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

480 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   401 – 480 of 480
Simon_W said...

@Mammoth_Hunter

"BTW your calculations are wrong. Minoans actually have less ABA ancestry than Myceneans"

No, definitely not according to the Global25/nMonte method:

[1] "distance%=2.0287"

GRC_Minoan_Lassithi

Barcin_N,58.7
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,29.8
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,11.5
Yamnaya_Samara,0
WHG,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

[1] "distance%=1.8477"

GRC_Mycenaean

Barcin_N,51.4
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,20.9
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,13.9
Yamnaya_Samara,11.6
Yoruba,0.9
Ganj_Dareh_N,0.8
Han,0.3
WHG,0.2
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0

Simon_W said...

Only using very "ultimate" sources, Mycenaeans get more CHG than Minoans:

[1] "distance%=2.214"

GRC_Minoan_Lassithi

Barcin_N,86.7
GEO_CHG,13.3
WHG,0
RUS_Samara_HG,0

[1] "distance%=2.5227"

GRC_Mycenaean

Barcin_N,76.4
GEO_CHG,17.2
RUS_Samara_HG,6.4
WHG,0

But this model makes no difference between CHG from the Steppe and actual ABA from Anatolia.

Simon_W said...

But let's take a look at Krepost_N, since that individual figures prominently in Chad's suggestion:

[1] "distance%=3.0276"

BGR_Krepost_N

Barcin_N,53.7
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,33
Yamnaya_Samara,5.6
Ganj_Dareh_N,3.9
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,2.7
Han,1.1
WHG,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Yoruba,0

It's interesting, this individual does have a strong ABA-like admixture. It's not ABA, because there was no Bronze Age at that time, but it's very much like ABA-admixture. But Krepost_N is a single individual, and in general, as I've shown in my previous models, ABA-like ancestry is flimsy to nonexistent in the Balkans prior to the EBA. He or she may have been an unusual exotic foreigner.

Simon_W said...

BGR_N is a sample of 4 dating to the 6th Millennium BC. No ABA, although you might suspect a minimal trace of it in the 0.7% "Yamnaya".

[1] "distance%=1.8604"

BGR_N

Barcin_N,96.8
WHG,2.5
Yamnaya_Samara,0.7
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,0
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

Simon_W said...

It's clear that Barcin_N + EHG doesn't produce a Yamnaya-like signal. So if there wasn't enough ABA-like ancestry in early Neolithic SEE, it might have come somewhat later. But it makes sense checking this hypothesis with more or less contemporaneous, late Neolithic or Chalcolithic Northwestern Anatolians instead of using early Bronze Age central and Southwestern Anatolians.

And indeed, the fits I obtain using Kum6, Barcin_C and Dereivka are better than when using ABA and Yamnaya:

[1] "distance%=4.4632"

UKR_Trypillia

Barcin_N,74.5
UKR_Dereivka_I_En1,16.9
WHG,8.6
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0
UKR_Dereivka_I_En2,0
Anatolia_Kumtepe_N:kum6,0
Anatolia_Barcin_C:I1584,0

[1] "distance%=4.8538"

BGR_Varna_En3

UKR_Dereivka_I_En2,62.5
Anatolia_Kumtepe_N:kum6,13
Anatolia_Barcin_C:I1584,10.8
Barcin_N,8.4
UKR_Dereivka_I_En1,5.3
WHG,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

[1] "distance%=1.8895"

BGR_Varna_En2

Barcin_N,79.6
UKR_Dereivka_I_En2,17.8
WHG,2.6
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0
UKR_Dereivka_I_En1,0
Anatolia_Kumtepe_N:kum6,0
Anatolia_Barcin_C:I1584,0

vs.:

[1] "distance%=4.5613"

UKR_Trypillia

Barcin_N,77
WHG,14.9
Yamnaya_Samara,8.1
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,0
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

[1] "distance%=5.3034"

BGR_Varna_En3

Yamnaya_Samara,46.4
Barcin_N,42.9
WHG,10.7
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,0
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

[1] "distance%=2.1216"

BGR_Varna_En2

Barcin_N,83.9
Yamnaya_Samara,9.1
WHG,7
Anatolia_EBA_Isparta,0
Anatolia_EBA_Ovaoren,0
Ganj_Dareh_N,0
Natufian,0
Morocco_Iberomaurusian,0
Han,0
Yoruba,0

However, only Varna_En3 shows some later Northwest Anatolian ancestry, while the other 2 tested samples just profit from the inclusion of Dereivka instead of Yamnaya.

M.H. _82 said...

@ Simon

Don't blame nMonte. The error lies with you :)
Your set up is problematic - you include no LN Greek samples & no Balkan Eneolithic-like samples; hence your results are too distant-based to show anything relevant

As can be seen, Myceneans pack more ABA ancestry than Minoans; suggesting that Minoans might be predominantly of ''local'' origin.

