have little evidence of steppe ancestry, but Bronze Age (~3400-1100 BCE) individualsdo (we estimate 30%; CI: 26-35%).

Archi said...

@Huck Finn
Mereke_BA could be even Botai speakers, or they could speak any other extinct language of which there were thousands, it's all speculations. It is important that they do not belong to the present Ural speakers.

EastPole said...

Just general thoughts. Iosif Lazaridis commented: „A good example of Big Picture science which will enable a lot of followup work in years to come.” He probably thought about genetics. I am thinkig about followup work in linguistics and the history of Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian religions and cultures.

„The detection of genetic patterns that connect speakers of the Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic branches of Indo-European” which „provides a plausible genetic explanation for the linguistic similarities between the Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian subfamilies of Indo-European languages” is a great discovery which should influence many linguistic and religious studies to come.
It may lead to a better understanding of the roots of Rigveda and the roots of Baltic and Slavic cultures.
Here we have real linguistic and genetic links. It is a different story from PIE which is a pure speculation and a waste of time at the moment IMO.

Archi said...

@vAsiSTha
" 1. Aryans destroyed ivc - false, no such arch evidence, ivc depopulated due to disease and low rain"

It's just a hypothesis trying to explain Harappa's demise. It has no bearing on the significance for Aryan invasion.

" 2. Aryan invasion was male mediated - vagheesh in his paper - steppe ancestry in swat valley LBA IA is female mediated"

Pointless remark. I already wrote that in these graves are not of the Vedic Indo-Aryans, but Dasa, Dasyus, Shudras, Vratya, half-breeding are the result of exchange of women and bastards, as well as in times of war there is always gene flow resulting from the violence.
Gene flow could not be contained by anything, anyway, a couple of hundred years it will blend as if they lived separately, that's why fiction Aryans in Harappa.

" 3. False, chariot burial has been found contemporary to Sintashta (2100bc) prior to the supposed Aryan migration."
Lies, this is not a chariot, but a regular two-wheeled (Sumerian) wagon (from steppe).

" 4. Iranians brought farming into NW India. - false, shinde paper shows farming developed independently without Iranian Gene flow"
It has nothing to do to Aryan migration. Iranian gene flow was, but passed very close to Harappa, this is the way and anthropologists wrote. BMAC, etc., there was a cultural exchange between them.

" 5. Iranians brought dravidian into India - false, no Gene flow from Iran into rakhigarhi. Dravidian Brahui was most likely brought north by south indians who had higher AASI ancestry."
No false. Dravidian flow in the Indus Valley from Turkmenistan/Iran was, but apparently not in Neolithic times, in general, it was hunter-gatherers. The Dravidians are aliens, but the time when they came has not yet been explored. Who was Harrapians yet a complete mystery.

" 6. IVC people were mainly AASI who spoke dravidian - false, IVC people were distant cousins of Iran farmers, with very little AASI, and most likely had nothing to do with dravidian language."

These are all your speculations given out as facts.

"More likely that indo Aryan already existed in Iran and IVC."
Absolutely impossible.

" 7. High presence of steppe origin in brahmins (of UP and Bihar, which are in east India lol) proves external origin of IE. False - brahmins originated in NW India and moved east and south (this is well known Hindu history)"

Unscientific and ideologised propaganda.

" 8. Why are fire altars found in IVC pre supposed 'aryan migration'?. Same for chariots"

You don't understand cultural and scientific matters, but here we speak about genetics.

JuanRivera said...

Here's some data from the archeology of some of the Far East. Suchu (which is in the lowermost Amur River valley, but not the estuary) was first abandoned at 5170 ± 90 BP and then last seen at 4380 ± 40 BP. Voznesenovka (located more upwards) was established at 5115 ± 160 BP, shortly after Suchu was first abandoned. Nil-Ust'e, in the Magadan region, is first established at 4920 ± 240 BP, followed relatively shortly by Kukhtui III, which was established at 4700 ± 100 BP. In the same region, Druchak-Vetrenyl is last seen at 5120 ± 180, while Khurendzha as a whole is last seen at 4530 ± 150 BP. Ushki as a whole is last seen at 4200 ± 100 BP, some centuries before the Tarya culture. Abandonments aren't seen in southern Primorye in the timeframe (where instead continuity can be observed). Overall, it reeks of some replacement in the area, which can be observed in the form of Afanasievo admixture in the locals of the Manchurian Steppe and other zones south of the Stanovoys plus Afanasievo (0.83%) and Devils_Gate_Cave_N (5%) in Magadan_BA, suggesting an expansion of Afanasievo-related populations along low-populated areas with not too severe climate. By the way, a replacement during the Neolithic was deduced by analyses of mtDNAs of Koryaks and Itelmens (from exclusively A, C, D, Z to a composition of A, C, D, G1b, Y1, Z with G1b and Y1 being the most frequent mtDNAs), which can be seen in the small Devils_Gate_Cave_N admixture in Magadan_BA and the presence of G1b in an individual (who also happens to be the one that surely has Sintashta-like admixture).

Mammoth_Hunter said...

Well, Chad is kind of right. I2a2a1b1 in Bulgarian Yamnaya & Bronze Age barrows is likely to be from the Carnavoda culture; therefore to call I2a2a1b 'Russian' is indeed crazy talk.

As Romulus pointed out, the characteristic traits of PIE are already emergent in the 5th millenium lower Danube (in addition to symbolic axes; sun-worship; etc); then spreads from there, including western Anatolia. It was a special hybrid society; different to regular EEF, with high H-G admixutre (I2, R1) from inception. When Gimbuats wrote her theory, she rightly noted that c. 4500 BC cultures appear to be very different to earlier Neolithic groups - the female-centric society had diminished, and people were less concerned about painting pottery. Hence she attributed it to migrations, and connected it to pastoral nomads in the Volga, mostly based on stereotypical perspectives rather than hard data. The issue is, a long line of ''Indo-Europeanists'' have simply repeated this story; but its been doubted by speciaalist archaeologists. But the latter are unknown to the average person/ linguist/ Harvard geneticist reading up on the matter. But the matter is now settled, as the pastroalist Tiszapolgar culture is known to be predominanlty EEF, but with more EHG/UkrHG.

@ Epoch

''Yes there is. Toponymy. For one thing, the name of the river Meuse is can be explained from a IE root. The Germanic name for the river (Maso, cf Dutch Maas) must have gone through Germanic sound shifts whereas the Celtic name (Mosa) must have gone through typical Celtic sound shifts.''

Have you carbon dated this toponym ?

Simon_W said...

@Sam
"The njew Albian & Italian samples will be interesting."

Indeed, I already posted some curious Global25/nMonte derived observations in the previous thread.

Simon_W said...

@Andrzejewski
"What’s the rest of their ancestry? I thought Anatolian was close to 85% like Sardinians"

As always, it's key to distinguish between ANF and ABA, the two are not the same. What Sam was speaking of was ABA in Minoans. Sardinians are close to 85% ANF, but according to some analyses they lack ABA. So what the Minoans had, apart from ABA was mostly ANF. So in a way they were "completely Anatolian", but nobody says this because it means nothing.

Simon_W said...

@Sam
"The First Italian samples from around Rome are interesting. 30-35% Beaker/North European. Other 70% is mostly akin to Classical Greeks and Minoans but there is also some Levant admix.
"

What's their date?

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter
"As Romulus pointed out, the characteristic traits of PIE are already emergent in the 5th millenium lower Danube (in addition to symbolic axes; sun-worship; etc); then spreads from there, including western Anatolia."

It was the usual trading trips of the Sredniy Stog culture for copper. Trading posts of the Sredniy Stog culture is even in Hungary (Csongrad). Suvorovo group on the lower Danube is a branch of the Sredniy Stog culture (Novodanilovo part), and not a continuation of the Balkan Neolithic.
There is nothing surprising in this, in the Balkan-Carpathian metallurgical province there was an active trade and traders went very far. These campaigns did not lead to the spread of Indo-Europeans and naturally (E)Neolithic Balkans peoples were never Indo-Europeans.

epoch said...

@Mammoth Hunter

"Have you carbon dated this toponym ?"

Actually, Chad stated literally: "No PIE under Celtic or Germanic".

