W odpowiedzi na osobiste, coś jak żądanie… i w nawiązaniu do kilku innych zapytań i spraw, oto nadarzyła się okazja, żeby upowszechnić trochę ciekawych źródeł i wiadomości. Szczególnie polecam rozważania o żeńskich haplogrupach i roli kobiet w dziejach, nie tylko Słowiańszczyzny, ale nie tylko to, bo i tzw PIE tyż można se poczytać…
Mam nadzieję, że ten wpis na jakiś czas zadowoli pewną przedstawicielkę płci przeciwnej, czyli pięknej (bez urazy, ale może nawet i nie jedną)… 😉
Sunday, February 5, 2017
Women on the move
From the jungle known as the comments section:
First there was the creation of a new way of life north of the Caucasus, a mobile form of pastoralism herding animals which had been domesticated in the near east and the horse which was domesticated somewhere on the Eurasian steppe. Once this new way of life had been developed, it had a tremendous expansionary potential due to the vast amount of land which was suitable for it. This is why polygamy was a good strategy for these pastoralists because, as they competed with one another to build the biggest herds and control the biggest territories, it allowed for a rapid expansion of their family groups. This is the context within which there was a need to bring in additional women from outside. The pastoralists in turn would have been able to offer the families of their Caucasus farmer wives a good bride price for them.
But there is R1a-M17 in Lokomotiv predating Khvalynsk. Was it still east of the Urals?
I know you pride yourself on being objective, but clearly, like a lot of people who post here, you need to work on being realistic. Why would European R1a-M417 come from east of the Urals at such a late stage? Why wouldn’t it come from the western steppe, along with the Corded Ware expansion, from an archaeological group like Dnieper Donets, Sredny Stog or Pontic Yamnaya, that has already been suspected of being ancestral to Corded Ware? Keep in mind that Ukraine N is from a Dnieper Donets burial, and fits the bill as ancestral to the most steppe-shifted Corded Ware individuals. So that comment of yours, was that a brain fart or were you just trolling, or what?
February 5, 2017 at 7:54 PM
I don’t think Daves theory is totally discarded yet , but as Rob points out , it is not very attractive given current assessment of the situation . The final pov on the PIE question in all of this, is again from where R1a M417 and Rb-M269+ emerges from and they were present to which degree throughout Eurasia chronologically . I know that in few months a massive advancement to that question will happen . But at the end it is something, that cant be changed is that, we have no hard data to suggest which language was spoken in S Russia in those pre-historical periods , not even around 2nd millennium bc by any means , Scythian related related groups are the first attestations there . Anything is still possible genetics wise , please stay calm as possible 😉 .
February 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM
Amanda S said…
I’ve been doing a bit of reality checking on what I wrote against some of the archaeological literature. I found a paper called „The Social Structure of the Neolithic Population in the Pontic Steppe” by Nadezhda Kotova. This is an analysis of some graveyard sites in the Don and Dnieper valley dating from around 5,000 BC. The picture it paints is of a society that has only minimally adopted aspects of farming technology; mainly cattle breeding but is still mainly dependent on wild resources for its sustenance. Although the “hunter gatherer” and “farmer” or “pastoralist” descriptions are useful categories for thinking about human societies, they can also be deceptive and over-simplifying. At this stage the society described is not really a hunter gatherer one or a pastoralist one. The writer of the paper describes a social system based around male lineage clans discernable in their burial practices. One would think this was likely a local hunter gatherer descended society in the process of transition rather than a highly expansionary one at this stage. It raises the question as to what were the cultural elements and innovations that enabled the nascent Steppe societies to expand and when did this happen.
February 5, 2017 at 10:48 PM
It raises the question as to what were the cultural elements and innovations that enabled the nascent Steppe societies to expand and when did this happen. Cultural appropriation from the farmers that they were getting their brides from?