''But let's take a look at Krepost_N, since that individual figures prominently in Chad's suggestion:''

Again, a poor set up. You're using Anatolia EBA to make inferences about a sample from 5000 BC. The Krepost- & Greece_Pelo Outlier samples actually lie on different clines from Anatolia BA samples. It's wrong to make inferences about each other from them


All in all, this is a highly complex & merging field. You need to ''walk before you can run'' - anyone can clown around with online programmes, but making sense requires deep understanding of multiple factors. Here's to some humility.

vAsiSTha said...

http://www.ijarch.org/Admin/Articles/9-Note%2520on%2520Chariots.pdf

Archaeologist's Notes on the chariot burial in sanauli, N India, for those interested

Davidski said...

@vAsiSTha

The paper looks like nonsense. There aren't any radiocarbon dates in it, just some claims that chariots were being used in India as early as 2,000 BC.

And your link doesn't work. This is the correct link...

http://www.ijarch.org/Admin/Articles/9-Note on Chariots.pdf

Anonymous said...

The OCP is a culture of the 2nd Millennium BC, its late stage falls at the end of the 2nd Millennium BC. Its beginning falls at the late Harappan, then it develops independently. Allegedly the "chariot" appear at the end of OCP, that is, at the end of the 2nd Millennium BC.

EastPole said...

David, I am still under the impression of this very clear statement from the Narasimhan et al. paper:

“The Steppe ancestry in South Asia has the same profile as that in Bronze Age Eastern Europe, tracking a movement of people that affected both regions and that likely spread the distinctive features shared between Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic languages.”

Using your PCA I plotted modern Slavic populations together with MLBA populations:

https://i.postimg.cc/3xkWW9Qr/slav-MLBA-Asia12a.png

Some of those MLBA samples are within modern Slavic range, they intersect especially with Russians. Sintashta has 6 such samples, Srubnaya 1, plus Poltavka_o and Petrovka. Samples from Uzbekistan, Kazachstan and Tajikistan MLBA are also very close.
Ugro-Finnic Vespians and Mordowians are also very close. They most likely also came from CWC. I plotted CWC without outliers.
It is also true in other dimensions:

https://i.postimg.cc/3W54TvWC/slav-MLBA13-Asia.png

https://i.postimg.cc/nhZ8shDd/slav-MLBA23-Asia.png

David, I asked you earlier in this tread about the origin of some words with religious and psychological meaning which Slavs share with Indo-Iranians and which clearly have Slavic etymology. Do you think they went to India or came from India?

vAsiSTha said...

@davidski

Thanks for correcting the link.

Don't worry, the radiocarbon dates will be out soon. Don't expect anything later than 2000bc as all the previous Ochre Coloured pottery artefacts have been carbon dated between 4000 and 2000bc. http://www.ijarch.org/Admin/Articles/4Aligarh%20&%20Hathras.pdf

Anonymous said...

Nonsense, the OCP culture has moved from the North-West to the Ganges, and the previous burials on the Ganges have nothing to do with the OCP. And there is nothing to fantasize about OCP in the Paleolithic. OCP is replaced by early Iron age cultures. The Indians always have astronomical size dates of Kali Yuga that no one considers scientific. Something similar to a two-wheeled cart was found at the end of the OCP culture.

vAsiSTha said...

@archi

".It appears in the
light of the dates of Jhinjhana(TL date 2650 B.C.), Lal Quila, (TL date 2030 B.C.), AtranjikheraTL date
2680B.C.),
56Hulas (six calibrated carbon dates 3318B.C.,3231B.C.,3181B.C.,3159B.C.,3139B.C.,
2468B.C.)
57and Bhagwanpura[TL dates for early phase 4868(± - ±12% ) BP,4141(±12% - ±15%) BP,
5460(± - ±15%) BP,4696(±3% - ±17%) BP],
58that some of the sites of the so-called degenerate phase
predate the M.H., some of them run contemporary to it and some survive them."

All these are places were OCP was excavated. All the dates are using thermoluminescence (TL) on the OCP pottery.

Jhinjhana (thermoluminescense dated to 2650bc) is actually just 50 km north of Sanauli where the chariots were found along with the OCP pottery, coffins and weapons.


Anonymous said...

Thermoluminescent dating is uncalibrated, their accuracy is unknown. Distances don't matter.
Those early dates on the Upper Ganga are irrelevant to the OCP.

Most importantly, that cart was found at the end of the OCP and may be related to the IA BRW.

vAsiSTha said...

Yeah, the most elaborate warrior burial with the most elaborate and expensive coffin ever found in the region (with copper covering and intricate artwork, etc) along with weapons, dagger, shield, helmet - IS GOING TO BE BURIED NEXT TO 2 CHARIOTS, NOT 2 CARTS.

The OCP site called hulas with OCP has been carbon dated to around 3000bc, not using TL. This site is 90km from sinauli.

Niraj Rai is soon coming out with dna evidence of presence of horses in mature harappa, acc to his Jan tweet. Just give up already.

Anonymous said...

Don't talk nonsense, they're not chariots at all, they're just carts.