But you know, there is a nice archaeological cultural continuity from Bell Beaker, via Barbed Wire to Hilversum culture.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Archi

Your summary is exceedingly uninformed. It was far more than copper.
You might wish to notice that people with steppe-like signature appear in Varna, buried according to local customs. This means they had been ''converted'' to local customs; which were also acquired by those of the Suvorovo horizon, and with them spread back to the steppe.
We have no clue what such groups spoke, but it is not hard to view them as emergent IE groups.
Despite your protestations, the predominant ancestry in historically attsted IE speakers is what is generically known as EEF.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Epoch
Chad stated ''there is no evidence of some early IE in northern Europe predating LBA''

This might or not might be correct. But your reasoning did not mitigate his suggestion. The etymology of the river Meuse tells us nothing about when it was actually given to the said river.
In any case, It would be good to see the Netherlands characterised in detail, I suspect there is no absolute continuity there.

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter
"Your summary is exceedingly uninformed."
As if yours are informative, they're useless anybody.

"Despite your protestations, the predominant ancestry in historically attsted IE speakers is what is generically known as EEF."

It is your faith, but it is wrong, the data contradicts it. There is not a single fact that connected the Proto-Indo-Europeans with the Balkans - neither linguistic nor archaeological, neither cultural nor genetic.

Huck Finn said...

@Archi: Uralic or not, but you seem to miss the main point. According to ISOGG tables I've seen P189.2. is not a part of N1a, which is the term Narasimhan et al is using related to Mereke.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Archi

There were multiple EEF languages & several steppe languages; the data actually shows that IE groups can be tracked to a specific combination of certain of the above.

Not that I'm particularly interested in your opinion; but you should note that you should support your arguementation with formulations: models, genetic data, antrhopological syntheses. Unfortunately, you're barely able to formulate a sentence.

Anshuman said...

People should start remodeling all the present day as well older SA samples on the IVC samples and other ancient population samples to find out how much contribution They have in present day South Asians instead of depending on Steppe alone

Simon_W said...

As for the theory of a spread of IE from Anatolia to the Balkans - I think it should be clear that Barcin_N and Anatolia_EBA are clearly distinct in their genomic profiles. Anatolia_EBA has an eastern CHG/Iran pull that Barcin_N completely lacks. The main difference between Barcin_N and the various European Neolithic farmers is the diverse amount of WHG admixture that the latter have. So what makes a European Neolithic farmer look more "Anatolian" or more "eastern" is a low score of WHG. But the spread of the eastern Anatolian, CHG/Iran-related admixture that turned Neolithic Anatolians into Anatolia_EBA reached Europe fairly late and it remained rather confined to far southeastern Europe and eventually Southern Italy and Sicily.

At least this can be seen very well using the Global25/nMonte method:

BGR_C

Barcin_N,92.3
Yamnaya_Samara,6.9
WHG,0.4
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0.4
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,0
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

BGR_Middle_C

Barcin_N,85
Yamnaya_Samara,7.7
WHG,7.3
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,0
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

BGR_Late_C

Barcin_N,88.3
WHG,6
Yamnaya_Samara,5.7
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,0
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

BGR_EBA

Barcin_N,66.3
Yamnaya_Samara,16.4
WHG,11.1
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,6.2
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

BGR_MLBA

Yamnaya_Samara,74.3
Barcin_N,17.6
WHG,7.4
Han,0.5
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0.2
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,0
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Yoruba,0

Thus in Bulgaria, Anatolia_EBA-like admixture starts to show up in the EBA, which started there about 3300-3400 BC. Long after Hamangia and other Neolithic cultures. And in the MLBA it's already gone again, at least in Bulgaria.

Meanwhile the potentially Hittite Anatolia_MLBA sample is almost entirely like Anatolia_EBA:

Anatolia_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA

Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,66.5
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,33.3
Barcin_N,0.1
Han,0.1
Yamnaya_Samara,0
WHG,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Yoruba,0

So if PIE should be from Anatolia, as Chad suggests, it would have to be associated with Barcin_N-like ANF ancestry which is very low in Yamnaya but somewhat stronger in Corded Ware and Andronovo. And it would mean that the strong eastern admixture that transformed the Anatolian DNA by the EBA didn't wipe out the supposedly IE language of the Barcin-N-like locals.

Archi said...

@Huck Finn
"but you seem to miss the main point. According to ISOGG tables I've seen P189.2. is not a part of N1a, which is the term Narasimhan et al is using related to Mereke. "

Am I missing??? I wrote about it!!! Read more carefully.

Archi said...
Mereke_BA (Poltavka culture) is not Finno-Ugrians. They have very rare pure European haplogroup N2a https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-P189.2/ with TMRCA 4400 ybp, it came from Altai.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10uEE4YovereBpEDWB4O_W7LjmvPhjcsmmx7kvMmhB20/edit#gid=1533574591
September 6, 2019 at 2:47 PM

Simon_W said...

Of course Chad might object that the Yamnaya-like admixture in Chalcolithic Bulgaria wasn't really steppe-ancestryat all, but rather a mix of incoming Ukrainian EHG and CHG-related migrants creeping up the southeastern fringe of the Balkans. I'm not sure if I can buy this.

Huck Finn said...

@Archi: yes you are.

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter
"There were multiple EEF languages & several steppe languages; the data actually shows that IE groups can be tracked to a specific combination of certain of the above."

There is no combination, it is only your imagination on anything not reasonable.

"but you should note that you should support your arguementation with formulations: models"
You do nothing at all, only believe, your statements are unfounded. The models you require from me are all in scientific publications. Yours doesn't exist.

Simon_W said...

Well at least the fit is slightly better using something along the lines of Chad's theory instead of using Yamnaya_Samara:

[1] "distance%=2.1346"

BGR_C

Barcin_N,83.3
Anatolia_Kumtepe_N:kum6,7.2
UKR_Sredny_Stog_II_En,5.9
UKR_Dereivka_I_En2,3.2
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0.2
Anatolia_Barcin_C:I1584,0.2

Compared to:


[1] "distance%=2.3221"

BGR_C

Barcin_N,92.3
Yamnaya_Samara,6.9
WHG,0.4
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0.4

vAsiSTha said...

@archi

"It's just a hypothesis trying to explain Harappa's demise. It has no bearing on the significance for Aryan invasion."

disproving any of your hypotheses never has any bearing on your biased colonial origin theories. thats the problem we have with you lot.

"Pointless remark. I already wrote that in these graves are not of the Vedic Indo-Aryans, but Dasa, Dasyus, Shudras, Vratya, half-breeding are the result of exchange of women and bastards, as well as in times of war there is always gene flow resulting from the violence.
Gene flow"

reminded me of this childhood fable. "How many crows are there in Delhi? A: 24573. What if there are more - well then some obviously flew in from outside to meet their friends. What if there are less - well then they obviously flew out to meet their friends"


"It has nothing to do to Aryan migration. "
Why its very important to Indians who have been told that outsiders came in and brought agriculture, along with all other language and culture later on. Now the 1st part has been proven to be untrue.

"Iranian gene flow was, but passed very close to Harappa, this is the way and anthropologists wrote. BMAC, etc., there was a cultural exchange between them."
On the contrary, there was gene outflow from IVC to turan, bmac and central asia as per this latest paper.

"Dravidian flow in the Indus Valley from Turkmenistan/Iran was, but apparently not in Neolithic times, in general, it was hunter-gatherers."
in your fantasy world, sure

"These are all your speculations given out as facts."
The rakhigarhi sample is 80% iran like. My testable prediction is that older samples from the area will be 90-95%+ iran like. too bad for you that the sample wasnt predominantly aasi. AASI % rises into iron age, clearly people from the south migrated up north and kept migrating for centuries.

"Absolutely impossible."
great argument. 10/10

"brahmins originated in NW India and moved east and south (this is well known Hindu history) - unscientific and ideologised propaganda"
lmao the vedas clearly mention NW india as the geography, mahabharata mentions the same geography. Later literature shifts the vedic activity to the Ganges. South indian brahmins have recorded history of movement south from north at the behest of southern kings.

"Lies, this is not a chariot, but a regular two-wheeled (Sumerian) wagon (from steppe)."

2 wheeled sumerian vehicles are always war chariots, not wagons. sanauli 2 wheeled vehicle is also a chariot (ratha). akkadaian words fro chariot are narkabtu/gigir.

a said...

@vAsiSTha. Horse and wheel are found in Slavic and Indian language, Jagganath festival for example. Now we can test the horse remains from Corded Ware/ Slavic areas along with burial wagons.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Finn

''yes you are''

more than half a loaf, I'd say

Archi said...

@vAsiSTha you have no knowledge, but you are a typical ideological propagandist. Remember, a two-wheeled wagons is not a chariot. And if you don't know it, you're just a ignoramus that ignorant of chariots.

