6.5 ka Levantine chalcolithic DNA

50% blue eye frequency is a lot. In NE Europe blue eyes became common from much lower percentages, i wonder why the reverse happened in Levant.
 
So what language did the people already in the levant and south levant speak when these northerners arrived ?
.
And these northerers had already moved emigrated as in left the levant by the early bronze-age.........how can they have taught any language from the north

The issue is not that. It is that Chalcolithic Levant was already northern-shifted (much more Anatolian_Neo and, a bit less so, Iranian_Neo) than Neolithic Levant, but this study also shows that Chalcolithic Levant was still less northern-shifted than Bronze Age Levant, particulary Bronze Age Levant_North (that's especially clear when you look at the PCA, with Chalcolithic Levant closer to Neolithic Levant, and Bronze Age Levant, especially Bronze Age Levant North, even closer to the ancient Caucasian and Iranian samples). That shows that, if Chalcolithic Levant can be modeled as ~43% non-Levantine (Anatolian + Iranian), then Bronze Age Levant were even more affected by these West Asia, but non-Levantine sources of ancestry. In my opinion that came from a second wave from northerners, probably this time more influenced by Iranians/South Caucasians than by Anatolians (maybe the wave that brought a huge percentage of J1 and J2?) - and in my opinion probably more "northeasterly" than the earlier wave and possibly coming roughly from Northern Mesopotamia.
 
Could you for crying out loud ever get your facts straight? CHG WAS NOT BLUE-EYED.

Also, read my post # 30 second to last paragraph as to the possible origin.

As far as the following is concerned, you are completely confused:
"I mean, i've tried to say that to you or in general many times but... The problem is not where fair features appeared. The problem is that we are talking about 6000BC Levant and we make an analogy with Eastern Europe, only because IE theories. Pushing an agenda is not about finding something that nobody ever thought, its about take that information and make a parallel without something else, just too discredit that latter thing. Apparently, you, Lazaridis and many are willing to believe that if Yamnaya was Brown haired / Brown eyed or Blonde haired / Blue eyed it change completely the power of this reality, because some kind of elite ( wich one? George Soros? Lol private joke ) prefer that they were Blond Haired / Blue Eyed."

The saga of the blonde, blue-eyed Yamnaya people or more generally the Bronze Age people of places like Ukraine bringing those alleles to central and northern Europe has nothing to do with Iosif Lazaridis, or Reich, or me for that matter. That was the saga promulgated since the late 19th century by "anthropologists" and then repeated by every crack pot racist in the 20th century.

Science has falsified that explanation. It's all much more complicated than that and hasn't really been fully explained as of yet.

Lazaridis just said it in his Twitter. It's not about facts, it's about pushing an agenda. He maybe just confused the fact that CHG had genes for fair skin. The fact that Yamnaya was like Brown Haired / Brown Eyed, like Mediterranean with Fair Skin isn't an issue, why would it be? It's an issue when, in case of IE spreading languages and the potential ancestry and heritage people can get of that, Fair Skin have somehow a role to play. Why would Lazaridis make an analogy of blue eyes with Levant_Chl and Pontic Steppe Eneolithic if he didn't have himself the envy to prove the contrary.
 
Lazaridis just said it in his Twitter. It's not about facts, it's about pushing an agenda. He maybe just confused the fact that CHG had genes for fair skin. The fact that Yamnaya was like Brown Haired / Brown Eyed, like Mediterranean with Fair Skin isn't an issue, why would it be? It's an issue when, in case of IE spreading languages and the potential ancestry and heritage people can get of that, Fair Skin have somehow a role to play. Why would Lazaridis make an analogy of blue eyes with Levant_Chl and Pontic Steppe Eneolithic if he didn't have himself the envy to prove the contrary.
He simply stated how surprising it was to find blue eyes in such a high frequency in an ancient Levantine population. I'm sure hardly anyone expected a frequency this high.
 