"Its wheels are solid and studded with
triangular pieces of copper
(Fig: 04). The light frame of the carriage has a curved chassis made of
rounded wood. In addition to the chassis being fixed to t
he covering of axel, there was a similar ‘U’
shaped wooden support for the carriage as shown in the figure above. A long shaft was fixed to the
chassis. Joint has been covered with thin copper plate"

This description is exactly the usual carts like Yamnaya cart. The chariots only had spoked wheels, that's its essence, and the carts were solid. How the chariot looked you can see in Fig. 11. Horses could not pull solid wheels.

No one will ever believe the pseudo-scientific speculations of the nationalists. I'm sane.

Davidski said...

Ah, OK, so spoked wheel chariots were invented in India, and Sintashta actually migrated from South Asia to Eastern Europe. Sintashta (aka modern) horses also came from India.

Thanks, it's all clear now.

Anonymous said...

But all their evidence for the existence of chariots in India are based on the picture related to the 2nd century B.C.. Well, if the Indian chariot 2nd century B.C. came to Sintashta 21nd century B.C., then of course, India is the birthplace of elephants.

vAsiSTha said...

@archi
You are a retard. "Horses can't pull solid wheels" hahahahaha

@davidski
Nice strawman

Anonymous said...

vAsiSTha said...
@archi
You are a retard.

Thank you, from the man who wrote only lies this lie is praise and a full acknowledgment of your delusions.

postneo said...

The Sanauli chariot has solid wheels but its profile is that of a light vehicle/chariot very different from the heavy 2 wheeled cart of rural India unchanged since IVC days. It's probably from btw 2100 to 1900.
Even though it's not spoked, it does not seem to be built for huge loads.

The spoked copper stud design is rather fancy for your average cart. No animal bones were found with it so It can't be confirmed what animal pulled it. Horse bones are being analyzed from IVC not Sanauli.

Nobody is claiming Sintashta chariots or Sanauli are connected. It needs to be analyzed independently without steppe-tard baggage. Its quite different

Matt said...

@postneo, in many ways that seems a fair summary of the content (although I don't know about "nobody suggests" and "steppetards"). Why did these people have a lightly built cart, what animal drew it and what was it for? Why was it buried with people?

Regarding the frame of the vehicle, my understanding from Chechushkov's big review (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10963-018-9124-0) is that it seems that the superstructures of the chariot basically don't survive (wooden construction) and they are estimating from wheel impressions and the dimensions of chariot burials. How much of the copper construction of the Sanauli vehicle survives? It seems like not very much.

(On a side note, totally off topic but came across this interesting presentation from Mary Bacharova on similarities between Vedic and Greek prayers and at least some of these motifs (probably relating to the sun and wheels) can be traced originally from a shared Mesopotamian origin -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpE61mrs_oA - reflecting a route of borrowing for prestige.

There's a cool note at 12:59 that it seems that the word for wagon in Sumerian, Semitic and Kartvelian was borrowed from the reconstructed proto-Indo-European word for wheel, which suggests that there was some interaction of these peoples at this time specifically around wheeled vehicle terminology (Though they don't borrow the actual word for wheel, just use it to produce a shared word form for wagon!) ).

Anonymous said...

The lightness of the cart frame is not essential, frames of yamna-catacomb carts were already light. http://annales.info/bronza/war/chariot4.jpg

mzp1 said...

Spoked Wheels and Chariots from 2000BC are a mute point given we already have a Chessboard and Swastika engraived dice from the IVC.

This is all somewhat amateur.

Anybody here think the Chessboard predates the spoked wheel chariot?

Davidski said...

@mzp1

Spoked Wheels and Chariots from 2000BC are a mute point given we already have a Chessboard and Swastika engraived dice from the IVC.

This is one of the comments of the year, but for all the wrong reasons.

a said...

@Archi what's your take on the PIE word for silver? Does it seem that Indo-Iranian,Celtic,Italic, Tocharian might have a common root connected with this precious metals?

mzp1 said...

The invention of chess is attributed to the Indians by the Iranians and occurs late in Iranian and Indian literature.

The swastika engraived dice are even more noteworthy. Both the swastika and gambling/chance games are part of IE culture. The swastikas association with luck in gambling seems specific to Indo Aryans.

Good luck trying to explain these away as some Witzelian 'indigenous', 'para-munda' Bmac/Ivc substrate. Lol.

How to prove the Kurgan theory.

Step 1: Figure out everything which is part of IE culture by looking at history and literature.

Step 2: Find out those things from 1 that match the Kurgan theory.

Step 3: Define *IE by removing everything from 1 not in 2.

Now you have *IE which differs from IE by the absence of planned cities, architecture, chess etc basically most aspects of civilized 'high-culture'. Tell everyone *IEs weres barbaric simpletons who managed to conquer more advanced civilization based of superior European genes, or simple horses and Chariots for the more politically correct audience.

Anonymous said...