Two-wheeled wagons has never participated in war, especially the Sumerians, it was the personal transport pulled by donkeys for personal trips out of city to the war completely unusable. As you can see on the Sumerian military standard.

I talked a lot with supporters of OIT and I know that neither any arguments and knowledge do not perceive. They live in a fantasy world and will live in it forever.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Simon W
I don't think Chad was suggesting that PIE arrived to Europe with Anatolian Bronze Age.

Gaska said...

Bohemian paper-The genetic makeup of later Bell Beaker and Bronze Age individuals can be explained as mixtures of preceding Late Neolithic populations and a significant proportion of incoming steppe-related ancestry. We also detect a number of interesting outlier individuals which add to our understanding of the dynamics and regional nuances of population interactions in 3rd millennium B.C. central Europe.

It seems a very interesting presentation. Maybe we are not so far from solving the issue of R1b-L51


vAsiSTha said...

point me to mesopotamian 2 wheeled non war 'wagons' in this paper.
I will wait.

"Notes on the Wagons and Chariots in Ancient Mesopotamia"
https://journal.fi/store/article/view/50011/15042

also kindly explain the helmets, weapons, swords, daggers found along with the chariot. Thanks.

Archi said...

@vAsiSTha you can't read and understand scientific texts? Then read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot. Find here the "chariots" or horses in war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_Ur#/media/File:Standard_of_Ur_-_War.jpg

vAsiSTha said...

@archi

wiki articles. ok brv hahahaha

btw, the standard of UR pic shows no 2 wheeled non war 'wagon'. couldnt answer the Q about the helmets, swords and daggers excavated along with the sanauli chariot? too hard?

epoch said...

@Simon_W

"Well at least the fit is slightly better using something along the lines of Chad's theory instead of using Yamnaya_Samara"

Is that still the case in the Bronze Age samples?

Leron said...

@Archi There’s no reason why Eneolithic Balkan people couldn’t have been Indo-Europeanized. There’s many IE speakers around the world without a single drop of Steppe blood.

zardos said...

@Leron: Modern Colonialism is a completely different thing which you cant compare with whole bronze age populations language shifts.
Whats always a possibility is a constant decrease of the original speakers ancestry from one daughter culture to the next.
But even then a low amount is to be expected and one has to prove an unbroken chain of daughter cultures with decreasing levels.
A good example would be East Asian in Turkic speakers.

epoch said...

@Mammoth_Hunter

"In any case, It would be good to see the Netherlands characterised in detail, I suspect there is no absolute continuity there."

Well, what is interesting is that massive barrow alignments were continuously added to from SGC to Iron age. Now, that is not necessarily evidence for continuity - BB reburied in Megaliths - but the *addition* to such a structure does point to some sort of basic similarity in.. ideology, religion, cultural outlook, whatever.

zardos said...

The Netherlands had one of the longest periods with both independent HG and farmers beside Corded Ware.
The Vlaardingen Culture is quite remarkable and it would be great to have ancient DNA from them.
I don’t thing SGC was the main ancestor of steppe BB, but a lot is still possible.

Is the study on Bohemia available? I mean full text.

Archi said...

@Leron I clear wrote "here is not a single fact that connected the Proto-Indo-Europeans with the Balkans - neither linguistic nor archaeological, neither cultural nor genetic." Languages reflect culture, culture is reflected archaeologically, genomes spread, the Y chromosome spreads along with the expansion of its carriers. None of this is in the Balkan reality. The Balkan hypothesis is long dead because it has no positive evidence. I do not know any scientist who would seriously prove it, but many of them like the Balkans as you.

@vAsiSTha wiki for you because you can't read scientific texts.

"also kindly explain the helmets, weapons, swords, daggers" You can see that the wagons moved all the people including the leaders.
Vedic Indo-Aryans didn't know swords.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Archi

which ''scientists'' have proven your definitive claims ?
Are you a scientist ? What are your degrees ?

epoch said...

@Mammoth_Hunter

By the way, this is the alignment I was talking about:

https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/20381/05.pdf?sequence=10

The PDF is a chapter from this book:

https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/20381

vAsiSTha said...

"Vedic Indo-Aryans didn't know swords"

That's fantastic @archi. Helps support my claim that rig vedics lived much before 2000bc. Thanks lol

Archi said...

@vAsiSTha This suggests that you do not know anything about any topic. There were no swords in Central Asia, which is why the Vedic Aryans had no swords. The Vedic Aryans lived after the invention of the chariot (Sintashta) and after the saddling of the horse, but before the cavalry.
You are on the Rig Veda apparently know nothing at all and maybe even never heard of.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Simon_W,

Those Italian samples are modern. David added many new regions in Italy to his G25 PCA.

MOCKBA said...

Yes, Davidski, it would be awesome if you can recap Dravidian / Elam hypothesis in light of the new discoveries, which, at the first glance, show that the major component of the IVC ancestry came from the West, but not as far West as the mountains of Zagros?

The Elamite cradle of Susa is right in the middle of the Zagros, and may date back to 4000 BCE? The oldest Neolithic samples from there are modeled as an Iranian (EHG) / Anatolian Farmer mix, and the respective Iranian component is deeply divergent from the IVC source?

In the other hand, isn't there a hypothesis (Lazaridis) that the Iranian vs. Anatolian divergence is explained by an admixture with an older population, rather than by deeper phylogenetic split? Is it a plausible hypothesis, and can an apparent deep Iranian / IVC split be a consequence of an admixture with a pre-existing population?

And broader on the Dravidian ... what should we make of its wide spread in India's South? Is it a reasonable hypothesis that it may have spread with the Iranian-like component of the IVC? What does linguistic chronology tell?

Romulus said...

@Samuel Andrews

Every time you make a dumbass post here Dyeus AKA Zeus AKA Thor the "Lightning God" lets it rip:

https://www.facebook.com/severeweatherEU/posts/spectacular-lightning-storm-over-varna-bulgaria-on-july-22nd-thanks-to-clement-p/2288909834665438/

Archi said...

In a very low-quality genome Darra-i-Kur, as I thought, it's contaminated by the genomes of archaeologists. It was full of I1 and r1b and all sorts of dirt.

It looks like R2, so there was no sensation.

Leron said...

Now for the elephant in the room, no “Basal” involved in the formation of IVC?

Gaska said...

@Archi said-In a very low-quality genome Darra-i-Kur, as I thought, it's contaminated by the genomes of archaeologists. It was full of I1 and r1b and all sorts of dirt. It looks like R2, so there was no sensation.

Thank you Archi, mor good news

Slumbery said...

The only fitting two-way models were mixtures of a group related to herders from the western Zagros mountains of Iran and also to either Andamanese hunter-gatherers (73% ± 6% Iranian-related ancestry; p = 0.103 for overall model fit) or East Siberian hunter-gatherers (63% ± 6% Iranian-related ancestry; p = 0.24) (the fact that the latter two populations both fit reflects that they have the same phylogenetic relationship to the non-West Eurasian-related component of I6113 likely due to shared ancestry deeply in time).

Does anybody know what they call "East Siberian HG" there? I could not find that information anywhere in the article.

music lover said...

People in this group are confusing genetics, language and culture. As I see it, there are vast differences between the culture of the people on the Steppe and both the corded ware/bell beaker cultures of Eastern Europe, and the early vedic people of northwest India. In both cases, these people culturally/archeologically reflect local traditions. Furthermore, the expansion of Indo European within South Asia may have taken place at a much later time just like in Mediterranean Europe. We simply do not know. The only data we have from the Iron Age in south asia is from the Swat Valley and these individuals (who clearly have horses) have a female mediated steppe component and way too little of such ancestry. This corresponds with the rather low overall percentage of steppe ancestry in modern india today - it's a max of 25%. However, it is clear that on entering Europe, the steppe nomads made considerable demographic impact in a male biased way in pretty much every site that has been sampled thus far. However, they remained culturally European, but perhaps switched their language.

Andrzejewski said...

So Elamite and Dravidian aren’t related because the split happened before invention of agriculture pre-12,000BCE?

Andrzejewski said...

@music lover “However, they remained culturally European, but perhaps switched their language.”

Are you saying that the PIE originally from Eastern Europe were not “Europeans”?

EastPole said...

@music lover
„However, it is clear that on entering Europe, the steppe nomads made considerable demographic impact in a male biased way in pretty much every site that has been sampled thus far. However, they remained culturally European, but perhaps switched their language.”

I guess, you wanted to say that on entering Asia, te steppe nomads made considerable impact in a male biased way, however they remained culturally European, but perhaps switched their language.