I have to say Lazaridis virtue signaling is pretty obvious this time, he cannot longer hide that he is pushing an agenda. Now he is aknowledging in his Twitter that Gamba and Mathiesen found Anatolian Farmers with blue eyes and him Minoan with blue eyes, and he dont say that Villabruna that predate all those people had blue eyes too. Look at how many black / white mulato in europe and north america have blue eyes, because their mothers where of european descent. People where exchanging from europe - anatolia and ultimately levant, before the neolithic even exist. What's the most funny, is that all those people have too high opinion of themselves, they think they do the right thing, being open minded, being a people of the world. The day all those papers gonna be interpret by Erdogan like Turkey is the birth place of " Aryans " because those liberals scientifics tried to do a good thing to shadowing europe and empowering other places in the world ( even if the real history is more complicate ).

What??? Can you clarify what you really mean? The "Aryan" (PIE) question has virtually nothing to do with these findings ("Aryan" does not mean "people with blue eyes", it means a people with a specific language and culture), and in fact it's been years since we first knew that Anatolian_Neolithic had a significant WHG-like - but still not exactly WHG - ancestry, so if the mutation for blue eyes happened in that ancestral population that contributed to both WHG and Anatolian_Neolithic everything could be neatly explained without any need for conspiracy theories. We also know that blue eyes were regularly find in WHG, but also in significant yet minor percentages in ANF and later in some EEF populations. There is no need to talk about "Aryans" here when the topic is Chalcolithic Levant.
 
What??? Can you clarify what you really mean? The "Aryan" (PIE) question has virtually nothing to do with these findings ("Aryan" does not mean "people with blue eyes", it means a people with a specific language and culture), and in fact it's been years since we first knew that Anatolian_Neolithic had a significant WHG-like - but still not exactly WHG - ancestry, so if the mutation for blue eyes happened in that ancestral population that contributed to both WHG and Anatolian_Neolithic everything could be neatly explained without any need for conspiracy theories.

What all this have to do with what i said. You and me obviously knows the meaning of Aryan, of CHG, Anatolia_Nhl, but not everyone. You never fought that people could use it as a political recuperation not to valorize european culture or genetic like Nazis, but to devalorize it instead? I know exactly what i'm fighting for, i'm not interested in PIE for some ancient ethnic pride, but for history, but not every people are like this. Just look at Kurdish people who says " PIE came from Kurdistan ". If you let them have this reality, they gonna after that come with " everything europe as came from Kurdistan, so we have better, we can devalorize them ". Did you remember that Vladimir Putin in 2004 was going to Arkaim ( archeological site of Sintashta Culture ) and talked about it like a " russian pride ". Just imagine the same is do about PIE coming from Kurdistan or Turkey only because some Genetists have to virtue signaling.
 
He simply stated how surprising it was to find blue eyes in such a high frequency in an ancient Levantine population. I'm sure hardly anyone expected a frequency this high.

I dont think he was, i was personnally surprised and found interesting that we found mtdna U6 in that context, until people made an analogy between PIE and Levant, then i remember than in 2k18 everything is virtue signalling.
 
if we look at the origins of blue eyes we see it is from proto-circassians.........maykop culture area
The Circassian language, also known as the Cherkess language, including West Adyghe, Kabardian Adyghe, and Ubykh, is a member of the ancient Northwest Caucasian language family.
Archaeological findings, mainly of dolmens in Northwest Caucasus region, indicate a megalithic culture in the Northwest Caucasus.[44] Around the beginning of the 4th Millennium BCE, the North West Caucasus region and western Steppes became influenced by the Maykop culture.

Is yamnaya also on the black sea or only on the caspian sea side ..........there are different options by some scholars
.
http://www.circassianworld.com/circassians/who-are-they/1124-who-are-the-circassians

That's total fantasy. CHG and even Caucasian Chalcolithic people were not particularly blue-eyed, WHG much to the west of the Maykop area had already had a much higher proportion of blue eyes, and in fact people of the Villabruna Cluster well, well before Maykop (in the Mesolithic) and far away from the Caucasus. I also think you're making another leap of faith by affirming categorically that the Maykop culture was Proto-Circassian. Besides, as we can see from this study, by the Chalcolithic, when Maykop formed as a culture, there were already relevant proportions of blue eyes in populations of the Levant, Anatolia and all of Europe. No, it's not from Proto-Circassians, it predates them by thousands of years, and the Caucasus wasn't even a hotspot for high blue eyes frequency.
 
