Teal people found: Caucasians!

[Alan]

Of course there will be allot of overlap, since EEF is virtually made up of 50% pre WHG like ancestry.

The point is just to show the average. On Average EEF types are longer headed(dolicho- to mesocephalic) and Robust while WHG types shorter headed (meso- to brachycephalic) and broad/rounder faced.

 

[Tomenable]

While found EEF skeletons were Dolicho- to Mesocephalic and Robust (medium broad) or sometimes long faced.

Today North Africans and Middle Easterners are indeed more dolichocephalic - on average - than Europeans. But the most dolichocephalic populations (CI 73-75) are Sub-Saharan Africans, South Indians, Eskimos, Inuits, and Australo-Melanesians.

According to this map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/PSM_V50_D602_World_cephalic_index_map.jpg

On Average EEF types are longer headed

I still don't know if you are talking about face shape or skull shape.

Ötzi looks rather medium- or short-headed (meso- or brachycephalic), and he was EEF.

 

[Alan]

@Tomenable

I don't know if you even red what I write. I wrote WHG were pred. meso- to brachycephalic. Means some samples were mesocephalic(middle longheaded) other were brachycephalic(short headed).

If you have knowledge about this stuff you should know that someone with this kind of facial structure can no way be anything else but brachycephalic.
http://www.revolution-jungsteinzeit...etterhoehlenfrau_Halbprofil_links__440pix.jpg



On the other hand this guy looks pred. mesocephalic
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/07/91/3f/07913f4a549daf8cbfc2646b3cc75cd2.jpg

 

[Tomenable]

Posting some random pictures is un-scientific.

Why don't you check numerical data from some anthropological publication? I remember reading that from Paleolithic to Mesolithic the trend in Europe was generally toward dolichocephalization, but then from Neolithic to the 19th century the trend was toward brachycephalization. So Mesolithic Europeans were apparently more dolichocephalic, on average, than modern Europeans.

What is behind these processes is still largely unknown (maybe it's just random drift).

But according to this publication, brachycephalic skulls are more "cost-effective" in terms of volume vs. staying warm:

http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/anth/smith/TimeMach1984.pdf

In general populations around the equator tend to be more dolichocephalic so maybe relationship with climate exists. But there are some exceptions (e.g. brachycephalic Native Americans near the equator, dolichocephalic Scandinavians near the Arctic Circle).

That said, Scandinavia has seen the trend of brachycephalization as well (they used to be more dolicho- in the past than now).

 

[Alan]

Also you need to see it in this perspective. There are some people in Northeast Europe mostly who have this kind of extreme broad,round heads which are not so relevant in other regions of the continent and therefore can only be traced to WHG or EHG ancestry, while there are some kind of facial features in South Europe or Western Asia (especially among some Bedouin tribes which are rare in Northeast Europe and can only be traced to EEF ancestry.

Just to give two extreme examples.

 

[Alan]

Today North Africans and Middle Easterners are indeed more dolichocephalic - on average - than Europeans. But the most dolichocephalic populations (CI 73-75) are Sub-Saharan Africans, South Indians, Eskimos, Inuits, and Australo-Melanesians.

According to this map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/PSM_V50_D602_World_cephalic_index_map.jpg



I still don't know if you are talking about face shape or skull shape.

Ötzi looks rather medium- or short-headed (meso- or brachycephalic), and he was EEF.

disagree, Todays West Asians are not more or not less meso-Dolichocephalic than South or Central Europeans.
Going from what we know about the skeletons the ancient West Asians were more Longheaded dolicho-mesocephalic than modern West Asians who have undergone a shortening process. That was even mentioned by old school anthropologists.

That is exactly the reason why I say the EEF were the most dolicho-mesocephalic types of West Eurasia by that time, because virtually all Neolithic skeletons from Anatolia and the Levant were Robust Dolichocephalic types.

Sub Saharan Africans, South Indians, Eskimos, Inuits or whatever are not West Eurasians so they don't play any role.

Though Sub Saharan Africans and South Indians are not more Dolichocephalic. South Indian tribals are meso- or brachycephalic. There is also huge variation in Sub Saharan Africans. In fact the most Dolichocephalic Sub Saharan Africans are the West Eurasian (EEF) mixed East Africans like Ethopians and Eritreans. And in West Africa the Mali and Mauritanians(Afro_Asiatic admixed).