February 5, 2017 at 10:52 PM
Amanda S said…
Cultural appropriation from the farmers that they were getting their brides from? Well, maybe. According to David Anthony, the initial spread of the farmer technologies of cattle, pottery and grain into the Pontic Steppe came from the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture of South Eastern Europe, not from the Caucasus. I need to read more!
February 5, 2017 at 11:09 PM
Well, maybe. According to David Anthony, the initial spread of the farmer technologies of cattle, pottery and grain into the Pontic Steppe came from the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture of South Eastern Europe, not from the Caucasus. Yamnaya does show that type of western ancestry. It doesn’t usually show up in ADMIXTURE, but it does in models based on formal stats, and even in my nMonte tests. Some of the brides, and a lot of the innovations, could have come from CT.
February 5, 2017 at 11:14 PM
But regarding this „West Asian” mtDNA, we just got a new paper that looked at 12 samples from Ukraine Bronze Age, spanning from pre-Yamnaya, Yamnaya and post-Yamnaya periods. And they’re all U, U5, U5a and a couple of C4. And not long ago we got mtDNA from the Botai culture (who were basically hunter-gatherers, from Kazakhstan) and their results were all „West Asian” IIRC. Could be just luck, but that’s what we have right now.
February 5, 2017 at 11:19 PM
It’s likely that some of the mtDNA lineages that you’re counting as EHG actually arrived on the steppe from the North Caucasus with CHG-rich women. You’re largely focusing on the deep Holocene or older affinities of these haplogroups, but Yamnaya only formed ~3,500 BC. That’s a problem and your mistake.
Thus far, there is absolutely no evidence of any male migration from the Caucasus/Near East onto the steppe at that time. All we have are clues that women from the North Caucasus were incorporated into steppe societies.
These clues come from mtDNA, isotopes and archeology. So unless you can actually come up with evidence that the Caucasus brides theory is false, or at least that it doesn’t sufficiently explain the formation of Yamnaya, that’s the best theory we have, and it actually makes sense on several levels.
February 8, 2017 at 1:45 PM
But the present evidence can fit perfectly well with plenty of „Caucasian husbands” as well as „Caucasian wives”. No it can’t. Kurgan lines from across space and time during the Bronze Age look fully European: R1a, R1b and I2a2. It’s the mtDNA that shows southern admixture. The simple math you want is misleading for the reason I outline above. At best you’re looking at a few Caucasian husbands here and there. As far as I’m aware though, no one has actually found them yet. But they have found the Caucasian wives with isotopic data.
February 8, 2017 at 3:24 PM
And sure, some of that R1a, R1b and even I2a2 in the Kurgans could in theory be from the Caucasus, just like some of the U5 and U4 might be from the Caucasus. If so, however, how did only European-specific Y-HGs make it onto the steppe at that time? Where’s the J2 for instance? Wouldn’t you expect at least a couple J2, maybe G, or some other clearly southern Y-HG? Why is the southern admixture clearly evident only in the mtDNA? Y-DNA founder effects don’t really explain too well why only Eastern European-specific Y-HGs migrated from the Caucasus onto the steppes.
February 8, 2017 at 3:37 PM
We are going to need more ancient DNA before we know exactly what happened on the steppe. So what? Female exogamy from farmer groups to steppe herders is a legitimate hypothesis and a very good one until then. We have no Caucasus-specific Y-HGs on the Bronze Age steppe, but fresh Caucasus-specific mtDNA, and examples of exactly such female exogamy at other sites where steppe-derived people settled.
So I’m not sure why you’re about to pop a testicle by arguing against this legitimate and common sense hypothesis? Seems like there’s something hiding under your objectivity, most likely the preference for another outcome.
February 8, 2017 at 4:45 PM
You’re wrong though. It’s not bad reasoning. The dribs and drabs of data we have from the steppe generally fit with the expected behavior of steppe people. So the female exogamy hypothesis has a very good chance of being confirmed, like it was in the Lach Valley in Bavaria with the steppe-derived Bronze Age folks there.
February 8, 2017 at 5:38 PM
So far the Majkop mtdna doesn’t quite look like Yamnaya , but it’s a small dataset Western Yamnaya and catacomb look very EuroHG
February 8, 2017 at 9:12 PM
I’ve got a spreadsheet here with Catacomb and Yamnaya mtDNA.
February 8, 2017 at 11:34 PM
This the image of the Yamnaya „chief” from Samara Russia Kutuluk River. He was yDNA R1b1a2a2(Z2103) and mtDNA H6a1b. http://i61.tinypic.com/1zcpteb.png
February 12, 2017 at 8:34 AM
Davidski, thanks for the graph. I’m curious about the 4 mtDNA H6 Catacomb Culture in Ukraine. Is that the full sequence? That is a lot of mtDNA H6 in ancient Ukraine! Yamnaya & Poltavka & Srubnaya Cultures in Russia has 3 H6’s. Siberia has 2 H6, Okunev & Andronovo Cultures…….looking forward to the Bell Beaker DNA results and wonder if a mtDNA H6 will show up in them. H6 is associated with Corded Ware but mixed Beaker/CW marriages are a possibility.
February 12, 2017 at 8:53 AM
Thursday, February 9, 2017
I found a really good archaeological paper on the agricultural transition in what is now eastern Ukraine. It helps to explain not only the origins of agriculture on the Western Steppe, but probably also the ancestry of Khvalynsk, Yamnaya and other closely related steppe pastoralist groups, as a three-way mixture between North Eurasian foragers and early Balkan and Caucasus farmers. This fits very nicely with my qpAdm models showing significant Late Neolithic Lengyel-related input in Yamnaya (see here).
Abstract: This paper presents the results of the first archaeobotanical investigation of NeolithicChalcolitich-period sites in eastern Ukraine and southwest Russia. The goal of this research is to understand the timeline of the earliest appearance and possible geographical origins of domesticated plants species in the region of study. The research conducted consists of the retrieval and study of macrobotanical remains and the analysis of plant impressions in pottery. Three possible corridors of influence upon agriculture in eastern Ukraine are postulated in this paper, originating from the Balkans, the Caucasus, and the Eurasian steppe.
At the same time, in contrast to what many still claim in the comments here and elsewhere, it’s extremely unlikely now that Y-chromosome haplogroups R1a and R1b were introduced onto the steppe by these farmers (see here and here). Clearly, they appear to be paternal markers native to Eastern Europe, in so far as they’ve been present in the region since at least the Mesolithic.
It’s rather improbable that we can say the same about the R1a and R1b in the Near East and South Asia, which of course means that we’re edging closer and closer to solving the Indo-European Urheimat question, because R1a-M417 and R1b-M269 are by far the best candidates for the main Y-haplogroups of the Proto-Indo-Europeans (see here).
Giedre Motuzaite-Matuzeviciute, The earliest appearance of domesticated plant species and their origins on the western fringes of the Eurasian Steppe, Documenta Praehistorica, Vol 39 (2012), DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/dp.39.1
Ultimately both R1a and R1b arrived there from Central Asia during Mesolithic, they are not ‚native’ to Eastern Europe. You probably mean Siberia not Central Asia. In any case, Mesolithic forager = indigenous in my book. Also, the Proto-Indo-Europeans were not pure „Siberian” foragers when they expanded out of Eastern Europe, they were a specific and complex mixture as per my post above.
February 10, 2017 at 5:41 AM
Saturday, February 11, 2017
Yamnaya-related admixture in Bronze Age northern Iberia
The question of when ancient steppe or Yamnaya-related ancestry first entered Iberia is crucial to the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) homeland debate.
If the steppe or Kurgan PIE hypothesis is correct, then we’d expect this to have happened during the Bronze Age rather than, say, the Medieval Period with the migrations into Iberia of Northern Europeans likely rich in Yamnaya-related admixture like the Visigoths. That’s because Indo-European languages are attested in Iberia as early as the Iron Age.