What all this have to do with what i said. You and me obviously knows the meaning of Aryan, of CHG, Anatolia_Nhl, but not everyone. You never fought that people could use it as a political recuperation not to valorize european culture or genetic like Nazis, but to devalorize it instead? I know exactly what i'm fighting for, i'm not interested in PIE for some ancient ethnic pride, but for history, but not every people are like this. Just look at Kurdish people who says " PIE came from Kurdistan ". If you let them have this reality, they gonna after that come with " everything europe as came from Kurdistan, so we have better, we can devalorize them ". Did you remember that Vladimir Putin in 2004 was going to Arkaim ( archeological site of Sintashta Culture ) and talked about it like a " russian pride ". Just imagine the same is do about PIE coming from Kurdistan or Turkey only because some Genetists have to virtue signaling.

I understood what you think about this problem that you perceive. What I didn't understand is your point about the remarks of Lazaridis, and why they are supposedly so misleading or even dangerous. And what do the comments about blue eyes and Chalcolithic Levant have to do with the PIE controversy? What's this association between the Levant and steppe PIE that you're talking about in your posts?

It's not like blue eyes has been demonstrated to be particularly correlated with the spread of PIE-speaking people, especially because out of dozens of Pontic-Caspian samples only a minority have blue eyes, and it's been proven that both light skin and - less so - blue eyes were already widespread before the IE expansion in many parts of Europe and West/Central Asia. In fact, blue eyes are a trait too superficial and minor to allow us to make any inferences about the origin of peoples. It can be selected for or against along the time, "artificially" increased to high frequencies by genetic drift and bottlenecks, or whatever.
 
I understood what you think about this problem that you perceive. What I didn't understand is your point about the remarks of Lazaridis, and why they are supposedly so misleading or even dangerous. And what do the comments about blue eyes and Chalcolithic Levant have to do with the PIE controversy? What's this association between the Levant and steppe PIE that you're talking about in your posts?

It's not like blue eyes has been demonstrated to be particularly correlated with the spread of PIE-speaking people, especially because out of dozens of Pontic-Caspian samples only a minority have blue eyes, and it's been proven that both light skin and - less so - blue eyes were already widespread before the IE expansion in many parts of Europe and West/Central Asia. In fact, blue eyes are a trait too superficial and minor to allow us to make any inferences about the origin of peoples. It can be selected for or against along the time, "artificially" increased to high frequencies by genetic drift and bottlenecks, or whatever.

Exactly what's the point? It's Lazaridis who said, Hey look Levant Chalcolithic have more Blue Eyes than Chalcolithic Eastern Europe. Then he start to talk about how some Anatolian Farmers from the Gamba and Mathiesen papers and his study about Minoan also had Blue Eyes, then he even mention CHG for whatever reason. Why? What's the analogy between Levant Chl and Eastern Europe Chl a part of saying something like " hey look near-easterners where more aryans than PIE people ". Obviously my use of the term Aryan here is purely provocative. He could have just said: Wow ancient near-easterners had blue eyes, cool. But no, he talks about eastern europe with a somehow analogy with PIE, like an attack to people believing Eastern Europe and PIE people were Blonde haired and Blue eyed. That's typically people who hide ideas or agenda, and those ideas and agenda resurface at certain points for random reasons.
 
wait! nobody is suggesting that T and the Iranian farmer is the responsible of the introduction of Indoeuropean into Israel? wait... no IE there? what a fun we can have with genetics uh?

Typically what this means? What IE have to do with the actual context? It not even make any ironical sense. Can we stop to put PIE in every context like this is the graal?
 
50% blue eye frequency is a lot. In NE Europe blue eyes became common from much lower percentages, i wonder why the reverse happened in Levant.