And Eskimos, Inuits Dolichocephalic? The Eskimos I have seen were average Mesocephalic (middle longheaded) and Inuits mostly brachycephalic round faced.

But than again. They don't play any role in our discussion about West Eurasian types and the differences between WHG and EEF.

 

[Tomenable]

I was talking about North Africa and Middle Eastern Arabic-speaking countries, not about West Asia in general.

The shortening (and widening) process is the general trend seen in most parts of the world.

The lengthening process of skulls (dolichocephalization) is less frequently observed than brachycephalization.

 

[Angela]

I haven't yet gone over all of the pictures that have been posted in this thread, but I personally don't have any confidence that even forensic artists can give us a good sense of the appearance of these ancient peoples, much less people just posting sketches on the internet.

This is the first reconstruction of Oetzi. In my opinion, it obviously owes a lot to a perception, conscious or not, that he would have looked like modern Central Europeans.

This is the second reconstruction. I have some familiarity with these areas, and I think that his time, as well as correcting the pigmentation based on the snp analysis, they looked at phenotypes common in the Tyrol.

A reconstruction for La Brana was recently done. Yet prior reconstructions of European hunter-gatherers looked slightly different. Which ones are more correct?

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Cro-Magnon

Where does this Les Elyzies sample fit?

 

[Tomenable]

much less people just posting sketches on the internet.

But those are not that random guy's own sketches but some professional reconstructions as well.

He just scanned them or something, and posted on the internet.

What I like about those sketches is that authors didn't pretend that they know pigmentation.

 

[holderlin]

Yamna people can be modelled genetically as a mix of EHG and either "Teal" or CHG. This also applies already to Khvalynsk people, even though in slightly different proportions. In anthropological terms I'm not sure how things looked like in Yamna culture (maybe the population was already so intermixed that it comprised a single anthropological type), but a morphological duality of Khvalynsk population can be observed.

Let's quote Mathieson's study:

"The unusually large cemetery at Khvalynsk contained southern Europeoid and northern Europeoid cranio-facial types, consistent with the possibility that people from the northern and southern steppes mingled and were buried here."

I guess that originally (before they merged into one population) EHG = northern types and "Teal" or CHG = southern types.

I wonder which cranio-facial type or types can be attributed to males SVP35 with R1b (grave 12) and SVP46 with R1a (grave 1) ???

Were both of them of northern Europeoid cranio-facial type, or was one or both of them of southern Europeoid type?

Everything in the region after Dnieper Donets/Samara is a mix of "Southern" and "Northern". But of course with no evidence for contact with Caucuses until darn close to Yamnaya this was assumed to be a result of contact with the Balkans, at least prior to ancient genetic revelations. I was trying to match the individual Khvalynsk samples with some of these other characteristics as well but I couldnt dig it up. I don't know that it's all been curated together, or at least it's not readily available.

Stredny Stog was clearly a mix of Balkan(WHG+EEF)+Steppe(EHG+(dash of Teal at this stage?)), and it seems to be implied by one of these research groups that this is the source of EEF/WHG in Sintashta rather than requiring a Corded War migratiion back to the East Pontic after penetration into Northern Europe.

 

[Tomenable]

Currently available Ancient samples of R1b haplogroup (in total 45+ samples) and R1a haplogroup (in total 71+ samples) suggest, that both R1b-M269/L23 and R1a-M198/M417 could initially increase in numbers (demographic expansion) in the Volga steppe. If not counting R1b-V88 Iberians, the oldest known samples of R1a and R1b come from exactly the same prehistoric peoples and cultures - from EHGs and from Khvalynsk culture (= the best candidate for the earliest PIE culture according to M. Gimbutas).

Roughly from that area, they could later expand territorially, roughly at the same time, but along distinct routes.

I've made two maps showing possible early expansion routes & ranges, based on available samples and their chronology:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...f-R1a-M198-M417-in-the-light-of-aDNA-evidence

R1a M198/M417:

http://s1.postimg.org/di5tzku0d/Early_expansion_of_R1a_M198.png

R1b M269/L23:

http://s1.postimg.org/r1lbqot7h/Early_R1b_expansion.png

 

[MOESAN]

But those are not that random guy's own sketches but some professional reconstructions as well.

He just scanned them or something, and posted on the internet.


What I like about those sketches is that authors didn't pretend that they know pigmentation.

some unverifiable traits in facIal reconstruction BASED ON SKELETONS:
pigmentation form and implantation of head hairs, facial pillosity: moustaches, beard, eyebrows, fleshy form of nose tip, eyelids, thickness and form of lips, and so on: AnD ALL THESE FEATURES ARE OF THE GREATER IMPORTANCE CONCERNING EXTERNAL LOOK AND PROFANS JUDGEMENT AND FEELINGS.
it's why I don't accord too much weight to these artistic reconstitutions

 

[Tomenable]

MOESAN, thank you for your comments.

I think we should just leave physical anthropology alone, at least for now.

What do you think about my R1b and R1a expansion maps posted above?

Many people pursue a "South of Caucasus" agenda for the origin of either just R1b M269 or both M269 and R1a M198.

Considering that both M269 and M198 formed ca. 14 - 13 thousand years ago, I think it is probable that either one or both of them originally came from south of the Caucasus. But they most likely came as hunters, not as farmers (because it was too early for farming). And I think that L23 and M417 arose already in the steppe, most likely within the Samara & Khvalynsk cultures. There is solid evidence that demographic expansion of those lineages took place already in the steppe, and we also found aDNA samples of both R1b and R1a at first in EHGs, then in Khvalynsk culture. I think the "Southern Agenda" pursued by some users - which seems to be their substitute for the old Anatolian Hypothesis (which is now totally dead) - can't be sustained in the light of new findings.

Another nail to the coffin of this "Southern Agenda" was the discovery that "Teal people" could in fact be... hunters from Caucasus. Every supporter of the "Southern Agenda" was expecting them to be already farmers or herders, not still hunter-gatherers.

So this is a huge unpleasant surprise for them as well.

I think supporters of this "Southern Agenda" want to claim, that Proto-IE language first evolved south of the Caucasus, then went to the steppe. But this is impossible to claim if we assume that the migration from the south took place in Mesolithic times.

Because we know from linguists, that PIE language is not so old.

So even if some R1b or R1a came from the Middle East to the north in Mesolithic times, they were not yet PIE-speakers.

It seems increasingly more probable, that Marija Gimbutas was right not just in general outline, but also in many details - it seems that Samara culture (the first guys ever who domesticated horses) and Khvalynsk culture were the earliest PIE speakers.

 

[Sile]

why is it that every paper that comes out gets distorted by fabrication about ydna R1 ??

the paper has 2x J and 1 x I ydna
lets not have R1 fantasy dreams as per usual

when you find CHG in a per with R1 .........then we can talk about it

 

[holderlin]

I'm not sure why do you consider Yamnaya as the "original Indoeuropeans". That culture was not the first stage of PIE, but the last one:

According to linguist Robert Stephen Paul Beekes: "There seems to be no doubt that the Yamnaya culture represents the LAST phase of an Indo-European linguistic unity, although there were probably already significant dialectal differences within it."

Marija Gimbutas who was the original author of the Kurgan Hypothesis also didn't consider Yamna as the earliest PIE, but a later stage.

Gimbutas saw early stages of PIE in Chalcolithic steppe cultures which preceded Yamna - Samara and Khvalynsk cultures.

According to Mayu's blog, Corded Ware was descended from PIE groups which emigrated from the steppe during Early Yamna phase:

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html

AFAIK, all Yamna samples collected so far are from later phases of Yamna culture, so they are people who stayed in that part of the steppe after several other groups had already emigrated in various directions before. Which may be the reason why all that we can see there is ht35.

All Yamna samples tested so far, are from period called by Mayu "Indoeuropean stage 3", not from "stage 2":

Stage 2:

Stage 3:

By the time of Stage 3 some haplogroups and subclades - such as R1b-L51 - could already be outside of the steppe zone.

Maybe R1b-L51 - which is absent from Yamna samples known to date - was in Coţofeni culture or in Ezero culture ???