No, they didn’t switch their language; read my posts above where I quote what is the most important result of this study which links genetic findings with what is known from linguistics: „The detection of genetic patterns that connect speakers of the Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic branches of Indo-European” which „provides a plausible genetic explanation for the linguistic similarities between the Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian subfamilies of Indo-European languages”

Archi said...

You have no represent how close the Indo-Europeans of that world were culturally, how close the ties were connections. Aryans and Central Europe changed synchronously and are very similar. This synchronous system transition from the burial rite of cremation, ktnatafes, synchronous spread of the chariot, the spread of domestic horses and horseman, sync potteries (roller pottery), the transition from sedentary to nomadic, etc.. Late Bronze age cultures of Central Europe and the Aryans were very similar, and the Dark ages (total destruction and egalitarianism) in Southern Europe that in South Asia has come at exactly the same time.
Such global connections have come since the time of Yamnaya, Afanasievo, and Corded Ware, when the same artifacts, ceramics and diseases appeared simultaneously.

Shaikorth said...

@Slumbery
ESHG = Shamanka_EN
Because it's more related to ANE than AASI is, the fit with it requires less Iranian-related ancestry (63% vs 73%) and has a higher p-value.

Matt said...

@Slumbery, yeah, what Shaikorth said, but in my case for the less that I reasoned it out as he has (correctly) and more that I went to Narasimhan's online data visualizer and set to all samples, and they appeared under that label :) (ESHG=Shamanka_N - see: https://imgur.com/a/ctIEokh for example).

(Still working out how to navigate this thing - I kind of want to find the "Fig S 4 Online Data Visualizer Tab 4 - All possible computations of f4-statistics" to plot things but don't seem to be able to trace it).

Srtmil said...

Culturally aryan you mean , you only need to read the iliad and oddyssey to know that the warrior ethos, their god, patriarchy.....transfered all across europe once they asented .

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Archi

Since you did not answer, I take it you have no background; and are simply a waste of oxygen;
Now here is what scientists have so far said abaout Anatolia & the Balkans. You're nonsense was also called out in couple of threads back by a trained Aegeanologist.

Mathieson ''No steppe migration to Anatolia via southeast Europe''

Lazaridis '' Such a migration would support the idea that Proto-Greek speakers29 formed the southern wing of a steppe intrusion of Indo-European speakers. Yet, the absence of ‘northern’ ancestry in the Bronze Age samples from Pisidia, where Indo-European languages were attested in antiquity, casts doubt on this genetic-linguistic association, with further sampling of ancient Anatolian speakers needed. ''

Damgaard ''Furthermore, it appears that the Indo-European Hittite language derived from Anatolia, not the steppes.''

You'll learn that Afansievo is irrelevant for PIE, or whatever it is you're yammering on about (one can barely understand you)

natsunoame said...

Andrews
Minoans spoke IE too.Linears A and B were decoded and have good parallels with specific runes and old tablets on Balkans and their sound values ​​are identical. The first script was created on the Balkans, why not and the first IE language!
You can be sure in one thing...the PIE can't be a synthetical language. Start from here and search.
Languages ​​in the world are of two types - synthetic and analytical. As development goes !!! from synthetism to analyticism. This is achieved through the influence of analytical language over synthetic language.
Human speech is the largest information code and cannot be tampered with because it is used by a great many media at any given time. The structure / grammar / language is one of the most durable components of speech. Major changes in grammar have taken millennia. Therefore, the structure / grammar / of the language most accurately determines the origin of a people and is the guarantor of the truth of other evidences.


JuanRivera said...

In case anyone forgets, Areni_C has Steppe Maykop admixture: Areni_C: (RUS_Darkveti_Meshoko+Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N+RUS_Steppe_Maykop+IRN_Hajji_Firuz, 2.081, RUS_Darkveti_Meshoko 14.17% Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N 35.83% RUS_Steppe_Maykop 23.33% IRN_Hajji_Firuz 26.67%). Also, Minoan_Lassithi lack that admixture (though Minoan_Odigitria_Low_Res has it).

JuanRivera said...

As about decipheement, it's actually far from resolved. For now, claims that Linear A and the Vinča script have been deciphered are as likely as those regarding the Indus script and Rongo-Rongo.

JuanRivera said...

*decipherment

self-consumer said...

@Sam

"You have a strange bias against your own people which is a mental illness which is typical for educated western Europeans and Americans."

I highly doubt that Chad is biased against his people.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

There is the well known African saying - ''"A wise man never knows all, only fools know everything."'

Davidski said...

@All

The interesting thing that no one's really picked up on, and has been totally missing from all of the papers to date, is that there's almost 100% genetic continuity in parts of Eastern Europe since the Eneolithic in terms of ancient ancestry components.

For example, Sredny Stog II overlaps heavily with modern Ukrainians, which means that very similar ratios of the same ancient components are still found in this part of Eastern Europe at least six thousand years later.

Pretty awesome stuff.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ music lover

''However, it is clear that on entering Europe, the steppe nomads made considerable demographic impact in a male biased way in pretty much every site that has been sampled thus far. However, they remained culturally European, but perhaps switched their language.''

Maybe at present maybe we should simply state - ''they imparted a major demographic impact''. The rest requires further elucidation. As ive outlined, this will not be born into fruition if some groups blanket all steppe groups into one umbrella

Andrzejewski said...

OT Can we model American Indians on the macro level as an admixture between MA1-ANE and Baikal_HG groups?

JuanRivera said...

Baikal_HGs are way later than Amerindians, plus they have Kolyma_Meso admixture (which is a cousin to Amerindian; and also Devils_Gate_Cave_N [which is to be expected], extra ANE and West_Siberia_N [which in addition to autosomally can be seen in the U5a and potential R1a seen in the Lokomotiv and Shamanka sites]). So, Baikal_HGs are likely to be a population of much more recent origin, plus they would have too much WHG anyways. Interestingly, Devils_Gate_Cave_N itself models quite good as Han+Kolyma_Meso, the latter component also seen in the D4 mtDNA.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Davidski,
"For example, Sredny Stog II overlaps heavily with modern Ukrainians, which means that very similar ratios of the same ancient components are still found in this part of Eastern Europe at least six thousand years later."

True....but not till 2600 BC Corded Ware did this basic makeup become widespread in central-Eastern Europe. Modern Slavs derive from multiple Bronze age Central-East European pops which when combined created something similar to Sredny Stog II. That doesn't mean pops similar to Sredny Stog continuously inhabited Ukraine from 4000 BC till the present.


Russia is not far from Latvia or Poland or Romania. Including Kurgan & hunter gatherer ancestry, overall technically Eastern Europeans especially Balts derive barely over 50% from Mesolithic Central/Eastern European pops. This kind of goes contrary to the idea Europe was formed by pops from different worlds.

Davidski said...

@All

I'm putting together a new map of ancient R1a. Yep, another one. LOL

What is the oldest R1a in the Central Asian ancient DNA record at the moment?

And when I say Central Asian, I mean east of the Urals, West of Mongolia, south of Siberia and north of Pakistan. See here...

Map of pre-Corded Ware culture (>2900 BCE) instances of Y-haplogroup R1a

epoch said...

@Mammoth_Hunter

At one point you claim:

"The issue is, a long line of ''Indo-Europeanists'' have simply repeated this story; but its been doubted by speciaalist archaeologists. But the latter are unknown to the average person/ linguist/ Harvard geneticist reading up on the matter."

Then all of a sudden what they actually say fits you bill and you state:"Now here is what scientists have so far said abaout Anatolia & the Balkans. " and you come up with a list of Harvard (and Danish) geneticists. Didn't you just say we shouldn't pay too much attention to them?

Mammoth_Hunter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Slumbery said...

Shaikorth & Matt

Thank you.

If it is indeed Shamanka_N (as opposed to let's say Devil's Gate) then it is actually somewhat admixed with ANE, not just closer to it by ancestry than AASI.

BTW, I played around with nMonte (not the right tool for this, but maybe a starting point) and Hotu HG possibly had this type of (AASI?) ancestry at some low level.

epoch said...

@Mammoth_Hunter

If you state that the data for Anatolia is so clear that even Damsgaard couldn't obfuscate much - your words - you can obviously state which sample should have had steppe admixture if the steppe theory was true but hasn't, and explain how that makes the evidence against the steppe hypothesis so clear.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Epoch
You don't really know what you're talking about.
Good luck with your research on the River Meuse; it sounds rivetting

epoch said...

@Mammoth_Hunter

"You don't really know what you're talking about.
Good luck with your research on the River Meuse; it sounds rivetting
"

So the data is clear, but when asked to elaborate we get this. I'll ask you again: What exactly is the data that so massively disproves the steppe origin of Anatolian? Which sample?

Davidski said...

@All

I've updated my West Eurasian PCA...

PCA plot

PCA datasheet

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Epoch
It’s not actually my contention that Anatolian is not from the steppe
Rather; my reply was to people of your ilk who claim that science “definitely backs” that it is.
The fact that you can’t understand basic premises and convolute facts is very strange to me. It’s not a very manly quality; which I guess is why you need to overcompensate ...

EastPole said...

David, there are plenty of books showing how close Slavic and Indo-Iranian cultures were, how they shared common religious vocabulary, and even Slavic names were preserved in Sanskrit:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-ml4ebQYA0dg/To7YsXI_PLI/AAAAAAAAAGA/D1z9xqb9bn4/s800/Lakha.jpg

http://www.vedamsbooks.com/no55377/cognate-words-sanskrit-russian-indu-lekha


All Vedic gods have Slavic etymology. Not one, not two, but all of them.

It is very interesting how it is explained in Polish history books:

https://i.postimg.cc/SRC9RW6Q/screenshot-3.png

https://books.google.pl/books?id=zDMUPAAACAAJ&dq=gieysztor&hl=pl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiG9dSr28DkAhXN4KQKHZrhDKMQ6AEIOTAD

They write that peculiar secularization of the Iranian pantheon by Proto-Slavs is astounding, as some names of the Iranian deities were deprived of mythological value precisely for their common use.
So Proto-Slavs took Iranian Vedic names of gods from some mythical Iranians an secularized them in such a way that these words became a core Slavic words. All of them are Slavic now, have Slavic etymology and are used in many ways as nouns, verbs, adjectives etc. For example Mitra > mir-(pokój,zgoda)>mil-(miły, miłość, miłować, etc.)

Some modern Indian scholars try to explain Rigveda in psychological terms i.e. names of gods were originally psychological functions, for example Sri Aurobindo.

To be honest, I don’t believe in such explanations. Proto-Indo-Iranian psychological terms became the names of gods and their original meaning forgotten, then Proto-Slavs borrowed those names of gods from Iranian Vedic tribes somewhere around Dnieper and turned them into common words with psychological meaning exactly as they were originally in proto-Indo-Iranian.
David, do you believe it? I think that the opposite story is much more probably, i.e. that Slavic psychological terms became names of gods in Vedic India. These words travelled from Eastern Europe to India, and not from India to Eastern Europe. This is the direction that genetics shows us as real.

Gaska said...

Bohemian paper- wanted to highlight

1- The detection of EHG ancestry in Late Neolithic from the Narva culture- This entry certainly had to be produced thanks to certain uniparental markers. Perhaps it is the key to the mystery of R1b-L51 because we already know that Baltic Countries are plagued with this lineage throughout the Mesolithic-Neolithic. In any case, I don't understand the reference to EHG, when the Baltic hunter-gatherers were 70% WHG. If L51 entered the Bohemian Neolithic, the arrival of the CWC (2,900 BC) meant the mixing of both cultures, in addition to a peaceful form (contiguous burials of individuals with and without steppe ancestry - Again NO conquests)-The formation of the BB culture was produced as a mixture of steppe ancestry and Late Neolithic, but the statement that they have found very interesting "outliers" is very important to know the origin of population movements (If they were Iberian, the migrations that we have said so many times that occurred were confirmed as has happened in Sicily, Morocco, northern Italy, Hungary.. ). Can't wait to see the results

2-It may happen that this EHg ancestry has nothing to do with R1b-L51 and that this marker was in the Central European CWC. I think this was not the case, but undoubtedly that mixture between CWC and BBc that geneticists have seen, means that anything could happen.

3-As it has happened many times, this paper may not clarify the situation in the end, hopefully this time we will be able to reach acceptable solutions for everyone.

+ Vk531- It seems that few people are paying enough attention to this outlier, I hope someone checks their BAM file when it is available. It may be a Scandinavian forager, or be related to some Neolithic culture of Germany, but its situation in the Arctic Pole makes me think that it used a sea route and this could only be done by a BB. To David's peace of mind, I have to admit that he could also be a CWC guy since we know that this culture also traveled by boat in Scandinavia. However, the absence of steppe ancestry in my opinion invalidates this possibility. In any case he is my hero to get where he arrived

Interesting times await us.

Archi said...

Science any of the Balkan hypothesis is not supported (in contrast to the unique Mammoth_Hunter).
Science does not see any evidence of the Anatolian hypothesis, but some scientists are still supporters of it.
It is impossible it did not test someone necessary to shout that they there are not.

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter
"You're nonsense was also called out in couple of threads back by a trained Aegeanologist."

Your nonsense. They wrote untruth. The thing is that they did not test those cultures, those places and those times that need to be associated with the migration of the Hittito-Luwians. They could not draw any conclusions without checking the necessary data.

Mathieson and Damgaard have not tested any Hittites. Lazaridis has not tested any Achaean, his Mycenaeans to Achaeans are irrelevant, they are all local slaves and the Minoan dynasty, but in Crete it tested man. He has incorrect data on archaeology, Proto-Greeks came from Babyno culture and their movement is clearly visible on genetic data.

Bulgaria Kairyaka Necropolis, Merichleri [I2163 / Merich2, individual N5] 1750-1625 calBCE (3400±30 BP, Beta-432796) M R1a1a1b2 [Z93]

But none of them is a supporter of your Balkan hypothesis, some are former supporters of the Anatolian hypothesis, and now the South Caucasian hypothesis, which is connected with the ideological worldview.

"You'll learn that Afansievo is irrelevant for PIE, or whatever it is you're yammering on about (one can barely understand you) "
It is your fantasies ignorant. You write the worst.

mzp1 said...

It looks like we may be reaching a point of diminishing returns for human population genetics to solve the IE urheimat question.

It is not sound to assume even large scale human migration always result in a language or cultural shift.

Large scale movements of steppe peoples into Corded Ware and from there into Sintashta, seem to be the mass migrations of worker, possibly even slave peoples into pre-established economic cultures. Corded Ware originated from SS which is not a steppe culture. And Sintashta seems related to Turan and BMAC in terms of the trade networks and settlement types.

Autosonmal DNA gives us mass, not elite movements generally, and Y-DNA HGs can become elite long after joining another linguistic and cultural group.

The most interesting question would be on the genesis of 'steppe culture' ie the nomadic, domesticated animal based economic system that allowed these people to make the steppe economolically viable.

This is key because pastoralism was the main lifestyle of the early IEs.

There is an assumption here that Euro steppe groups like Samara and Khvalynsk were the major players in the steppe economic culture at the time. But this is not backed by any real data as far as I knw.

We need to look at the genetic origins of steppe domesticates, especially cattle and sheep, as these are essential for this subsistence system that allowed for the development of uniform trade and culture in the region.

Davidski said...

@mzp1

Large scale movements of steppe peoples into Corded Ware and from there into Sintashta, seem to be the mass migrations of worker, possibly even slave peoples into pre-established economic cultures. Corded Ware originated from SS which is not a steppe culture.

Are you on some sort of medication or recreational drugs right now?

Aram said...

I was expecting to see Iran Neo like ancestry in India before any farming. Well it seems my expectations will be fulfilled.

As for PIE. EEF is mostly ANF plus some various level of WHG. If EEF is PIE then nothing forbidens to imagine that various ANFs were also PIE. Thus there is no reason to imagine any migration for the formation of Hittites.

Archi said...

@Aram
"As for PIE. EEF is mostly ANF plus some various level of WHG. If EEF is PIE then nothing forbidens to imagine that various ANFs were also PIE. Thus there is no reason to imagine any migration for the formation of Hittites."

No. Faith will always prevail over you. White is black, black is white, ideological worldview. If the data says otherwise, then much the worse for the data.

Davidski said...

@Archi

In your opinion how did Anatolian languages spread into Anatolia?

And what sort of ancestry linked to Indo-Europeans do you expect Hittite era samples to show when many more are sampled, including from elite graves?

mzp1 said...

I don't see a consensus here that Yamnaya is the origin of Corded Ware. Burial customs are different which do not point to a Yamnaya elite in CW.

Sintashta settlement types and industrialization puts it into the BMAC sphere of influence as these do not have steppe counterparts.

So we cannot assume the common (autosomnal) population in Yamna, CW and Sintashta were necessarily elites. Elite, dominant groups tend to be more conservative culturally and economically. Likely there were varying levels of social stratification and given the history of slavery in the steppe it is just as likely many in this population were subjucated, especially given their tendency to adopt new customs and ways of living relatively frequently.

Davidski said...

@mzp1

Quit talking out of your ass.

Plenty of Corded Ware and Sintashta burials have been excavated and most of these were elite burials.

Commoner burials are less likely to be noticed or even to survive, because most commoners were buried in simple, shallow graves and with few or no grave goods.

And Sintashta was obviously closely related to Eastern European cultures and populations, like Abashevo. It was an Eastern European culture in Central Asia.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Archi

''But none of them is a supporter of your Balkan hypothesis, some are former supporters of the Anatolian hypothesis, and now the South Caucasian hypothesis, which is connected with the ideological worldview.''

My ideaological view ? I could be a gun-toting red neck for all you know. In any case, I don't recall saying something is simple 'IE came from the Balkans''. Your inability think in more than 2 dimensions is astounding.

''Babyno culture and their movement is clearly visible on genetic data.''

Which is why Greeks have 1% R1a-Z93, 'Mr Science''. There's no modern scholar who links Myceneans with Babino culture.

Afansievo is an extinct culture. They got displaced by local Siberians; their story is a fascinating one, but wholly irrelevant for IE languages. Just accept the facts

Archi said...

@Davidski
"In your opinion how did Anatolian languages spread into Anatolia?"

Working hypothesis - the Usatovo culture further the Ezero culture.

"And what sort of ancestry linked to Indo-Europeans do you expect Hittite era samples to show when many more are sampled, including from elite graves?"

The Hittites have no elite graves - they were cremated (like other synchronous Indo-Europeans). It is mentioned that the first Hittite kings were buried in kurgans, though it is unclear by inhumation or cremation, but no such kurgan was found and is unlikely to be found. Go find a kurgan like this if it's literally alone. Hittite society was based on egalitarian principles, it was elitism shown towards the conquered nations (king of Hatti and other).

@mzp1
"I don't see a consensus here that Yamnaya is the origin of Corded Ware. Burial customs are different which do not point to a Yamnaya elite in CW."

In Yamnaya elites have nothing. All burials are very poor. The size of the mounds was determined only by the age of the buried Patriarch and, accordingly, the size of the genus.

Sredniy Stog II is pure the steppe culture from Don river.

"Sintashta settlement types and industrialization puts it into the BMAC sphere of influence as these do not have steppe counterparts."

No, Sintashta have not to BMAC nothing relation. Sintashta has prototypes in Central Europe - north Balkan-Carpation region.

"So we cannot assume the common (autosomnal) population in Yamna, CW and Sintashta were necessarily elites."
They weren't the elite because the elite didn't exist in them.

"Likely there were varying levels of social stratification and given the history of slavery in the steppe it is just as likely many in this population were subjucated, especially given their tendency to adopt new customs and ways of living relatively frequently."

What are you talking about? There was no slavery in the steppe neither of the Bronze age nor in earlier times. This is known as two and two. Nothing to fantasize about.

Balaji said...

The finding that the “Iranian-related” ancestry in India was not due to the migration of Iranian agriculturalists is not all surprising to me. It has been my expectation and I happy to see it confirmed. I posted the following comment on bioRxiv last year in response to Narasimhan et al.

“You seem to be operating under the assumption that only AASI was present since the Pleistocene in the Indian Subcontinent and that any “West Eurasian” ancestry must be from migrations in the last few thousand years. But this is not true. Kivisild et al. in 1999 published a paper titled “Deep common ancestry of Indian and western-Eurasian mitochondrial lineages”. Metspalu et al .(https://bmcgenet.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2156-5-263) showed that “South- and West Asian-specific sub-branches of haplogroup U7 predate the last glacial maximum”. Therefore it was not Iranian agriculturalists who brought U7 to the Subcontinent.”

I have long believed that population structure had developed in the Pleistocene in the Indian Subcontinent with “ASI” to the east and south (the region that is now India) and “ANI” to the north and west (the region that is now Pakistan) and that these populations have been isolated by distance and geographic barriers. Certainly the Subcontinent is large enough to support such structure. This paper now confirms it.

Now the authors are assuming that until 3500-4000 years ago, there was only “Indus_Periphery-related” and “AHG-related” ancestry in the Subcontinent. They invoke an additional intrusive “Central_Steppe_MLBA” component to model present-day populations. I propose an alternative hypothesis. Suppose that there was structure within Pakistan, with “Indus_Periphery_West-related” being in the southern part of and “Indus_Periphery_North-related” being in the northern mountainous part of Pakistan. This “Indus_Periphery_North-related” would by ANE-rich. There would have be a cline in ANE from north to south in Pakistan. It should be possible to model present-day populations quite well as a combination of “Indus_Periphery_West-related”, “AHG-related” and “Indus_Periphery-North_related”.

I have been able to identify several genomes published by Narasimhan et al. which can qualify as “Indus_Periphery_North-related”. From the 2018 pre-print, we have Sarazm_EN and Gonur1_BA_o. Both of these show high allele sharing with Birhor (Figure S3.10 of the Supplement) and therefore are likely to have been Out-of-India migrants. They have relatively high ANE and relatively low Anatolia_N. From the 2019 Narasimhan paper, we have Aigyrzhal_BA which has high allele sharing with AHG (Figure S 19 of the Supplement). This sample from the IAMC (Inner Asian Mountain Corridor) in Krygyzstan also has high ANE and low Anatolia_N.

A population like Aigryzhal_BA a couple of millennia earlier could have been pastoralists who migrated north with their flocks along the IAMC, reached the steppe, mixed with EEHG there and formed the Yamnaya and Afansievo cultures.

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter 'Your inability think in more than 2 dimensions is astounding."

Learn to read, ignoramus without brains.

"There's no modern scholar who links Myceneans with Babino culture."

Lie.

"Afansievo is an extinct culture. They got displaced by local Siberians; their story is a fascinating one, but wholly irrelevant for IE languages. Just accept the facts"

Ignoramus. Afansievo always associated with the proto-Tocharians (IE!), this hypothesis will not go away.

You are your fantasies not knowing about subjects about which you write anything.

JuanRivera said...

Except that the population which admixed with EHG and Ukraine_N is CHG-like (like Vonyuchka and Progress), plus Khvalynsk, Sredny Stog II and Dereivka already have elevated CHG-like ancestry, and Samara_HG, Ukraine_N and Ukraine_Meso all have slightly elevated CHG-like ancestry relative to Sidelkino_HG (then, Sidelkino_HG itself has some CHG-like ancestry, while Karelia_HG has somewhat less CHG-like ancestry than Sidelkino_HG, but still some; with all of that, it explains nicely why EHG and Ukrainian HGs [and West Siberian HGs] don't exactly fit as AfontovaGora3+WHG).

Davidski said...

@Balaji

A population like Aigryzhal_BA a couple of millennia earlier could have been pastoralists who migrated north with their flocks along the IAMC, reached the steppe, mixed with EEHG there and formed the Yamnaya and Afansievo cultures.

You can't get Yamnaya and Afanasievo from a mixture like that. It's impossible.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Archi

'' the Usatovo culture further the Ezero culture.''

Which are EEF heavy cultures from the East Balkans. Ezero will G2a, E-V13 etc

JuanRivera said...

I have to agree that Afanasievo got mostly replaced. While it may reach ~15% on some places of Central Asia, nowhere it's above ~30%, and its principal descendant Okunevo got itself replaced.

JuanRivera said...

On the Okunevo subject, when modeled as Afanasievo+Botai+Kolyma_Meso+Shamanka_N, even there Afanasievo doesn't reach 30%, hence the nowhere above ~30% statement.

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter
Why did you write "will"? Because in your opinion everything is known, so you can argue. There will be see, but now from a completely not tested the region and time we have

Croatia Starcevo_EN_outlier Beli Manastir-Popova zemlja 4725 2884-2666 calBCE (4176±28 BP, BRAMS-1304) M R1b1a1a2a2

- that can be considered as Hittite-Luwian.


Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Juan

''I have to agree that Afanasievo got mostly replaced. While it may reach ~15% on some places of Central Asia, nowhere it's above ~30%, and its principal descendant Okunevo got itself replaced.''

And isn't that interesting ? Not only is it correct, but it also enables to learn about other people in Eurasia.

JuanRivera said...

Models of Western Siberia show increasing contributions of Shamanka_N with time, with Tyumen_HG having the least of it, while Botai has the most of it. Tyumen_HG is also mostly ANE, and its EHG ancestry is Sidelkino-like, while Sosonivoy_HG is Tyumen_HG+Samara_HG+Shamanka_N. With Botai we also see a rebound of ANE ancestry.

JuanRivera said...

Though, given that Tyumen_HG is mostly ANE, that extra ANE ancestry in Botai is likely extra Tyumen_HG.

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter "Its already gone." Its already gone only in your personal imagination. The Tarim mummies are aged 4000-4500 years ago.

Balkan fantasy has always been dead and dead now and in the future. Only seriously sick people from the crazy freak Klyosov her delusional.

zardos said...

@Mammoth_Hunter: "Which are EEF heavy cultures from the East Balkans. Ezero will G2a, E-V13 etc"

First, the Balkan cultures which show influences from the steppe are unlikely to be completely replaced yDNA wise, but will indeed most likely show a lot of Neolithic/Copper Age/SEE lineages. But it will suffice if there is a steppe influence, especially, in the upper class burials.

Second, what does "will" mean, afaik there are no samples taken from Ezero yet, or are there? So this is your speculation and no argument for now.

Desdichado said...

Are there samples that are definitely Elamite? I'm curious about the old somewhat speculative theory of an Elamo-Dravidian continuum and the Harappans place therein. It kind of sounds like this IVC sample would not support it, but I'm not very familiar with the Iranian ancient DNA evidence from the time period.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Zardos

''First, the Balkan cultures which show influences from the steppe are unlikely to be completely replaced yDNA wise, but will indeed most likely show a lot of Neolithic/Copper Age/SEE lineages. But it will suffice if there is a steppe influence, especially, in the upper class burials.''

Of course therell be steppe admixture. Steppe also have MNE admixture. By the time IE really began to expand, they had already mixed significantly.
And there are other groups relevant for the trajectory too.
Well, there are '''upper class burials'' - the barrows in Bulgaria, etc.

''Ezero yet, or are there? So this is your speculation and no argument for now.''

We already have aDNA from southeastern Europe; and we also have DNA from modern Europe. hence, there's not much speculation involved. For example; the Yamnaya in Bulgaria was I2a2a. Bulgaria MLBA was R1a-Z93. Both are virtually absent in SEE modern
So there's something odd there, if we go by your story.
Hence, the funny thing is, you don't really have a clue what you're talking about. Its just hot air all around. Did you guys all eat the same thing ?

zardos said...

@Mammoth: You seem to be provocative for the sake of it. That's unpleasant, because I just want to exchange arguments which should be factual or at least logical.

Admixture is one thing, male lineages and dominance another.

"We already have aDNA from southeastern Europe"

But not enough from the critical cultures/ancient populations.

"the Yamnaya in Bulgaria was I2a2a. Bulgaria MLBA was R1a-Z93. Both are virtually absent in SEE modern"

If you mind, population continuity is rare, as you should know by now. And some elites which brought a language which doesn't exist any more might have died out long time ago. What has this modern DNA to do with the spread of Anatolian languages?

We know from history how many people controlled the area of Bulgaria at different times, so it would be a wonder if the exact same elite families would still be as widespread today as they might have been then. Probably they were gone just some hundred years later already.

So modern DNA tells you sh*t about what happened in early Bronze Age there. Better come up with something useful.

Archi said...

"We already have aDNA from southeastern Europe; and we also have DNA from modern Europe. hence, there's not much speculation involved. For example; the Yamnaya in Bulgaria was I2a2a. Bulgaria MLBA was R1a-Z93. Both are virtually absent in SEE modern
So there's something odd there, if we go by your story.
Hence, the funny thing is, you don't really have a clue what you're talking about. Its just hot air all around. Did you guys all eat the same thing ?"

The logic of this person worse. Contradicts himself and still someone he is trying to teach.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Archi

''Croatia Starcevo_EN_outlier Beli Manastir-Popova zemlja 4725 2884-2666 calBCE (4176±28 BP, BRAMS-1304) M R1b1a1a2a2''

Mr Science; that sample is not Starcevo; its from Vucedol culture.
Take an enquiry about the elite status of the burial. I presume you've read the supplement ?

epoch said...

@Mammoth_Hunter

BUL10 is an Ezero sample and one of the EBA samples showing steppe admixture in Mathieson 2018.

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter It is so named in Reich's newer document. Most importantly he was outlier; culture is not given in the description of Mathieson there is only "(Starčevo
and Sopot cultures)", it is only in the table at the time of course Vucedol more correct.

"Take an enquiry about the elite status of the burial." Your elitism considerations don't matter.

That the kurgans were not from north in the territory of Ezero culture see https://www.dailysabah.com/istanbul/2016/05/16/rare-5000-year-old-kurgan-type-tumulus-from-the-bronze-age-unearthed-in-istanbul

Angantyr said...

@Gaska

+ Vk531- It seems that few people are paying enough attention to this outlier, I hope someone checks their BAM file when it is available. It may be a Scandinavian forager, or be related to some Neolithic culture of Germany, but its situation in the Arctic Pole makes me think that it used a sea route and this could only be done by a BB. To David's peace of mind, I have to admit that he could also be a CWC guy since we know that this culture also traveled by boat in Scandinavia. However, the absence of steppe ancestry in my opinion invalidates this possibility. In any case he is my hero to get where he arrived

Take a look at where he sits in the plots in figure 2 of the Viking preprint. There's not much if any EEF ancestry in him.

vAsiSTha said...

@samuel Andrews
"They didn't use more advanced weapons like swords or chariots because those didn't exist in the Corded Ware period.

The main god of the Rig Veda, Indra, then looks like a Bronze age version of Thor/Pernun. He had more advanced weapons: Chariot."

The first description of Lord Indras Vajra in the RV is that it is made out of human bones (of sage dadhichi). Not high tech stuff.

Archi said...

Indra has already saddled his horse for this he is praised. For the Vedic Aryans this happened very recently, and they still ride on the chariots and the most common weapon they have is the vajra, but no swords. Vajra is an ancient cross between hammer, axe and trident using by ancient Trita.
In all the southern cultures, the sequence was reversed, swords appeared before the chariots.

Gaska said...

@Argantyr said- Gaska-Take a look at where he sits in the plots in figure 2 of the Viking preprint. There's not much if any EEF ancestry in him.

I say that someone has to check their BAM File because of its age it could be L51/P312 etc (who knows?) Regarding his ancestry, I know that the steppes are far far far away, which makes him much more interesting. This together with the possible relationship between Narva Culture and the Bohemian Late Neolithic, can indicate that Baltic R1b hunters-gatherers, mixed, migrated or were pushed westward by the CWC. And it would be a fairly sensible explanation to understand the explosion of this lineage in Central and Western Europe (2.600-2.000 BC)-

Gaska said...


Obviously, if he doesn't have anything from EEF, then he can't be a BB or a Corded Ware outlier exploring the Arctic, and we should be talking only about SHGs.

vAsiSTha said...

@archi can you please kindly shut up. R

1.42.6 mentions the sword (hiranya asi - golden sword, could actually be a reference to swords made of copper). Yajur Veda is full of sword references.

Archi said...

"vAsiSTha " can you please kindly shut up. R

1.42.6 mentions the sword (hiranya asi - golden sword, could actually be a reference to swords made of copper)."
Shut up yourself. You disgraced your layman to deceive. asi is the lie.

rv01.042.06 ...hiraṇyavāśīmattama...
Nun mach uns die Siegespreise leicht zu gewinnen, der du alle Glücksgüter hast, du erster Träger des goldenen Beils!

vā́śī - a sharp or pointed knife or a kind of axe, adze, chisel (esp. as the weapon of agni or the maruts , and the instrument of the ṛbhus, while the paraśu or axe is that of tvaṣṭṛ), no sword.

así is a sacred knife for animal sacrifice and ritual fighting, in this form it is used in Yajurveda (Yajurveda was after RigVeda). Later this word came to mean the iron sword-scimitar, exactly iron.

postneo said...

The Vagheesh, Reich show extra steppe MLBA in modern Indians A lot of it must be due to central asians with Andronovo like ancestry from the IAMC. This along with Afghanistan was part of the greater Indo-sphere during the Buddhist Era. There are accounts of such assimilation.
Later invasions during the Muslim era were also from here but would not have impacted caste populations.

EastPole said...

@vAsiSTha

„The first description of Lord Indras Vajra in the RV is that it is made out of human bones (of sage dadhichi). Not high tech stuff.”

It is a metaphor, you don’t understand RV.