I think it may have something to do with the movement of J1 and J2 bearing groups from the southern Caucasus. These Levant Chalcolithic people had about 17% Iran Chalcolithic, but they had a lot of Anatolian Neolithic, where we know that people had about 25% of this blue eyed gene. Drift, bottleneck, etc. might have increased it, or it's just a coincidence in this one collection of people, but Anatolia Neolithic was quite a bit fairer than Iran Neolithic.

The Bronze Age Sidon and Jordan samples are almost 50% Iran Chalcolithic, with the rest Levant Neolithic, and are quite a bit darker, so that would fit.

The question I have is whether there were any people in the Levant, i.e. Syria perhaps, or among ancient Jews, in the Bronze and Iron Ages who did descend from them, or are they a total dead end. One reason I wonder that is because isolated Syrian populations, i.e. Assad's group, Samaritans, and even Palestinian Christians can have a few people with a relatively "lighter" phenotype. This could, however, be a result of endogamy and thus a barrier to continuing gene flow from the direction of the Arabian peninsula.
 
What all this have to do with what i said. You and me obviously knows the meaning of Aryan, of CHG, Anatolia_Nhl, but not everyone. You never fought that people could use it as a political recuperation not to valorize european culture or genetic like Nazis, but to devalorize it instead? I know exactly what i'm fighting for, i'm not interested in PIE for some ancient ethnic pride, but for history, but not every people are like this. Just look at Kurdish people who says " PIE came from Kurdistan ". If you let them have this reality, they gonna after that come with " everything europe as came from Kurdistan, so we have better, we can devalorize them ". Did you remember that Vladimir Putin in 2004 was going to Arkaim ( archeological site of Sintashta Culture ) and talked about it like a " russian pride ". Just imagine the same is do about PIE coming from Kurdistan or Turkey only because some Genetists have to virtue signaling.
These people had Anatolian farmer ancestry which includes whg-like ancestry. That whg-like ancestry is likely where the blue eyes came from.
 
These people had Anatolian farmer ancestry which includes whg-like ancestry. That whg-like ancestry is likely where the blue eyes came from.

I mean i probably have hard time to explain the point. It's not about Blue Eyes, it's about how you use this information. " Chalcolithic Levantines were probably more blue-eyed than Bronze Age people from Russia " What does that mean? To use Bronze Age Russia as an analogy for you?
 
Exactly what's the point? It's Lazaridis who said, Hey look Levant Chalcolithic have more Blue Eyes than Chalcolithic Eastern Europe. Then he start to talk about how some Anatolian Farmers from the Gamba and Mathiesen papers and his study about Minoan also had Blue Eyes, then he even mention CHG for whatever reason. Why? What's the analogy between Levant Chl and Eastern Europe Chl a part of saying something like " hey look near-easterners where more aryans than PIE people ". Obviously my use of the term Aryan here is purely provocative. He could have just said: Wow ancient near-easterners had blue eyes, cool. But no, he talks about eastern europe with a somehow analogy with PIE, like an attack to people believing Eastern Europe and PIE people were Blonde haired and Blue eyed. That's typically people who hide ideas or agenda, and those ideas and agenda resurface at certain points for random reasons.

Well, but if some people in 2018 still believe that PIE people were all Nordic types with blonde hair and blue eyes then I can see why a geneticist may have thought it'd be nice (or funny?) to call them out ("attack" is too strong a word frankly). I don't think the point of this comparison has two interesting observations: 1) things can change a lot in 5,000-6,000 years, so that the frequency of blue eyes in the Levant and in Eastern Europe are now almost the reverse of what they were in ~4000 BCE; 2) the traditional anthropologists and the pseudo-scientific or simply amateur/deluded racists of older generations were indeed very wrong when they believed that blue eyes and blonde hair were directly and mostly correlated with Indo-European ancestry, because there were other clearly non-IE sources for those traits. Unless blue eyes, light skin and blonde hair are somehow "more special" if they came only from Eastern Europe rather than at least partly from West Asia and from Western/Central Europe itself, I don't get what's the "big problem" in that provocation. The racists were again dead wrong. I can see why someone would find it worth commenting about.
 