Yep, the archaeology is in strong support of everything radiating from Samara(Possibly Dnieper Donets as well because they clearly share ancestors). For this reason many call Samara the actual PIE's. Yamnaya is used simply because it's the last layer exhibiting cultural homogeneity across the region before we see historically attested, already differentiated, IE's. Therefore, as a result it also clearly displays all of the characteristics we would expect based on the reconstructed lexicon. In other words, it's the safest bet, where linguists and archaeologists are in agreement and other pre-genetics data is also aligned. Just like the sources you reference, many claim that Hittites, if not Tocharians as well, probably left before Yamnaya as we define it existed.

The Volga also shows evidence of an unbelievably early Neolithic for the region, which the Samara and related cultures are a direct result of. Considering this, one shouldnt be surprised at hegemony.

The genetics are actually already in support of a Samara as PIE hypothesis, but people like to ignore this for various reasons.

 

[Goga]

why is it that every paper that comes out gets distorted by fabrication about ydna R1 ??

the paper has 2x J and 1 x I ydna
lets not have R1 fantasy dreams as per usual

when you find CHG in a per with R1 .........then we can talk about it

Lol, some folks are disappointed by the recent scientific papers and science in general, so they still try to find some kind of excuse to not abandon their dream world.

Samara & Khvalynsk cultures? C'mon people should find a better excuse and try better. Samara & Khvalynsk cultures were absolutely not proto-Indo-European at all, that's even ridiculous to think about it.

What we do know is that those Indo-Europeans who have invaded the Europe came from Yamnaya and not Samara, lol.

Linguistic links between Indo-European and Uralic are artificial. There're more real links between Indo-European, Kartvelian, proto-Semitic, Sumerian etc.

 

[Tomenable]

why is it that every paper that comes out gets distorted by fabrication about ydna R1 ??

the paper has 2x J and 1 x I ydna
lets not have R1 fantasy dreams as per usual

when you find CHG in a per with R1 .........then we can talk about it

Both CHG males, who are presumed to be "Teal people", had haplogroup J - not R1.

On the other hand, both R1a and R1b were present among EHGs, already before they acquired "Teal admixture".

The lack of R1 in CHGs seems to confirm what has been suggested time and again before - namely, that their "Teal admixture" perhaps came exclusively from women.

In wartime, prehistoric people used to capture enemy women. After conquering enemy settlements, they used to kill all men, but to take possession of their women. So a group of EHGs could either raid a group of CHGs (capturing a lot of their women in the process), or they could even entirely conquer a group of CHGs, thus acquiring their autosomal DNA, but not their Y-DNA.

There is of course also a more peaceful possibility - namely, exchanging brides between EHGs and "Teals" or CHGs, which led to the dillution of "Teal admixture" in EHGs.

 

[Goga]

Yep, the archaeology is in strong support of everything radiating from Samara(Possibly Dnieper Donets as well because they clearly share ancestors). For this reason many call Samara the actual PIE's. Yamnaya is used simply because it's the last layer exhibiting cultural homogeneity across the region before we see historically attested, already differentiated, IE's. Therefore, as a result it also clearly displays all of the characteristics we would expect based on the reconstructed lexicon. In other words, it's the safest bet, where linguists and archaeologists are in agreement and other pre-genetics data is also aligned. Just like the sources you reference, many claim that Hittites, if not Tocharians as well, probably left before Yamnaya as we define it existed.

The Volga also shows evidence of an unbelievably early Neolithic for the region, which the Samara and related cultures are a direct result of. Considering this, one shouldnt be surprised at hegemony.

The genetics are actually already in support of a Samara as PIE hypothesis, but people like to ignore this for various reasons.

LMAO, Samara? Are you serious??

There is a recent scientific paper that shows that folks that Indo-Europized Europe came from Yamnaya.


But delusional people changed their mind about Yamnaya when they found out that Yamnaya was for a huge part West Asian. So are trying to look for other places to spread the lies.


Love s**** when you are finding out that you are not who you think you are...

 

[Goga]

Once again, SAMARA??? Joke of the day!


Please, try better next time..

 

[Tomenable]

IMO people who were local hunter-gatherers in the steppe, did domesticate local horses (Samara culture) on their own.

Nobody brought horses to the steppe, it was their natural environment. And when it comes to other domestic animals - they could come together with women, who were kidnapped by "to-become-pastoralists" steppe hunters in their raids against farming villages.

Really, know-how can spread not just through "we migrate and give you", but also through "they attack us and steal it".