@a

PIE not knew silver content, for them this was simply white gold. It had the same name among the Aryans, the modern name of silver in Sanskrit came from Prakrit. Likely and the borrowing in Balto-Slavo-Germanic languages of the silver was of the same value of satem language like the Luwian language is close to PIE *gh'elto-bhelh2o- > *luw. sildabauro "gold shiny white."

natsunoame said...

JuanRivera
Can you please write some turkic agricultural terms here? I am so curious to know some old words invented by a newly formed ethnic group like the turkic one.

Gaska said...

As far as I'm interested, the truth is that these last papers have made it clear that R1b-L51 has nothing to do with Asia and therefore there were no migrations of this lineage in any prehistoric era. This is further proof that it is not related to the Yamnaya culture and of course that it originates in Western/Central Europe. We are going to leave the fight in Asia for our R1a relatives who have a difficult mission not to succumb to the Asian hordes. Good luck because the discussion about the origin of R1b-L51 is a discussion among Europeans, the rest of the struggle (including the origin of the IE language) is a matter of facing different civilizations. Thank God we have the Basque language as proof that in Western Europe IE was never spoken until relatively recent times.

Anonymous said...

R1b1a1a originates of course in Eastern Europe, see Narva culture 6000 BC R1b1a1a.
The fact that he did not belong to the Proto-Indo-Europeans is another matter, BB switched to the Indo-European language already in Central Europe from the CW.

Gaska said...


@Archi

The Latvian hunter gatherers of the Narva culture are R1b-P297 and according to the last paper we have commented on Bohemia it is possible that the lineage extended over Central Europe through the Central-European Neolithic cultures. We'll see what happens. We are also waiting for the publication of this paper-"The Bell Beaker Complex in the Lech Valley: a Bioarchaeological Perspective"-Stockhammer et al, which can help us understand the genetic and cultural relationship between CWC and BBC

"The DNA analysis enables us to understand family relations within the burial sites as well as the transformation of the genomic patterns from the Corded Ware to the Bell Beaker Complex and further on to the Early Bronze Age. In the end, we are able to present a new narrative for the genesis as well as the end of the Bell Beaker Complex at least for the Lech Valley south of Augsburg"

Mitochondrial haplogroups from that region have already been studied in another paper published in 2017 and the researchers showed that more than 25% of individuals in BB culture were not from that region but were migrants of one or two generations. I believe that we are going to find many surprises and that the role of the CWC in this story is still to be defined (mainly due to the almost total absence of R1a in Western Europe).


Anonymous said...

There was never the CWC in Western Europe, it was all taken up by the BBC, so there is no R1a. Indo-Europeans did not penetrate Western Europe before the branches of the Urnfield culture, there were no Indo-Europeans in Western Europe. In Central Europe, during the late the CWC, BB spread along the boundaries of the CWC and mixed with it (resulting in the kentum languages). The first Indo-Europeans who penetrated into Western Europe from the Urnfield culture are Lusitanians and Italiсs, from the Hallstatt culture (Czech territory) - Celts.

Gaska said...

@Archi

This time I have to absolutely agree on everything you've said, because I've been saying the same for a long time

@Juan

Bohemian paper has not yet been published, In any case I hope you don't like it because I don't think it's very favorable to the steppe theory

Gaska said...

what date does that Narva-like signal have in the Hungarian chalcolithic?

natsunoame said...

I can not see attested PIE words and their turkic parallels here. Write it properly, in the way everybody can compare.

like here:
I.A.S.T
пяна / piana/ -phena - foam फेन

беда/ beda/ -badha -trouble, pain aबाध

път /put,pat / -patha -way, road पथ

светлина, светъл / svetul/ -sveta -light, bright श्वेत

въпрос /vupros, vapros/ -vipraśna -question of fate विप्रश्न


Trying to associate Turkish with PIE is ridiculous, but you are free to continue...Even if you find something, this doesn't mean this is an original turkic word but a loan one. They convert so many tribes in muslim religion on their path so the original sources can be a lot too.

Dave Ian said...

Check out the podcast by Dr Niraj Rai today where he says he has proven out of india theory and completely demolised AIT and AMT. and papers on indian horses and chariots from 2200 bc and proof about indian origin of r1a1 is coming before end of this year. You all have a few months to re calibrate your thoughts and speculations.

Dave Ian said...

Ask any neutral India friends of yours to translate the hindi parts, it will shock the living hell out of all of you.

Anonymous said...

Around the world, these freaks come in for any question, they shout a lot, but actually their words are empty hot air. Such people cannot be convinced by any facts, and they do not realize the pseudoscientific nature of their speculations and manipulations. Nothing will change especially when it comes to nationalism.

Gaska said...

Indian origin of R1a1???

Gaska said...


I hope they have done their job well, because some Y-calls from Narasimhan are a joke. Darra-i Kur-Afghanistan, was reported to be R-L151, causing the euphoria of some blind Kurganists and seems to be BT. Let's see what evidence Dr Niraj Rai have.

Gaska said...

I think Darra-I Kur is R2

AWood said...

@Samuel Andrews
Hammers were not used as weapons until the Middle Ages, let alone by the Norse. However, they were used as a tool, and their most obvious use was through blacksmithing. The placement of the hammer among Nordic pagans is purely ornamental and symbolic.

Anonymous said...

Darra-i Kur has a poor genome with low coverage contaminate it by archaeologists I1 & R1b. It cannot be taken into account at all.

EastPole said...

@Archi
“borrowing in Balto-Slavo-Germanic languages”

Archi, stop trolling, there are no such languages as Balto-Slavo-Germanic.
Balto-Slavic are grouped with Indo-Iranian and sometimes called Indo-Slavic.

In Narasimhan et al. paper they refer to D. Ringe, T. Warnow & A. Taylor 2002 ‘Indo-European and Computational Cladistics’, Transactions of the Philological Society 100/1, 59–129.

https://i.postimg.cc/bJykYydv/screenshot-10.png

https://i.postimg.cc/nzfZqrqH/screenshot-11.png

https://www.academia.edu/38220415/Formation_of_the_Indo-European_Branches_in_the_light_of_the_Archaeogenetic_Revolution

AWood said...

@Gaska

Those aren't the droids you're looking for, although there was probably some mtDNA contribution from Narva and other HG Baltic people, the Y lines are a dead end. (my direct mtDNA line is in Baltic HG)

What the reality is that R1b-L51, or even R1b-L23 who led to L51 were a western steppe group of aggressive foragers who learned copper working from the Balkans from Cucuteni culture and then spread to central and western Europe. We see that they already had copper ornaments either through trade or raiding, but likely lacked the skillset and the resources on the steppes. Perhaps they took advantage of the plague ridden Cucuteni before learning what they could and moved west.

Anshuman said...

It's basically over .Rai clearly said that there is no chance he is ever looking towards AMT camp asks you guys to junk the Term Aryan..why..as he has lot of unpublished data which he will slowly reveal through his forthcoming papers.
Then Henis will show through his paper that R1a1 originated in India..whatever steppe ancestry came here was pretty late basically what they brought was some European HG part .
Even Narsimhan paper gives it away by saying Locals were already admixed when that so called steppe ancestry seems to have seeped in.Most of it came through Scythians Huns etc and some mixing due to trade.

Worst part which Language=Genes guy don't admit is that.. the IVC sample has little AHG and that completely destroys IVC=Dravidian link and put pays to any theory linking languages to genes

Anonymous said...

EastPole said...
Archi, stop trolling, there are no such languages as Balto-Slavo-Germanic.
Balto-Slavic are grouped with Indo-Iranian and sometimes called Indo-Slavic.

You are insolent, you is Troll, the Baltic-Slavic-Germanic group is considered by some linguists as genetic (see trees), in any case, it is closely related languages in which a lot of common innovations - read Porzig and etc.

In each of the languages of this grouping, this word was borrowed independently and in different forms, because in each of them this word is present in different irreducible variants.

Don't yell if you don't know anything.

Anshuman said...

The Thing which most people hide is this..Steppe=Iran Farmer(Cousin of IVC)+EHG with whatever extra garnishing people want to conjure .So IVC already would have a good number of mutations shared with Steppe.Statistics may be used to.take Steppe as a whole and hiding its components and thus serving certain biases but not for long.

Soon enough different modeling algorithms will come up which may concentrate on individual mutations to identify all ancestral populations that may be contributing to a particular genome and not some masks

Anonymous said...

@Anshuman said...
"It's basically over .Rai clearly said that there is no chance he is ever looking towards AMT camp asks you guys to junk the Term Aryan..why..as he has lot of unpublished data which he will slowly reveal through his forthcoming papers.
Then Henis will show through his paper that R1a1 originated in India..whatever steppe ancestry came here was pretty late basically what they brought was some European HG part .
Even Narsimhan paper gives it away by saying Locals were already admixed when that so called steppe ancestry seems to have seeped in.Most of it came through Scythians Huns etc and some mixing due to trade."

That is, to lie slowly in order to constantly excite the nationalists. This typical example, nothing has been published yet, there are no data yet, and the nationalists are already shouting about it as an accomplished fact.

mzp1 said...

@Dave Ian, where's the podcast link?

Davidski said...

@Anshuman

There's no "Iranian farmer" in the steppe. See here...

Yamnaya isn't from Iran just like R1a isn't from India

And by far the oldest R1a is from Eastern Europe. R1a finally showed up in Central Asia during the Bronze Age and then eventually moved into South Asia.

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

Dave Ian said...

Here it is gentlemen, the death bell for aryan invasion and migration theory. Rai jokes that soon it will called harappan invasion of the steppe theory. Happy meltdown all.

https://youtu.be/U__2851gcR4

Anshuman said...

David wait for it :)

Your blog will see lot of excitement in coming months as well as years.

Dave Ian said...