Lazaridis twitted this " I don't think it's directly relevant, as no one AFAIK proposed PIE had anything to do with Chalcolithic Israel, but certainly a piece of the larger puzzle. " So what is he trying to say?
 
Well, but if some people in 2018 still believe that PIE people were all Nordic types with blonde hair and blue eyes then I can see why a geneticist may have thought it'd be nice (or funny?) to call them out ("attack" is too strong a word frankly). I don't think the point of this comparison has two interesting observations: 1) things can change a lot in 5,000-6,000 years, so that the frequency of blue eyes in the Levant and in Eastern Europe are now almost the reverse of what they were in ~4000 BCE; 2) the traditional anthropologists and the pseudo-scientific or simply amateur/deluded racists of older generations were indeed very wrong when they believed that blue eyes and blonde hair were directly and mostly correlated with Indo-European ancestry, because there were other clearly non-IE sources for those traits. Unless blue eyes, light skin and blonde hair are somehow "more special" if they came only from Eastern Europe rather than at least partly from West Asia and from Western/Central Europe itself, I don't get what's the "big problem" in that provocation. The racists were again dead wrong. I can see why someone would find it worth commenting about.

Because it's not to others, especially people who dont have blue eyes ( wich i'am part of ) to call people with blue eyes out like they are shit. Racial bias and sexual bias are real things, wich i personnally dont care about, but a lot of people want to deconstruct those things. It's bad if you are a white guy having sexual bias over blonde blue eyed girl, but it's not if having over an african or a racial minority. It should be pretty obvious that fair features doesn't gives you any power, i dont understand your comment against racism here. So you cannot considering somebody special if he as blue eyes and blonde hair? its against every people that doesn't have those features? It's sad that such targeted shaming is happenning to Europe. And finally, what the heck have indo-european cultures to do with all this crap? Do you see warriors around you? Is Sweden a pride viking country? If you know actuality, then you know thats not. What IE was 4000 years ago, is not what it is today, this is for this reason i believe things like nationalism are bullshit, because those are federative ideas, you are willing to believe that everyone from your ethnic thinks the same, if it was the case, there would not be any other humans than europeans in europe.
 
I find it quite possible, even likely that the Afro-Asiatic linguistic component was originally absorbed by (or imposed onto) the Anatolian & Iranian ("northern") population that probably merged with Levant_Neolithic ones, hypothetically because they were highland immigrants in a more technologically advanced region or something like that. But that would've happened before the consolidation of a Proto-Semitic language and culture, before its expansion to other areas, probably still during the Late Neolithic,, and during that "gestation period" it's possible that the foreign elements eventually became dominant even before Proto-Semitic was spread elsewhere in the Fertile Crescent. I say that because I find it hard to believe that Afro-Asiatic came originally from too much north or east of the Levant, considering the distribution of the rest of the family (all other branches in Africa, some of them with possible older links to Southwest Asia, like Cushitic) and the heavy Natufian affinities in other heavily AA regions like North Africa and Egypt.

with some fancy we could suppose the definite break of Semitic off other AA languages could have occurred when somme AA language came northwards and was adopted by more northern populations in ancient times, if I follow your suggestion or what I believe it is. After that, linguistically acculturated northern pops could have reversed the flood and passed a completely developped Semitic language to southern pops, their old "teachers" of more archaic AA... Not impossible at all. Latins were not the first basic IE speakers but after some time, when their culture and forces flourished they passed their locally evolved IE to other IE pops whose languages were maybe closer to the origins...
 
the Chamitic languages are even, maybe, the more basic AA heirs? Or at least a more southern evolution of basic AA in situ (closer to the cradle).
 
I feel like, in linguistic afro-asiatic hypothesis are too conservative to try to debunk the actual hypothesis with some genetic facts. What's actually the real relationship between Afro-Asiatic languages? Some people have actual problem to consider even IE languages family as a thing, so imagine A/A?
 

This thread has been viewed 98458 times.

Back
Top