Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6141516
Results 376 to 380 of 380

Thread: 101 Ancient Eurasian Genomes Available Online

  1. #376
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,320
    Points
    34,830
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,830, Level: 57
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 620
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Some points after Reich and Allentoft:
    Some discrepancies between both works even if the samples of cultures were not exactly the same ones, and if, and I regret it, the breaking down into autosomes subgroups are not the same ones; let’s be cautious then. First result: I’m obliged to use proxi’s. the brown part in graphics seems sort of ‘steppic’ (ANE in it?) +’WHG’+’EHG’, so I’ ll do with it. I suppose it the ‘yamnaya’ element?
    The ‘west-asian’ (absent in Samara HG) seems light, as the East-Asia diverse components. The question is in the interpretation of this kind of ‘WHG’: new introduced by Steppes tribes or stayed in place after Neolithic? The first hypothesis magnifies the role of Steppes people in Western Europe when the second diminishes it for a part. Personally I would think the first interpretation is closer to reality but who knows?
    What remains of the two surveys is the vicinity of Corded to Unetice and BBs people, with a bit more of Western Europe (‘atlantic’ , ‘west-med’) among BBs Quickly said Unetice seems between Corded and BB what is not disproved by archeology and physical anthropology. The proximity to Yamnaya population (not only the component) is less evident in Allentoft than in Reich; Yamnaya people had almost 0% of ‘west-med’ or EEF or whatever ‘sardinian’ but in Allentoft this southwestern component appears in Corded, what troubles me! Not the same Corded sites or onlythhe differences in breaking down?
    What strikes me in Allentoft is the greater vicinity of Sintashta C. to Corded and other Central Europe Bronze Populations than to Yamnaya, spite it is further East and well separated from Corded on a map. Sintashta people had a little bit of EEF or a ‘mediter’ or pseudo ‘sardinian’ (?) as Corded when Yamnaya has not; Sintashta had less ‘caucasus’ or ‘west-asian’ than Yamnaya, and also less of diverse North-East Asia DNA. At the opposite, Afanasyevo, older than Sintashta, is very close to Yamnaya. Not so stupid was Konintsev affirmation saying a lot of Russian-Siberian Steppes cultures were in debt to Center-Western Europe, according to his metric surveys. Not in accord with Grigoryev affirmations that Sintashta people were for the most southerners, finding cultural sources in Anatolia, South Caucasus, Syria and Palestina. I red in some forums that Afanasyevo would have been of Western Europe origin, but it does not appear in the Allentoft’s DNA survey; As Yamnaya and Afanasyevo are older, I think the first impulse was from Steppes. Is it hazard if Sintashta and Andronovo more recent cultures seem linked to Corded? I don’t think it!
    The Grigoryev’s error is thinking similar artefacts are the mark of similar population: old problem of archeology. Artefacts prove contacts, not fusion. And contacts between steppic tribes and southern more civilized folks were already old enough.The Corded tribes had stone axes which were inspired by Anatolia and Iran copper axes (even imitating the mould marks!), spite their rather northern affinities. Contacts have been, sure. When? Where? When looking at burying traditions in some cultures and places like Unetice or South Siberian ones we see different traditions surely linked to different origins: some scholars imagined metallurgists elites, with great cultural influences and light demic influences…

    &: concerning Armenia supposed without admixture since the 1500 BC, the bronze Age people, spite being far enough from Steppes tribes, showed less EEF or ‘mediter’ component, less ‘west-asian’ and more ‘steppe’ (+HG) and some North-East Asia components quasi absent in today population: so either Armenians received imput from Near-Eastern after Bronze or at the contrary the Bronze population contained addition of Steppes people and was a partly foreign elite whose rarest components almost disappeared by time. a third solution could be: more Catacomb A proximity, these last ones more southernlike?