Rai says the indian r1a goes back to 15k BC and horse in rajasthan to 2230 BC. Blame it on nationalism now?? For those not familiar with Hindi, ask any neutral indian friends to do the translation of the hindi parts. I think he deliberately said the most key points in Hindi to keep you guys(non hindi speakers) in dark till the actual paper comes out by the end of this year.

EastPole said...

@Archi

Read modern staff like “The Indo-European languages” Thomas Olander 2018:

https://i.postimg.cc/mk4tbRjr/screenshot-12.png

https://rootsofeurope.ku.dk/roe_sommerskole/The_Indo-European_languages__RoESS_2018__-_slides.pdf

Olander uses Indo-Slavic term. This has nothing to do with Germanic.
This is now confirmed by genetics, read Narasimhan et al 2019:

“The Steppe ancestry in South Asia has the same profile as that in Bronze Age Eastern Europe, tracking a movement of people that affected both regions and that likely spread the unique features shared between Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic languages.”

Gaska said...

@Awood said "What the reality is that R1b-L51, or even R1b-L23 who led to L51 were a western steppe group of aggressive foragers who learned copper working from the Balkans from Cucuteni culture and then spread to central and western Europe. We see that they already had copper ornaments either through trade or raiding, but likely lacked the skillset and the resources on the steppes. Perhaps they took advantage of the plague ridden Cucuteni before learning what they could and moved west"

Sometimes I think that imagination has no limits, in your case I think you only say it to provoke, because your knowledge of European chalcolithic is minimal. Stop fantasizing, because the ridicule the Kurganists are doing is going to reach sidereal proportions. It is not worth discussing such silly and simple arguments. And say hello to your friends of anthrogenica, they are so little interested in knowing the truth like you.

Dave Ian said...

@all here is the link to Dr Rai’s podcast from today

https://youtu.be/U__2851gcR4

Anonymous said...

@EastPole
You don't know what to write, since the 19th century, many linguists draw a tree as

https://i.postimg.cc/nLCXZZ0q/image.png
https://d3tixod1wp885b.cloudfront.net/66/400cd0887d11e3b8442531e7acd3f8/indoeuropean-language-family-tree.jpg

All because the Baltic, Slavic, and Germanic languages are very close, they formed a linguistic Union of close languages that influenced each other and shared common innovations in both grammar and words of cultural vocabulary.
This union is named Balto-Slavo-Germanic languages.
Now this Union can no longer be recognized as a genetic group of languages, but this association still remains and the name for it remains.
I didn't write it is "a group".

EastPole said...

Browncast Episode 66, ancient India and DNA with Vagheesh Narasimhan

https://www.brownpundits.com/2019/09/11/browncast-episode-66-ancient-india-and-dna-with-vagheesh-narasimhan/

vAsiSTha said...

"Check out the podcast by Dr Niraj Rai today where he says he has proven out of india theory and completely demolised AIT and AMT. and papers on indian horses and chariots from 2200 bc and proof about indian origin of r1a1 is coming before end of this year. You all have a few months to re calibrate your thoughts and speculations."

Horse dna from 2300bce binjor, rajasthan is very interesting. that along with the chariots makes the 1500bc steppe ancestry useless to the question of the first vedic ppl.

he further adds that there are a lot of samples for the post harappan period from all over the country, and the dude is going to be quite busy over the next few years piecing together the internal movements of people.

Rai is dating R1a from modern population, unsure how sound that is, or if there are improvements in the process of dating using this method.

vAsiSTha said...

@davidski said

"There's no "Iranian farmer" in the steppe. See here...
Yamnaya isn't from Iran just like R1a isn't from India"

just pasting relevant bits from the Narsimhan paper

1. The final models show that Khvalynsk_EN can be modeled as a mixture of ~80% EEHG-related and ~20% ancestry related to early Iranian farmers.
2. A second observation is that the individuals from the EMBA are shifted “southward” on both the All Eurasian PCA and West Eurasian PCA toward Anatolian and Iranian farmer populations (7). This observation is also consistent with the ADMIXTURE plots which show additional ancestry components in teal and green in individuals from the western and central Steppe, suggesting that during the BA in contrast with the Neolithic, populations from across the Steppe were admixing with communities from the south.
3. From the HG period to the Eneolithic, we observe that the individuals from
Khvalynsk have an increase in ancestry related to that of Iranian farmers. From the Eneolithic into the BA, we observe that Yamnaya_Samara, Poltavka and Potapovka individuals are all genetically similar to each other and compared to the Eneolithic Khvalynsk individuals have additional ancestry related to both Iranian and Anatolian farmers.
4. In the central Steppe, we analyzed data from multiple locations across Kazakhstan: from the far west on the border with Russia, to Mereke, to Kumsay, to Dali in the southeast. When compared with the HGs from slightly north of Kazakhstan, and individuals from the Botai culture, we see that these individuals have increased allele sharing with Iranian farmers, as reflected in their shift toward the south on both PCA plots and the presence of a green component on the ADMIXTURE plot that is absent in the previous time period. This suggests that peoples of the central Steppe—like those of the western Steppe—experienced
gene flow from agricultural communities from the south.

stopping here, but this can go on & on. I cant analyze all this like others here can, but just putting it out there. Outright rejecting any role of iran farmer related ancestry seems foolhardy and biased to me.