Basant Kumar Ganguly describes your interpretation as childish:

https://i.postimg.cc/sDHhz5vW/screenshot-4.png

https://archive.org/details/TheRigvedaSamhitaVol1ByBasantKumarGanguly/page/n4

R.L. Kashyap gives followiing definition:

https://i.postimg.cc/v8V9W0HZ/dadhyanc.jpg

https://www.amazon.com/Semantics-Rig-Veda-R-L-Kashyap/dp/8179940497

Problem with Rigveda is that religious poetry can’t be properly understood without the knowedge of its background. But nothing older exists. So the only solution is to look for traces of common origin in Eastern Europe. The same problem is with Greek philosophy which was influence by Orphico-Pythagorean mystery cults which have Eastern European Hyperborean origin. However we can put together what is common in Vedic, Slavic and Hellenic myths, meaphors and symbols and understand it better by comparative studies.
@vAsiSTha

„The first description of Lord Indras Vajra in the RV is that it is made out of human bones (of sage dadhichi). Not high tech stuff.”

It is a metaphor, you don’t understand RV.

Basant Kumar Ganguly describes your interpretation as childish:

https://i.postimg.cc/sDHhz5vW/screenshot-4.png

https://archive.org/details/TheRigvedaSamhitaVol1ByBasantKumarGanguly/page/n4

R.L. Kashyap gives followiing definition:

https://i.postimg.cc/v8V9W0HZ/dadhyanc.jpg

https://www.amazon.com/Semantics-Rig-Veda-R-L-Kashyap/dp/8179940497

Problem with Rigveda is that religious poetry can’t be properly understood without the knowedge of its background. But nothing older exists. So the only solution is to look for traces of common origin in Eastern Europe. The same problem is with Greek philosophy which was influence by Orphico-Pythagorean mystery cults which have Eastern European Hyperborean origin. However we can put together what is common in Vedic, Slavic and Hellenic myths, meaphors and symbols and understand it better by comparative studies.
When Heraclitus says in his fragment 64 that „Keraunos steers all things”, he does not mean only that Keraunos, which etymologically is Slavic Perunos, ie. thunderbolt, is that kind of sacred fire which causes only lightning in the atmosphere, but most important it is the lighting in your mind, illumination, giver of sacred knowledge. The same with vajra wielded by the god Indra.

Matt said...

@David, thanks the West Eurasia PCA data.

Looking at it through the South-Central Asia+Steppe subsets, I do find I'm still quite skeptical of the paper's model to fit Swat_IA and its outliers at least as Steppe_MLBA+two points on the Indus_Periphery line (e.g. as an admix of point 1) Steppe_MLBA+Indus_Periphery_West and point 2) on the Indus_Periphery_West to AHG cline - a lot to pin on "Indus_Periphery_West").

It looks to me more like TKM_IA (a historically earlier, but genomically identical individual) would fit slightly better with a point on Indus_Periphery than Central_Steppe_MLBA.

But I must admit that in dimensions that can distinguish between these possibilities, the Swat populations are quite the diffuse cloud, rather than clearly pointing to TKM_IA or Steppe_MLBA, and it's only obvious that PAK_Saidu_Sharif_H:I6893 doesn't fit with TKM_IA, while the others are hard to choose between (there's probably some slight degree to which sample groups labelled _H or _MA rather than _IA tend to lean increasingly towards steppe though).

Archi said...

Slavic Perun and Greek κεραυνός "thunderbolt" < κεραΐζω "ruin" of course not etymologically related, the last word etymologically is connected with old.-ind. c̨r̥ṇā́ti "crushes".
Do not search fantastic etymological connections where they are not.
Vajra is a weapon of the ancient god Trita "third/triad", the predecessor of Indo-Aryan Indra. He taught him to use it. About all there bones is of course a metaphor.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Archi

First you claim - M269 in Croatia (?!) is linked to Hittites because '' it was elitism shown towards the conquered nations (king of Hatti and other).''
Naturally, your claims are wholly vacuous; and upon realization that the M269 in Vucerdol is a dead commoner you claim '' Your elitism considerations don't matter.''


''That the kurgans were not from north in the territory of Ezero culture s''

I mentioned that. But learn this again - I2a2a1 is irrelevant. Yamnaya got removed from Balkans - '' Ezero A and B1 material culture and inhabiting tell sites, and the pastoralists using Yamnaya material culture that were living in the wider landscapes around. However this situation changes in the second quarter of the 3rd millennium when Yamnaya type kurgans and burials sharply diminish in numbers, and Ezero Tell sites expand
regionally and locally. ''

Ezero is different, Carnavoda is different, Usatavo are different.
So here's the issue - you as with Zardos; make baseless claims. You don't understand genetics nor archaeology nor anthropology. You're both mythologists in a world of make-believe; and the problem is you're delusional enough to belive yourself

EastPole said...

@Archi

„Slavic Perun and Greek κεραυνός "thunderbolt" < κεραΐζω "ruin" of course not etymologically related, the last word etymologically is connected with old.-ind. c̨r̥ṇā́ti "crushes".
Do not search fantastic etymological connections where they are not. „

Well, a lot of knowlegable people think Slavic ‘perun’ and Greek ‘keraunos’ are etymologically related. So you should learn it too if you don’t want to be considered as not very knowlegable by others:

https://i.postimg.cc/dQGfWPq7/screenshot-5.png

https://books.google.pl/books?id=7_plIzxbd0AC&printsec=frontcover&hl=pl#v=onepage&q=keraunos&f=false

https://i.postimg.cc/6p1w9J4W/screenshot-6.png

https://books.google.pl/books?id=ZXrJA_5LKlYC&pg=PA244&lpg=PA244&dq=keraunos+perun&source=bl&ots=Wdzxln71jo&sig=ACfU3U34zANp6o6MuIRfTc-vY-GrzCo2VQ&hl=pl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjA7Y3BncLkAhWBK1AKHcBsByEQ6AEwB3oECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=keraunos%20perun&f=false

https://i.postimg.cc/hGqsQhdp/screenshot-7.png

https://books.google.pl/books?id=Er1_CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA285&lpg=PA285&dq=keraunos+perun&source=bl&ots=usGy1pSu7S&sig=ACfU3U0yshDoRcBIuz8I-CXX8eYmDI02ng&hl=pl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjA7Y3BncLkAhWBK1AKHcBsByEQ6AEwBXoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=keraunos%20perun&f=false

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter "First you claim - M269 in Croatia (?!) is linked to Hittites because '' it was elitism shown towards the conquered nations (king of Hatti and other).''
Naturally, your claims are wholly vacuous; and upon realization that the M269 in Vucerdol is a dead commoner you claim '' Your elitism considerations don't matter.''"

Learn to read and don't lie liar. About the nature of the burial nothing is written, we do not have the necessary data of the required cultures, you're on the brazen claim that since they do not tested, then there can not be proto-Hittites.
I wrote that the Hittites were egalitarianism in burial places like the Yamnaya culture people and so on. They buried and behaved towards each other as equals, but towards other peoples they behaved like an elitist, but in burials it had no effect.

"So here's the issue - you as with Zardos; make baseless claims. You don't understand genetics nor archaeology nor anthropology. You're both mythologists in a world of make-believe; and the problem is you're delusional enough to belive yourself "

You're a shameful liar, disgraced you've been carrying here all wrong. You've shown that you're a screamer who knows nothing about archaeology, genetics, and anthropology, and that's a fact. Mr. Klyosovhood - in your style perfectly obvious that you are mad Klyosov. That is such a crazy style of eternal lies and cry to spread their myth common to these stupid freaks.

Mammoth_Hunter said...

Haha . Klyosov ? Archi - check yourself in for Investigations

Archi said...

@zardos
"Well, a lot of knowlegable people think Slavic ‘perun’ and Greek ‘keraunos’ are etymologically related. So you should learn it too"

I know about these outdated assumptions, all of them have long been disproved. They are reprinted by people not interested in scientific linguistics.

Archi said...

@Mammoth_Hunter "Science is an oxymoron to you & Zardos. ''Indo -Europeanist'' psuedo-scholars . You should write for JIES & other pseudoscience with David Anthony"

You've only been fantasizing and lying and raving, and you haven't written a single useful message without nonsense. All your posts comes down to personal showdowns because in addition to them you have nothing to write anything valuable. Stop it!

Mammoth_Hunter said...

@ Epoch

''BUL10 is an Ezero sample and one of the EBA samples showing steppe admixture in Mathieson 2018.''

Yes Im aware, thanks. So we have some minor steppe ancestry; nobody said the contrary. Sintashta has even more EEF.
So what does that inform you ?

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 536   Newer› Newest»