    &: the first 'mongoloids' in eastern Steppes appeared about the iron Age, depending on places (Tarim Bassin: only about 1000 BC) - but in Northern parts of Okunevo culture, pre-Iron, 'amerindian-like' people weighted for more than 50% versus 'europoids'

  2. #377
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,320
    Points
    34,830
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,830, Level: 57
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 620
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Thanks Johannes. It seems confirming Kazakhstans surveys about the progressive replacement of 'europoids' in this part of Steppes by 'east-asian' people.
    in Kazakhstan the process of replacement perdured until late enough historical times, according to their scholars.

  3. #378
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    User with most referrers

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    25,862
    Level
    49
    Points: 25,862, Level: 49
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 688
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Johannes View Post
    Yes, Herodotus is to be respected. He is a valuable authority of ancient peoples. He is the father of history. Whats interesting is that the Persians were also descended from "Scythian" or "Iranic speakers." In fact Iran derives from "Aryanland."

    There were two kinds of Scythians: European Scythians and "Saka" or Asian Scythians. They both spoke the same or similar language and used Satem. However, a study was made of remains in Kazakhstan and some interesting results came out. For example, by the time Herodotus was writing about the Scythians most of the Saka were alredy a hybrid people (part white part Asian). However, the culture of the Saka seems to have been identical to the European Scythians. Just imagine Mountain Men in USA and Native Americans who had mixed with whites but had the same culture. Here is the study:

    Figure 2. Spatial frequency distribution maps of East Eurasian lineages.
    A- Pre-Iron Age period; B- Iron Age period. Frequency values and detailed information for populations 1–8 are shown in table 3. 1- Mongolia (Altai), 2- Gorny Altai, 3- West Kazakhstan, 4- Central Kazakhstan, 5- South Kazakhstan, 6- East Kazakhstan, 7- SW Siberia, 8- Mongolia (Egyin Gol).
    doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048904.g002


    "Tracing the Origin of the East-West Population Admixture in the Altai Region (Central Asia)"

    This clearly shows that by the Iron Age most of the Sakas in Central Asia had become "hybrids". During the Bronze Age the Saka had reached all the way into W China and the Altai region. They then mixed with Mongoloid women (and probably men) and the Mongoloid DNA had spread with the Saka and other possible Turkish-speaking tribes into Russia. So we can conclude that during by the start of the Iron Age two types of Indo-Iranians lived in the steppes: 1) the European Skythians and Sarmatians and the hybrids possibly of Turkish speaking descendants of the Saka. The Saka had clearly mixed with Mongoloid people throughout the time they roamed Kazakhstan. And this predates the time of the Huns and other Turkish speakers.


    Yes I know the Steppes were slowly getting mixed with East Eurasian admixture but I think we were speaking about a people ethnic origin and not there genetic make up.

    Yet this is still incorrect. What we clearly see here is that Early Saka were predominantly West Eurasian (+90% ) and slowly when they expanded towards East they absorbed East Eurasian dna within time. But how does that play a role in the ethnic origin of Sakas?

    Obviously all Iranic speakers mixed with other respective people of their region. Or are Punjabis not Indo_Iranians because they obviously mixed with tribal Indian groups? I kinda don't see the logic behind this and don't understand how this is important to our discussion that Saka were an Iranic tribe confirmed by linguistics and archeologists. It doesn't matter much how much of non Scythian genes they absorbed in some places in that case.

    Just because a, let's say my brother marries a woman from a near by tribe and brings her to ours and she becomes part of our tribe, does that make their children anything else but Kurds? I think you have a different view because you are not used to tribal thinking as much as I (not meant in a disrespectful manner) . People who incooperate into a society (mostly females) become part of it. And in the case of Sakas we see that geneticwise there was a change but culturalwise not. Therefore we can speak of genetic absorbation but not an "ethnical change".

    Also as I pointed out before the Bronze and early Iron Age Saka from all of Kazakhstan were almost fully West Eurasian. Only when they expanded further towards east into the Altais they absorbed genes from local people what is very normal, as Indo_Iranians did when they reached India, Pakistan or Afghanistan. But that doesn't make them any less Iranic, because Iranic is a ethno_cultural designation to which more than just genetics belong (Culture, Religion, Language, political motives and genetics). All Iron Age Iranic tribes differed significantly from their Proto Indo_Iranian forefathers at least slightly and Sakas from Altais were not an exception to that.

    pazyryk culture was the furthest the Scythians expanded.The primary homeland of the Saka (from where they expanded) was Kazkahstan

    as seen on this map
    Last edited by Alan; 11-07-15 at 14:25.