And indeed, the earliest Iberian sample in my dataset to show Yamnaya-related ancestry is Iberia_BA ATP9 from Gunther et al. 2015, dated to 3,700–3,568 C14 cal yBP or the Middle Bronze Age. This has not been reported before, but I’m certain that my finding will be confirmed sooner or later in scientific literature.
Many of you might remember that I’ve already looked at this issue back in 2015 (see here). However, that analysis was based on a very limited sequence of ATP9. So I’m going to do it all over again with a higher quality sequence, and eventually delete the old post.
Let’s start with a basic Principal Component Analysis (PCA) featuring ATP9 alongside a wide range of modern-day and ancient samples from West Eurasia and South Central Asia.
Clearly, ATP9 is shifted east, closer to Yamnaya, relative to the earlier Iberia Chalcolithic (Iberia_ChL) group, and almost clusters with Basques, who are known to harbor significant Yamnaya-related ancestry (see here). I can use formal statistics as well as models based on formal statistics to investigate this in more detail.
Mbuti Yamnaya_Samara Iberia_ChL Iberia_BA D 0.0031 Z 0.859
Mbuti Yamnaya_Samara Iberia_ChL Basque_French D 0.0086 Z 5.035
Mbuti Yamnaya_Samara Basque_French Iberia_BA D -0.0044 Z -1.316
Surprisingly, based on those D-stats ATP9 doesn’t appear to share more drift with Yamnaya Samara relative to Iberia_ChL (Z<3). But I suspect this might be due to inflated hunter-gatherer ancestry in Iberia_ChL, so let’s try something a little different.
Western_HG Yamnaya_Samara Iberia_ChL Iberia_BA D 0.0188 Z 4.987
Western_HG Yamnaya_Samara Iberia_ChL Basque_French D 0.024 Z 13.163
Western_HG Yamnaya_Samara Basque_French Iberia_BA D -0.0063 Z -1.768
OK, that’s basically in line with the PCA above, and I can cement this finding with the qpAdm algorithm. Note the nice chunk of Early Bronze Age steppe (Steppe_EBA) ancestry in ATP9.
chisq 5.216 tail_prob 0.876272
chisq 1.605 tail_prob 0.978452
chisq 3.485 tail_prob 0.900346
Of course, Basques are not Indo-Europeans, so the fact that ATP9 has some Yamnaya-related ancestry doesn’t necessarily mean she was an Indo-European. However, it’s not unreasonable to assume that the ancestors of Basques incurred gene flow from early Indo-Europeans moving into the Iberian Peninsula, and this probably explains their relatively high level of Yamnaya-related ancestry. So ATP9 may well have spoken an Indo-European language, and if not, then like Basques she probably has Indo-European ancestry
Do the Lengyel matches in Yamnaya-rich populations in Europe suggest a Middle PIE homeland in the Late Tripolye culture?
You would need Late Tripolye to be rich in R1a, R1b and steppe admixture, which I think is very unlikely.
I’d say Lengyel LN just represents the type of really late Neolithic farmer that had a wide range just before the homogenization of Europe via all sorts of population movements during the Bronze Age.
February 11, 2017 at 1:02 PM
Are there any proofs of widespread Lengyel LN-like admixture in Europe prior to Corded Ware, or does it appear to be a mostly local C/E European Neolithic population? Are you suggesting Lengyel superimposed themselves over the other Neolithics like LBK etc? Is Lengyel the best match for EEF ancestry in CW and Beaker samples as well? If so, I’m very much inclined to believe that Indo-European languages younger than Anatolian and Tocharian have a common origin in C/E Europe and a formative admixture event that occured as the Kurgans conquered Tripolye (/related cultures). Regardless, it’s likely that Tripolye had something to do with the spread of Lengyel-like ancestry as the oldest evidence of wheeled vehicles is from the troubled Late Tripolye culture (dated ca 3800 BC)
February 11, 2017 at 1:28 PM
„Of course, Basques are not Indo-Europeans, so the fact that ATP9 has some Yamnaya-related ancestry doesn’t necessarily mean she was an Indo-European. However, it’s not unreasonable to assume that the ancestors of Basques incurred gene flow from early Indo-Europeans moving into the Iberian Peninsula, and this probably explains their relatively high level of Yamnaya-related ancestry. So ATP9 may well have spoken an Indo-European language, and if not, then like Basques she probably has Indo-European ancestry.”
This is a very unreasonable assumption. There is no reasonable model in which Basque receive more distinctively non-Neolithic genetics from Indo-Europeans. A far more plausible hypothesis is that there is more than one linguistic population with origins somewhere in the vicinity of the steppe that have Yamnaya-like ancestry. In the North, those were Indo-Europeans who came to be exemplified in the Corded Ware culture. In the South, there were people with a non-Indo-European language family who were probably ancestral to both the Minoans and in a male dominated migration the Bell Beaker people whose language under the formative substrate influence experienced by the earliest Bell Beaker people gave rise to the Vasconic languages of which Basque is the only surviving representative. The original Bell Beakers probably migrate to their archaeological point of origin in Iberia’s major cities to exploit the tin deposits found there which their superior to local populations metalworking skills and mining knowledge allows them to exploit. These men (or at least those of them who participate in Bell Beaker expansion) marry Iberian women with elevated levels of mtDNA H which is what causes its levels in the gene pool of Western Europe to grow in tandem with Y-DNA R1b.
For roughly a thousand years Europe is divided between a Vasconic West known for their archery and cattle and distinctive pottery and metalworking and religious beliefs, and an Indo-European East known for their chariots and cavalry and horses and their distinctive pottery and metalworking and religious beliefs distinct from those of the Vasconic people despite the fact that the two have origins not geographically far from each other on the Steppe.
Then, following the climate events that give rise to Bronze Age collapse. Most of the Vasconic, Y-DNA R1b-M269 people of Western Europe who acquired the language and Y-DNA via the Bell Beaker fell to Urnfield/Celtic Indo-European people in the late Bronze Age/early Iron Age and experienced linguistic shift, but the Basque and some neighboring Vasconic people survived into the Roman era without falling to linguistic shift until eventually only the Basque were left. The later shift from Vasconic to Celtic leaves only a modest genetic impact roughly reflected by the percentage of R1a in Western Europe.
February 11, 2017 at 3:16 PM
Tuesday, January 24, 2017
Nonmetric cranial trait variation on the ancient Eurasian steppes + Scythian origins
No doubt this new AJPA paper is a prelude to a detailed ancient DNA study on most of the same samples.
Objectives: Within the fields of archaeology and anthropology, there is a long history of disputes concerning the origin of the northern Black Sea Scythians. One of the main points of contention is whether the Scythian gene pool was derived from the preceding local Bronze Age population or whether their population history can be connected to invaders from Central Asia. To test these hypotheses, we investigated Late Scythian populations from the northern Black Sea region and compared them to Bronze Age groups from Eastern Europe and Central Asia.
Materials and methods: We studied a cranial series of five Late Scythian populations from the northern Black Sea region (N = 323), as well as local Bronze Age groups (N = 109), Central Asian Bronze Age groups (N = 79), and Sarmatians (N = 110). Biological diversity was analyzed by the mean measure of divergence (MMD).
Results: The Late Scythian population considered in this study proved to be genetically homogeneous, although some connections with the Sarmatians were found. We also revealed similarities between the Scythian groups and the local Bronze Age population of the Srubnaya culture, as well as, to a lesser extent, a group representative of the Central Asian Bronze Age Okunevo culture.
Discussion: The similarities between Late Scythians and various Sarmatian groups could be the result of genetic contacts between the groups, as well as shared genetic origins. The gene pool of the Scythian population likely comprises both local and Central Asian genetic components, though the exact origins and proportion of the eastern component currently remains unknown.
Alla A. Movsesian, Varvara Yu. Bakholdina, Nonmetric cranial trait variation and the origins of the Scythians, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 24 January 2017, DOI:10.1002/ajpa.2315