Anonymous said...

aHahaha means they can't test human aDNA from India 2300BC, but they can test horse aDNA. What noodles on ears.
Rumors from a man that cannot be trusted to discuss it is useless and pointless.

@vAsiSTha You're replacing Paleolithic Caucasus CHG to Neolithic Iran, which is illegal and just a fake.

Anonymous said...

@JuanRivera @all It is necessary to write not Sredny_Stog_II, but Alexandria, not Dereivka, but Dereivka I - this is a very important distinctions. Because Dereivka means Dereivka II, and has no relation to the Dereivka I. This sample of Alexandria has nothing to do with the Sredny Stog II.

Anonymous said...

I have already said that the text of Narasimhan et al. very biased, throughout the text he never analyzes using CHG, even on this largely unstated, but it is the most ancient samples.

ADMIXTURE and tests are bad. No analysis of gene flows has been made, but elementary analysis of D-statistics shows an increase EHG in Iran coinciding with the spread of wagons.

Mbuti.DG EHG CHG Iran_N -0.026170984 -6.02495 0.0043438
Mbuti.DG EHG CHG Iran_LN -0.026942417 -5.41436 0.0049761
Mbuti.DG EHG CHG Iran_ChL -0.009127401 -2.64254 0.0034540
Mbuti.DG EHG CHG Iran_recent 0.001469850 0.31987 0.0045951
Mbuti.DG EHG Iran_LN Iran_N -0.002434149 -0.45196 0.0053857
Mbuti.DG EHG Iran_ChL Iran_N -0.016854386 -4.58599 0.0036752
Mbuti.DG EHG Iran_ChL Iran_LN -0.014073125 -3.23540 0.0043497
Mbuti.DG EHG Iran_N Iran_recent 0.030702635 6.36914 0.0048205
Mbuti.DG EHG Iran_LN Iran_recent 0.029722712 5.30181 0.0056061
Mbuti.DG EHG Iran_ChL Iran_recent 0.014083963 3.47870 0.0040486

In general, their text should be filtered for bias.

Leron said...

Even if IVC invaded the steppe it would have never carried Indo-European. Logically IE was attested in Anatolia earlier than Southeast Asia.

Dave Ian said...

@leron thats based on an assumption that the rig veda is from post 1500 BC. He’s trying to push that date back. He mentions that in the video as well.

Anonymous said...

It is perfectly clear that CHG is much closer to Yamnaya than Iranian farmers. Therefore, the use of Iranian farmers in the text about Yamnaya creates a false impression.

Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara CHG Iran_N -0.032651761 -9.90778 0.0032956
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara CHG Iran_LN -0.030051322 -7.87958 0.0038138
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara CHG Iran_HotuIIIb -0.026203181 -4.69495 0.005581
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara CHG Iran_ChL -0.017181072 -6.51740 0.0026362
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara CHG Iran_recent -0.009159683 -2.52353 0.0036297
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia CHG Iran_N -0.031994772 -8.71378 0.0036717
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia CHG Iran_LN -0.031571172 -7.70066 0.0040998
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia CHG Iran_HotuIIIb -0.023053164 -3.97537 0.0057
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia CHG Iran_ChL -0.018901638 -6.61262 0.0028584
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia CHG Iran_recent -0.007807957 -2.03964 0.0038281

Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_ChL Iran_HotuIIIb -0.009323583 -1.86785 0.0049916
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_ChL Iran_LN -0.009754644 -2.87556 0.0033923
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_ChL Iran_N -0.016487468 -5.59159 0.0029486
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_ChL Iran_recent 0.009338622 2.91241 0.0032065
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_HotuIIIb Iran_ChL 0.009323583 1.86785 0.0049916
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_HotuIIIb Iran_HotuIIIb 0.000000000 0.00000 1.0000
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_HotuIIIb Iran_LN 0.001218970 0.16482 0.0073956
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_HotuIIIb Iran_N -0.010709445 -1.79306 0.0059727
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_HotuIIIb Iran_recent 0.017117877 2.54461 0.006727
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_LN Iran_N -0.007067214 -1.67005 0.0042317
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_LN Iran_recent 0.017324644 3.73795 0.0046348
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_N Iran_recent 0.024059571 6.02428 0.0039938
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Samara Iran_recent Iran_N -0.024059571 -6.02428 0.0039938
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_ChL Iran_HotuIIIb -0.005512973 -1.05687 0.00521
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_ChL Iran_LN -0.011225659 -3.10282 0.0036179
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_ChL Iran_N -0.012707461 -3.90331 0.0032556
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_ChL Iran_recent 0.012538626 3.79766 0.0033017
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_HotuIIIb Iran_LN -0.013180332 -1.72185 0.00765
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_HotuIIIb Iran_N -0.014033094 -2.22286 0.00631
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_HotuIIIb Iran_recent 0.014916956 2.14297 0.0069
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_LN Iran_HotuIIIb 0.013180332 1.72185 0.00765
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_LN Iran_N -0.002245723 -0.48906 0.0045919
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_LN Iran_recent 0.022585938 4.70698 0.0047984
Mbuti.DG Yamnaya_Kalmykia Iran_N Iran_recent 0.024235606 5.81438 0.0041682

Andrzejewski said...

@JuanRivera “I think that Narva-like signal can be linked with the dispersal of pottery from Eastern Europe. And surprisingly, SWE_TRB's HG ancestry is a mixture of Narva-like and WHG, with no SHG admixture.”

What happened to SHG? Why did they go extinct?

Does Progress_EN and Vonyuchka_EN preferring AG3 to MA1 indicate that PIE arose with CHG tribes instead of EHG ones?

Hodo Scariti said...

@ Gaska

In the abstract of the Bohemian paper the authors state that the signal is from Lithuanian Narva culture, not the Latvian one.

Karl_K said...

@Archi

"aHahaha means they can't test human aDNA from India 2300BC, but they can test horse aDNA. What noodles on ears."

Horses have much larger and more solid bones than humans. That probably has a huge difference in degradation of DNA.

Davidski said...

It's probably just an Indian wild ass.

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

Matt said...

Quick attempt to project the Indus_Periphery samples that Davidski couldn't get onto West Eurasia 9 onto there:

Images: https://i.imgur.com/Yrl4bZq.png (Black Diamond = Rakhigarhi, Black Stars = Indus Periphery; projected)
Pastebin: https://pastebin.com/QCsqmeBi

(Procedure, take first two PC of Narasimhan online PCA, take Davidski's 9 dimensions, predict from crossover samples present on both using only Indus_Periphery samples)

MaxT said...

@Davidski

Can you please add these samples to Basal Rich spreadsheet?

Davidski said...

@MaxT

It's time to move onto the Global25.

MaxT said...

@Davidski

Global25 nMonte runner website does not have this sample. I'm curious about estimated East Eurasia ancestry for this Indus sample, since many are claiming it varies between 20-40% based on several nmonte posts i've seen on other forums. However, K7 breaks down East Eurasia better from what i've noticed.

MaxT said...

Their study estimates itself varies in that regard with two-way models, for example:

“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)”

I think the over-all ENA ancestry in Rakhiga sample is around 32%?

Sandip Kumar Munda said...

@Davidski

Hello Sir,
Have Shinde et al released any data of the male skeleton sample I4411 from the Rakhigarhi site into the public domain ?

Davidski said...

@Sandip

Yes, please refer to the blog update above dated to 05/09/2019.

Ebrelios said...

"In Slavic mythology, Perun (Cyrillic: Перýн) is the highest god of the pantheon and the god of sky, thunder, lightning, storms, rain, law, war, fertility and oak trees. His other attributes were fire, mountains, wind, iris, eagle, firmament (in Indo-European languages, this was joined with the notion of the sky of stone[2]), horses and carts, weapons (hammer, axe (Axe of Perun), and arrow), and war."
We have a complete IE mythology in our languages.

D => Th => Ph -> P/-> F/ -> V/B + R=L
ThoR/ThunDeR/PioRun/sToRm/BuRza/Wir/Swirl/Gorgo/Huragan/Virbas
sTRong/Tur/Bear/Bearing/enDure/Orzy=>Orzeł(eagle)/Ogromny/Ogre
Pyre/Fire/Svar/Żar/Sore/Ból/Goreć/Ogień/Agni
Big/Balshoy
AxisMundi Oś Świata, the divine tree attracting power of sky, lightning bolt and fire, a central wooden 4 faced allgod of world, central as the fireplace in earlier shamanic cultures Rod/Pal/Log/Block/Pole/Kołek/Sąg/Kłoda/Słup/Stulpas/Drąg/Spor/Zbór/Zbiór/Spear/Kołowrot(spinner)/Kręgosłup=Spine/Kotas/Kotelis/Łodyga
Hard/Garda/Guard/Harsh/Garść/Pięść/Fist/Firm/Rigid/Stiff/Twardy/Trzeć/Tvirtas/Surowy/Sunkus/Katorga/Kietas/Kamienas(trunks, stem)/Kamień=Rokas(rock)/Krekas(crack)
Now i get why rok means a year - 1 yearly tree stem growth ring. Same as counting summers or dots on a bug.
Order/Ordnung/Tvarka/Drausme/Ład/Porządek/Prawo/
Especially on a hill, kurgan like, esp. with an old oak(Dąb/dębina).
Kurgan/Góra/Kopa/Guba/Piarg/Prism/Hram/Werder
Advice/Guidance/Wisdom/Rada/beRATung/Rie/Patarimas/nuRODymai

But the word of the day is definitely lithuanian kilti and kiltis = arise, originate, stem from...

«Oldest ‹Older   401 – 480 of 480   Newer› Newest»