  4. #379
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Johannes's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-12-14
    Posts
    435
    Points
    4,137
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,137, Level: 18
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 113
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1

    Ethnic group
    Celtic/Germanic/Basque
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    Yes I know the Steppes were slowly getting mixed with East Eurasian admixture but I think we were speaking about a people ethnic origin and not there genetic make up.

    Yet this is still incorrect. What we clearly see here is that Early Saka were predominantly West Eurasian (+90% ) and slowly when they expanded towards East they absorbed East Eurasian dna within time. But how does that play a role in the ethnic origin of Sakas?

    Obviously all Iranic speakers mixed with other respective people of their region. Or are Punjabis not Indo_Iranians because they obviously mixed with tribal Indian groups? I kinda don't see the logic behind this and don't understand how this is important to our discussion that Saka were an Iranic tribe confirmed by linguistics and archeologists. It doesn't matter much how much of non Scythian genes they absorbed in some places in that case.

    Just because a, let's say my brother marries a woman from a near by tribe and brings her to ours and she becomes part of our tribe, does that make their children anything else but Kurds? I think you have a different view because you are not used to tribal thinking as much as I (not meant in a disrespectful manner) . People who incooperate into a society (mostly females) become part of it. And in the case of Sakas we see that geneticwise there was a change but culturalwise not. Therefore we can speak of genetic absorbation but not an "ethnical change".

    Also as I pointed out before the Bronze and early Iron Age Saka from all of Kazakhstan were almost fully West Eurasian. Only when they expanded further towards east into the Altais they absorbed genes from local people what is very normal, as Indo_Iranians did when they reached India, Pakistan or Afghanistan. But that doesn't make them any less Iranic, because Iranic is a ethno_cultural designation to which more than just genetics belong (Culture, Religion, Language, political motives and genetics). All Iron Age Iranic tribes differed significantly from their Proto Indo_Iranian forefathers at least slightly and Sakas from Altais were not an exception to that.

    pazyryk culture was the furthest the Scythians expanded.The primary homeland of the Saka (from where they expanded) was Kazkahstan

    as seen on this map
    The Saka did not mix "slightly." They mixed a lot. As it is clear from this study during the Bronze Age the Saka were 100% West Eurasian and by the Iron Age they were 50% West Eurasian-50% East Eurasian. I know the study uses confusing terminology. They claim to have studied remains of persons in Mongolia and Altai region (#1 and #8). But what they should have stated is that East Eurasians were actually East Asian, or at least most of them.

    I never said the Saka lost their culture. I stated before that the Saka and Tocharians had a tremendous influence on the Turks and Mongols on the development of the steppe culture. The Turks and Mongols completely copied or adopted the Saka culture that at the time. If we encountered Saka during the Bronze Age it would have been hard to tell them apart from the Skythians. However, this study clearly shows how the Saka and Tocharians became progressively more Mongol/Turkish as time went on. This study also points to how the Huns and later Turkish tribes who conquered all of Central Asia and Eastern Europe must have carried all the R1a of the Sakas and mixed with the Slavic and Balkanic peoples. Therefore not all of the R1a in eastern Europe is of Slavic origin.
    Last edited by Johannes; 14-07-15 at 05:43.

  5. #380
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Johannes's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-12-14
    Posts
    435
    Points
    4,137
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,137, Level: 18
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 113
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1

    Ethnic group
    Celtic/Germanic/Basque
    Country: United States



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    Thanks Johannes. It seems confirming Kazakhstans surveys about the progressive replacement of 'europoids' in this part of Steppes by 'east-asian' people.
    in Kazakhstan the process of replacement perdured until late enough historical times, according to their scholars.
    And the Hybrids later on became or evolved into Turkish speakers and carried a lot of R1a back into Eastern Europe.

Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6141516

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •