Ancient genomes reveal social and genetic structure of Late Neolithic Switzerland

This is slightly off topic my friends but does anyone here have any knowledge regarding these latest Khvalynsk samples? This nonsense on Eurogenes is driving me crazy. The blogs host and creator Davidski out of nowhere in the last day or so, went from believing Khvalynsk is one of the ancestors of Yamnaya, something which has been stated in practically every study done on WSH, to now believing some undocumented, unpublished, ghost population to the west actually contributed to Yamnaya. He seems to believe this because he claims there is minor WSHG admixture in one of the samples, the Q1a sample to be exact. The problem I see with this is simple, unless there is something wrong ultimately with the interpretation of the WSHG samples, and there is a ANE ghost population in Central Asia we do not know about, Khvalynsk cannot have WSHG, because the former has no ANA or East Asian ancestry to speak of, while the latter supposedly does at around 20%. That is pretty significant. WSHG is also incredibly similar made up of about 50% ANE, with 30% EHG. How could they claim WSHG as a source population with such similar ancestral components, up to 80% EHG/ANE in fact? I could just as easily claim Karelia HG or Pit Ware HG as the source of Khvalynsk. Funny how only a week ago, he claimed that making definitive statements on ancestry between ancient populations made up of such similar sources is too difficult, to now being 100% in on this more than likely, cooked up WSHG in Khvalynsk. Seems to me these guys not only just play with computer models until it suits their agenda, but they actually think as hobbyists, they know more than the scientists and researchers in the actual labs with the data, you know the people who have been researchers in this field for decades, some of whom for over 25 years. Yes these researchers make mistakes and are corrected eventually, some are a little archeologically ignorant. I am aware of these facts, however, call me crazy, but for some reason I am more inclined to believe David Anthony’s results and opinions on said results, over some guy who plays with models to suit his agenda on some random internet blog.

Both Khvalynsk and Yamnaya are just early branches from the Sredny Stog Cultural group. It was always the most likely scenario to me, that SSC is absolutely central to everything and SSC in turn came from the Lower Don Culture, when coming under the influence of Western Neolithic populations in Ukraine, later with influences from Cucuteni-Tripolye. Khvalynsk is an early offshot marching East, mixing with locals and having uniparentals, as well as ancestral ratios, including possible West Siberian admixture, which don't fit for Yamnaya and even less so for the Western groups, which were all but more important. I'm talking about the Western groups which produced not just the steppe people which colonised the West of Europe, like especially Cernavoda, Usatovo, Corded Ware etc., but also those which moved back to create Abashevo, Sintashta-Andronovo, so the Eastern wing of the IE, the Indo-Iranians.

The core group of these developments before Yamnaya was never much further East than the Don, for sure not that far North East as Khvalynsk. If now a much earlier presence of "the" steppe ancestry being found in the Western proposed cultural centre, while there is proof for a worse ratio, Siberian ancestry and uniparentals which don't fit in Khvalynsk, the latter is definitely out of the game and just an early offshot which was later captured by Yamnaya and the Yamna clans too were rolled over by the next waves from the West, after having been able to push for some time. The centre of "the steppe culture" or PIE is further West, truly the North Pontic sphere, at the border to the Western Neolithics, which is why they got that ancestral component, all of them. SSC developed and adopted cattle breeding under the direct influence from Western agro-pastoralists. There was no centre much further East and North, these were backward hunter fisher territories, no dynamic source.
 
Both Khvalynsk and Yamnaya are just early branches from the Sredny Stog Cultural group. It was always the most likely scenario to me, that SSC is absolutely central to everything and SSC in turn came from the Lower Don Culture, when coming under the influence of Western Neolithic populations in Ukraine, later with influences from Cucuteni-Tripolye. Khvalynsk is an early offshot marching East, mixing with locals and having uniparentals, as well as ancestral ratios, including possible West Siberian admixture, which don't fit for Yamnaya and even less so for the Western groups, which were all but more important. I'm talking about the Western groups which produced not just the steppe people which colonised the West of Europe, like especially Cernavoda, Usatovo, Corded Ware etc., but also those which moved back to create Abashevo, Sintashta-Andronovo, so the Eastern wing of the IE, the Indo-Iranians.

The core group of these developments before Yamnaya was never much further East than the Don, for sure not that far North East as Khvalynsk. If now a much earlier presence of "the" steppe ancestry being found in the Western proposed cultural centre, while there is proof for a worse ratio, Siberian ancestry and uniparentals which don't fit in Khvalynsk, the latter is definitely out of the game and just an early offshot which was later captured by Yamnaya and the Yamna clans too were rolled over by the next waves from the West, after having been able to push for some time. The centre of "the steppe culture" or PIE is further West, truly the North Pontic sphere, at the border to the Western Neolithics, which is why they got that ancestral component, all of them. SSC developed and adopted cattle breeding under the direct influence from Western agro-pastoralists. There was no centre much further East and North, these were backward hunter fisher territories, no dynamic source.

One big problem, Sredni Stog is too young and we do not have aDNA to prove anything that happened before 5000BC. Eneolithic Steppe is formed already and if you mean the Lower Don culture instead of the Sredni Stog culture when I would propably agree but there are already domesticated animals in early neolithic lower don, not need to adapt it from western neolithic cultures. See:
"
Finds of bones of domesticated animals in the same Early Neolithic layers may suggest even a more complicated organization of this ancient community and may indicate the northern limit of the Neolithic package distribution."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1040618219300126
 
Thank you all for your thoughts. The big issue for me is the use of WSHG, to me the 20% East Asian component, along with its similarity to the much younger, East Asian admixed Botai samples, makes it unusable for any kind of proxy ancestry into WSH populations. It was stated in Damgaard et al. 2018, that there was East Asian in Botai but none to be found in either Khvalynsk or Yamnaya. WSHG is also frankly too similar, with such a high ratio of EHG/ANE, there is of course, going to be some strong genetic overlap. I am also intrigued if the Ancient East Asian in WSHG is legitimate. WSHG/Botai was used as the proxy for the ANE ancestry found in Fofonovo_EN, Baikal_EN and Baikal_EBA in Jeong et al. 2020, with Wang et al. 2020 and Gakuhari et al. 2019 publishing very similar findings too. On a final note, I am sorry to the members of this forum page for derailing the topic of discussion. This has been something I have been a little puzzled over as of late. Thank you to Anfanger, Riverman, and Angela for responding to my questions. I will take it over to the other recommended forum.
 
One big problem, Sredni Stog is too young and we do not have aDNA to prove anything that happened before 5000BC. Eneolithic Steppe is formed already and if you mean the Lower Don culture instead of the Sredni Stog culture when I would propably agree but there are already domesticated animals in early neolithic lower don, not need to adapt it from western neolithic cultures. See:
"

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1040618219300126

The Lower Don Culture was the original centre of the cultural developments in the North Pontic steppe and it was there that the typical population of EHG : CHG first emerged. The LDC had Neolithic techniques adopted, but they were still largely hunters and fishers. If they had, early on, domesticated animals at all, it was mostly ovicaprids. No cattle, no horses. Cattle breeding was adopted after contacts with the West, this is very obvious. Horses even later. So the Lower Don Culture was work in progress, resulting in the SSC. In the early phase they were still foragers - at least for the most part, but with Southern influences visible in their settlements.
The typical style of the steppe agro-pastoralism with intensified cattle breeding was however only adapted after intensive contacts with the Western Neolithic neighbours.

However, I waited for quite some time for news from R. yar. Did you read the full article? Because I myself got convinved by the very same authors that the early LDC got the Neolithic package (rudimental) and domesticated animals (first). This was disputed however, even for ovicaprids. Do you know details from the article? Is there something new in it from after 2019, or just printed in the journal with the old preliminary ones?
 
It could definitely be that it fits his agenda in some way, but also, given his track record, he could have been tipped off about some as yet unpublished samples, by Khan or others. It's happened before that when he does an abrupt shift with no lead up that not too long after a paper comes out supporting it.

Totally dishonest, of course, but that's how he operates.
I cogitated it for the first time back in 2015.

October 2015
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/10/yamnayas-exotic-ancestry-kartvelian.html

November 2015
"Upper Palaeolithic genomes reveal deep roots of modern Eurasians"
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms9912

Perhaps a coincidence, but...
 
He said for quite some time that the origin of the dominant steppe groups is further West. It was some other authors which claimed it to be further East, even in Asia, and which used terms like Iranian to describe the CHG-like component. The only reason Khvalynsk was still in the game was that there was no proof, so far, for the same steppe component having been much further West as early or even earlier, because of a lack of samples. So newer samples will just prove what was the logical consequence, the most likely scenario all along, that there was an even earlier source further West, from which Khvalynsk is just a descendent. But as long as there are no new samples, it might be sometimes better to be cautious with claims which go too far, especially as a more public person which has a reputation. Its not like its such a big surprise, its just like FINALLY the proof is there which you can show the critics: If you don't trust logic and common sense, here you have the bulletproof data. Its time to move on and to dig even deeper, leaving the fruitless debates of a more Eastern origin of the European steppe ancestry behind.

The real big thing which is still unresolved is where exactly the CHG-like component was coming from in the Lower Don Culture and when, with which culture. Even whether it was just one wave of colonists, or more. That's still largely a mystery. That there are still no samples from the LDC is a real pity.
 
The Lower Don Culture was the original centre of the cultural developments in the North Pontic steppe and it was there that the typical population of EHG : CHG first emerged. The LDC had Neolithic techniques adopted, but they were still largely hunters and fishers. If they had, early on, domesticated animals at all, it was mostly ovicaprids. No cattle, no horses. Cattle breeding was adopted after contacts with the West, this is very obvious. Horses even later. So the Lower Don Culture was work in progress, resulting in the SSC. In the early phase they were still foragers - at least for the most part, but with Southern influences visible in their settlements.
The typical style of the steppe agro-pastoralism with intensified cattle breeding was however only adapted after intensive contacts with the Western Neolithic neighbours.

However, I waited for quite some time for news from R. yar. Did you read the full article? Because I myself got convinved by the very same authors that the early LDC got the Neolithic package (rudimental) and domesticated animals (first). This was disputed however, even for ovicaprids. Do you know details from the article? Is there something new in it from after 2019, or just printed in the journal with the old preliminary ones?

Yes it was disputed since 2017 but this papers abstract says pretty clear that they had the neolithic package but the domesticated animals were probably ovicaprids, cattle and horses came later. Horses were domesticated on the steppe while cattle is from the west. Unfortunately, I can not get access to the full article but reading various other articles about this period the LDC is the best candidate for colonizing the steppe and bringing this neolithic package as far north as Khvalynsk.

He said for quite some time that the origin of the dominant steppe groups is further West. It was some other authors which claimed it to be further East, even in Asia, and which used terms like Iranian to describe the CHG-like component. The only reason Khvalynsk was still in the game was that there was no proof, so far, for the same steppe component having been much further West as early or even earlier, because of a lack of samples. So newer samples will just prove what was the logical consequence, the most likely scenario all along, that there was an even earlier source further West, from which Khvalynsk is just a descendent. But as long as there are no new samples, it might be sometimes better to be cautious with claims which go too far, especially as a more public person which has a reputation. Its not like its such a big surprise, its just like FINALLY the proof is there which you can show the critics: If you don't trust logic and common sense, here you have the bulletproof data. Its time to move on and to dig even deeper, leaving the fruitless debates of a more Eastern origin of the European steppe ancestry behind.

The real big thing which is still unresolved is where exactly the CHG-like component was coming from in the Lower Don Culture and when, with which culture. Even whether it was just one wave of colonists, or more. That's still largely a mystery. That there are still no samples from the LDC is a real pity.

I don't know why you think that the Lower Don Culture is so much further west, it is actually more south than west of Khvalynsk and the steppe cultures didn't appear much further west of the Don until the times of Sredny Stog about 4500BC. Lower Don, Lower Volga and Middle Volga were much earlier part of a agro-pastoralist lifestyle than Sredny Stog according to most papers about the Neolithic and Eneolithic of Southern Russia.

The CHG-like component in Eneolithic steppe is still a mystery but in my opinion looking at the dates for the neolithic and sheep and goats in lower don culture it was probably not from Colchian CHG. Still no one can say for sure because we don't have any aDNA from the culture. So let´s wait and see what the future will bring.
 
Yes it was disputed since 2017 but this papers abstract says pretty clear that they had the neolithic package but the domesticated animals were probably ovicaprids, cattle and horses came later.

Even the evidence for ovicaprids wasn't great. I know they said so, as do other authors and I think they are right, but they need to bring up undisputable evidence for closing the case. Great would be aDNA from the domesticated animals - and the humans too of course.

I read these two papers, one in German, one in English, with the same people involved, among others:
1. Zu kaukasischen und vorderasiatischen Einfl?ssen bei der Neolithisierung im unteren Donbecken, Von Alexander Gorelik, Andrej Cybrij und Viktor Cybrij.
2. ?Neolithisation? in the NE Sea of Azov region: one step forward, two steps back|

Then the evidence was probably not finally conclusive, that's why I'm asking, since I think the excavations and examination of the material are still ongoing in the area. Would be great if the results are decisive in meantime and even better if ancient DNA samples were taking. Because this region is absolutely key in understanding how the developed steppe culture and the steppe ancestral component came into existence.

Horses were domesticated on the steppe while cattle is from the west. Unfortunately, I can not get access to the full article but reading various other articles about this period the LDC is the best candidate for colonizing the steppe and bringing this neolithic package as far north as Khvalynsk.

Exactly, its just an early offshot, a first colonisation along the Wolga of yet not fully developed steppe people. The crucial point is: They were pretty distant from the centre, most likely mixed with locals, being still more hunter fishers than anything else, and were later just replaced by the more developed Yamnaya, which is also evidenced by their uniparentals.

I don't know why you think that the Lower Don Culture is so much further west, it is actually more south than west of Khvalynsk and the steppe cultures didn't appear much further west of the Don until the times of Sredny Stog about 4500BC. Lower Don, Lower Volga and Middle Volga were much earlier part of a agro-pastoralist lifestyle than Sredny Stog according to most papers about the Neolithic and Eneolithic of Southern Russia.

First of all, the Lower Don Culture, and especially its important early developments, were all taking place in the area of the Sea of Azov, not much up the Don river. Now its a relative thing, but I think, considering the space in between, the centre of Khvalynsk is significantly further North and East. Sredny Stog on the contrary was to the West of the whole Khvalynsk horizon.

I think these conclusions are still valid:
These imports and imitations reflect the contacts of the steppe people with the Balkans population, namely with the Hamangia culture. Those contacts created a base for formation of the Sredniy Stog and Khalynsk Early Eneolithic cultures with radical changes of the burial rites. The cultural transformation was initiated with an aridity of climate between 5400?5330 ВС with a maximum about 5360 BC, which created an ecological and economic crises in the dry southern regions of steppe. Destruction of traditional way of life of the Surskaja and Low Don populations near the Sea of Azov and their close contacts during previous times gave an impulse for the formation of the new Sredniy Stog culture on the base of their traditions located in the Sea of Azov area. The first period of this culture is dated about 5250?4800 BC. Pottery with shells in clay, linear and comb decoration, flintheads of spear and arrows, bone plates, pendants from red deer teeth and shell beads are typical for this culture. Their ceramics can be seen as a heritage of the Surskaja tradition, but the set of tools, weapons and adornments copied the Low Don complex (Kotova 2008).

Nadja S. Kotova, The contacts of the Eastern European steppe people with the Balkan population during the transition period from Neolithic to Eneolithic, in PR?HISTORISCHE ARCH?OLOGIE IN S?DOSTEUROPA - BAND 30. p. 315.

About the relationship of Khvalynsk to SSC:
The Khvalynsk Eneolithic culture was formed in the steppe Volga basin practically simultaneously with the Sredniy Stog culture in the Don-Kalmius interflive.

Positioning and borderzone:
The border between the Khvalynsk and Sredniy Stog cultures probably passed between the Don and Volga rivers.

About its development:
Similarity of the Khvalynsk ceramics with pottery of the Late Lower Don and Early Sredniy Stog cultures, as well as with separate vessels of the Orlovka culture allow me to assume, that its formation was connected with human migration about 5200-5150 BC, caused by gradual climate dryness. Probably, that aridity forced a part of the Early Sredniy Stog population from the steppe Don region to move in northern areas along valleys of the Don, Medveditsa and Volga.

Admixture with locals:
On the right bank of Volga the migrants met the local population of the Neolithic Orlovka culture, and probably assimilated its separate groups, as well as some southern groups of the Samara culture. As a result of those complicated processes the Khvalynsk culture was formed.

A layer of the Khvalynsk culture at the Kombak-te site in the north-west of Pricaspian area is dated about 4880?192 BC. Probably, here the Khvalynsk population partly
assimilated the native inhabitants - the population of the Neolithic Pricaspian culture.

Its this admixture which makes the difference and of which David might know now more than before. Nothing new, but now we might have the genetic, the aDNA evidence ready. This admixture was not brought back on a big scale to the West, they were replaced by Yamnaya.

Kotova is also great in explaining how the Western steppe culture (later stages of SSC and related groups) developed under the influence of the expanding and highly influential Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture:
Strange as it may seem, the Tripolye population was more interested in contacts, than the steppe inhabitants. They were newcomers, which gradually
moved to the east through the forest-steppe area, occupying lands, which were settled by the Bug-Dniester and Kievo-Cherkassy Neolithic population. The
Tripolye population needed allies and peaceful relations with the neighbors, especially with those, whose territories were unnecessary for them. Among such
neighbors were the bearers of Azov-Dnieper and Sredniy Stog cultures, who occupied other natural-climatic zone, which was useless for the Tripolye
population during the Early Eneolithic. Even during the Later Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age they occupied only the steppes in the South Bug basin and to
the west of it, staying out of the territories of the Sredniy Stog descendants.

Early Eneolithic in the Pontic Steppe, Nadezhda Sergeevna Kotova, BAR International Series 1735, 2008, p. 121 ff.

The situation was really similar to the Roman expansion, which eliminated the Celtic puffer and created a direct border, trade, contacts and relationships with the Germanics. The TCC expansion brought new ideas and techniques to the steppe people, like the earlier Neolithic colonisations from the West and East. Under the influence of this new contacts, they themselves developed on, but based on a clan and tribe, well organised kin-based structure on a new, higher level. With bigger, more stable alliances and tribal chiefs, even new religious ideas and cults.

For a long time the relations were good, but when they deteriorated, with worsening natural conditions and pressure from the East, the formerly allied or even dependent steppe people turned on the TCC. If you look at the development of the Lower Don Culture to Sredny Stog to late Sredny Stog and Dereivka, then to Corded Ware and Usatovo, there is no need or place for a big impact of Khvalynsk. As it seems not even for Yamnaya. They were just the earlier offshot going up the Wolga which replaced and partly assimilated preceding local populations. That's there role in this story and that's it. Some elements might have been assimilated by the later groups from the Western/Southern steppe, but how much is up to more detailed genetic analyses.
 
Even the evidence for ovicaprids wasn't great. I know they said so, as do other authors and I think they are right, but they need to bring up undisputable evidence for closing the case. Great would be aDNA from the domesticated animals - and the humans too of course.

I read these two papers, one in German, one in English, with the same people involved, among others:
1. Zu kaukasischen und vorderasiatischen Einfl�ssen bei der Neolithisierung im unteren Donbecken, Von Alexander Gorelik, Andrej Cybrij und Viktor Cybrij.
2. �Neolithisation� in the NE Sea of Azov region: one step forward, two steps back|

Then the evidence was probably not finally conclusive, that's why I'm asking, since I think the excavations and examination of the material are still ongoing in the area. Would be great if the results are decisive in meantime and even better if ancient DNA samples were taking. Because this region is absolutely key in understanding how the developed steppe culture and the steppe ancestral component came into existence.



Exactly, its just an early offshot, a first colonisation along the Wolga of yet not fully developed steppe people. The crucial point is: They were pretty distant from the centre, most likely mixed with locals, being still more hunter fishers than anything else, and were later just replaced by the more developed Yamnaya, which is also evidenced by their uniparentals.



First of all, the Lower Don Culture, and especially its important early developments, were all taking place in the area of the Sea of Azov, not much up the Don river. Now its a relative thing, but I think, considering the space in between, the centre of Khvalynsk is significantly further North and East. Sredny Stog on the contrary was to the West of the whole Khvalynsk horizon.

I think these conclusions are still valid:


Nadja S. Kotova, The contacts of the Eastern European steppe people with the Balkan population during the transition period from Neolithic to Eneolithic, in PR�HISTORISCHE ARCH�OLOGIE IN S�DOSTEUROPA - BAND 30. p. 315.

About the relationship of Khvalynsk to SSC:


Positioning and borderzone:


About its development:


Admixture with locals:




Its this admixture which makes the difference and of which David might know now more than before. Nothing new, but now we might have the genetic, the aDNA evidence ready. This admixture was not brought back on a big scale to the West, they were replaced by Yamnaya.

Kotova is also great in explaining how the Western steppe culture (later stages of SSC and related groups) developed under the influence of the expanding and highly influential Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture:


Early Eneolithic in the Pontic Steppe, Nadezhda Sergeevna Kotova, BAR International Series 1735, 2008, p. 121 ff.

The situation was really similar to the Roman expansion, which eliminated the Celtic puffer and created a direct border, trade, contacts and relationships with the Germanics. The TCC expansion brought new ideas and techniques to the steppe people, like the earlier Neolithic colonisations from the West and East. Under the influence of this new contacts, they themselves developed on, but based on a clan and tribe, well organised kin-based structure on a new, higher level. With bigger, more stable alliances and tribal chiefs, even new religious ideas and cults.

For a long time the relations were good, but when they deteriorated, with worsening natural conditions and pressure from the East, the formerly allied or even dependent steppe people turned on the TCC. If you look at the development of the Lower Don Culture to Sredny Stog to late Sredny Stog and Dereivka, then to Corded Ware and Usatovo, there is no need or place for a big impact of Khvalynsk. As it seems not even for Yamnaya. They were just the earlier offshot going up the Wolga which replaced and partly assimilated preceding local populations. That's there role in this story and that's it. Some elements might have been assimilated by the later groups from the Western/Southern steppe, but how much is up to more detailed genetic analyses.

Thanks for the interesting papers! It is refreshing to have some literature about the Lower Don culture in German. Their conclusion partly reflects my opinion that their is probably some migration from Northern Zagros involved but unlike me they also see connections to Western Georgia. I think we all agree, we need aDNA from this culture it is crucial for understanding the steppe cultures. Also very interesting in the Early Eneolithic there was climate change, this is also exactly the period when domesticated animals appear in the Lower Volga and Khvalynsk according to other studies.

It is big news if Sredny Stog is dated that early and is contemporaneous to Khvalynsk. It is the first time I hear about this dates for SSC.

Interestingly, we do not have ancient DNA from the southern Pontic steppe maybe this was the route for contacts, trade with TCC.

There are rumors that Orlovka is soon going to be sampled and we are finally going to have aDNA.
 
Thanks for the interesting papers! It is refreshing to have some literature about the Lower Don culture in German.

You're welcome. I think people should always, if being really interested, read the original sources rather than rely on newspaper articles which might misinterpret the actual results. Unfortunately too many papers are still behind paywall, sometimes even for academics.

Their conclusion partly reflects my opinion that their is probably some migration from Northern Zagros involved but unlike me they also see connections to Western Georgia.

From Northern Mesopotamia, the Southern Caucasus at least. I too think that is likely, but I don't think this element was formative for the steppe people on the genetic or ideological level. It did however influence their culture, since these colonists from the South, if there were some, first influenced the CHG-rich coastal people and these in turn influenced, even though they came under the dominance of local hunter-fisher lineages, the EHG people, with the mixture of both forming the new steppe people which we see in the later Lower Don Culture and then SSC and KhC. Genetically I think they were a small minority which barely made it genetically to the North Pontic after their admixture with the coastal CHG-rich people. But the earliest LDC settlements might still have it.
So I don't think the CHG ancestry as such came with them, but they gave the whole region a big cultural impulse.

It is big news if Sredny Stog is dated that early and is contemporaneous to Khvalynsk. It is the first time I hear about this dates for SSC.

SSC and KhC were both children of the late LDC, although KhC could have been the grandchild rather, because SSC was minimum contemporaneous or older. SSC in itself is a very comlicated cultural horizon, with the early and late phase, the different geographical groups being all quite different.

There are rumors that Orlovka is soon going to be sampled and we are finally going to have aDNA.

I hope new samples are coming in soon, it got kind of boring. However, I try not to rush to conclusions based on single data points, especially in complicated cases - don't always manage to do it though, especially if it seems to fit the bigger picture. But still, considering how widespread and diverse LDC, SSC and KhC were over space and time, single data points might be misleading. Like even if at the Eastern edge of Khvalynsk a specific admixture appears, the ratio and uniparentals don't fit, the Western portion of the cultural horizon might still look different and being closer to Yamnaya/CWC. For the early LDC in particular, which seems to represent the mixture before the homogenisation took place, every settlement might have had a different mixture of ancestral components imho. So any single sample from just one place and point of time might lead us in the wrong direction for the LDC as a cultural phenomenon in the North Pontic region as a whole.
Probably that's one of the reasons why we don't get results from there for so long, even though that's probably the most important site for the whole debate? The dating is highly problematic there (reservoir effect) and they need more samples to be sure, before publishing anything? We will see, hopefully.
 
I hope new samples are coming in soon, it got kind of boring. However, I try not to rush to conclusions based on single data points, especially in complicated cases - don't always manage to do it though, especially if it seems to fit the bigger picture. But still, considering how widespread and diverse LDC, SSC and KhC were over space and time, single data points might be misleading. Like even if at the Eastern edge of Khvalynsk a specific admixture appears, the ratio and uniparentals don't fit, the Western portion of the cultural horizon might still look different and being closer to Yamnaya/CWC. For the early LDC in particular, which seems to represent the mixture before the homogenisation took place, every settlement might have had a different mixture of ancestral components imho. So any single sample from just one place and point of time might lead us in the wrong direction for the LDC as a cultural phenomenon in the North Pontic region as a whole.
Probably that's one of the reasons why we don't get results from there for so long, even though that's probably the most important site for the whole debate? The dating is highly problematic there (reservoir effect) and they need more samples to be sure, before publishing anything? We will see, hopefully.

Yes,i agree with everything. I also think seeing the first aDNA from Orlovka will not be that crucial compared to some settlements of the LDC because in Orlovka there was probably heavy mixing happing between diverse populations. At first my opinion was that there was a back migration from Khvalynsk bringing EHG/CHG to Eneolithic Piedmont but maybe there was no such backmigration and this mixture was already there in LDC. Anyway, we have to wait a few months at least.
 
Just a reminder to everyone that its 2020.

As far as I know, the following image is used by the Johannes Krause group at Jena (MPI SHH) as of mid 2019 regarding neolithization of Europe.
Have they already and finally figure it out as well? - *https://imgur.com/a/ANeaSyZ


Those two arrows are not going from IRAN to the steppe! those two orange blobs are EXACTLY the boundaries of the Shulaveri-Shomu culture and those two arrows are going directly from the Shulaveri-shomu to the steppe. And that is what today, one of the 2 powerhouses for ancient DNA in the planet believe -- again, and since 2015 I just say - No shit, Sherlock.
 
And to be even more clear:
those two arrows (https://imgur.com/a/ANeaSyZ) are stating that both Sredny Stog as well as orlovka culture are derivatives of the Shulaveri-Shomu.

Funny also how at Reich Lab the communication mantra went from Iran Neolithic DNA to Iran_N/CHG to in latest twitter from Laziridis to Iran_N/CHG/ARMENIA. Really cute – Ashot Margaryan (from Caucasus paper) told me that the Shulaveri samples (Armenia from Aratashen) they had extracted Mtdna (I1, H15 and H2) from, were now being used by another project to extract nuclear data as well. --- Looks like Reich already did it, doesn’t it?


https://shulaverianhypothesis.blogs.sapo.pt/
https://r1b2westerneurope.blogs.sapo.pt/
 
And to be even more clear:
those two arrows (https://imgur.com/a/ANeaSyZ) are stating that both Sredny Stog as well as orlovka culture are derivatives of the Shulaveri-Shomu.

Funny also how at Reich Lab the communication mantra went from Iran Neolithic DNA to Iran_N/CHG to in latest twitter from Laziridis to Iran_N/CHG/ARMENIA. Really cute – Ashot Margaryan (from Caucasus paper) told me that the Shulaveri samples (Armenia from Aratashen) they had extracted Mtdna (I1, H15 and H2) from, were now being used by another project to extract nuclear data as well. --- Looks like Reich already did it, doesn’t it?


https://shulaverianhypothesis.blogs.sapo.pt/
https://r1b2westerneurope.blogs.sapo.pt/

Actually, the first thing they said, years and years ago, via Lazaridis, was "Armenian like". Eurogenes had a conniption fit and so did all his followers. God forbid the holy Indo-Europeans were partly descended from people related to ARMENIANS! :)

You haven't been around long enough.
 
Just a reminder to everyone that its 2020.

As far as I know, the following image is used by the Johannes Krause group at Jena (MPI SHH) as of mid 2019 regarding neolithization of Europe.
Have they already and finally figure it out as well? - *https://imgur.com/a/ANeaSyZ


Those two arrows are not going from IRAN to the steppe! those two orange blobs are EXACTLY the boundaries of the Shulaveri-Shomu culture and those two arrows are going directly from the Shulaveri-shomu to the steppe. And that is what today, one of the 2 powerhouses for ancient DNA in the planet believe -- again, and since 2015 I just say - No shit, Sherlock.

There are some connections to Shulaveri Shomu and Lower Don but Shulaveri Shomu is fully neolithic while the Lower Don is not until the Eneolithic at least. Jena is still using IranNeolithic-related and so is the Reich Lab, Armenia is the thing of Lazaridis since 2016 but in the end all are taking about the South Caucasus. Davidskis idea that hunter fishers out of nowhere startet domesticating sheep and goat which were not home to the steppe at that time and some basic neolithic is possible but very very unlikely. Every paper about this topic I read mentions a possible migration from the south which brought this neolithic package to the Don but in my opinion Gobustan in Azerbaijan might be a better source for the neolithic on the Lower Don than Shulaveri Shomu(it is still my second guess though), but lets see what the experts say :

"Zu kaukasischen und vorderasiatischen Einflüssen bei der Neolithisierung im unteren Donbecken" Eng: "Caucasian and Middle Eastern influence in the Neolithization on the Don"

1.
Unsere Vergleichsanalyse hat gezeigt, dass mindestens zwei Regionen starke Verbindungen zum Neolithikum des Unteren Dons zeigen. Es handelt sich um das nördliche Zagros-Gebirge und um die Schwarzmeerküste des Kaukasus. Eng: Our Analysis shows that there are two regions with strong connections to the Neolithic Don. The northern Zagros and the Black Sea Coast of the Caucasus.

2.
Im gebündelten Erscheinen neuer Kulturelemente im Zagros, an der Schwarzmeerküste Kaukasiens und am Unteren Don wurden schon seit Danilenko Argumente für Migrationsprozesse gesehen. Eng: Because of the bundle of new cultural elements in the Zagros, the Black Sea coast and Lower Don there are since Danilenko, Arguments for a Migrationprocess.

3.
Auffällig ist die paradoxe Tatsache, dass zwischen relativ benachbarten neolithischen Siedlungen des Westkaukasus und des Unteren Dons die Ahnlichkeiten geringer sind als zwischen dem Neolithikum des Zagros Gebirges und dem des Unteren Don. Eng: Striking is the paradox fact that the connections between neighboring neolithic settlements of the West Caucasus and the Lower Don are fewer than the connections between the Neolithic in the Zagros Mountains and the Lower Don.



Sure i have my own biases but at least there are some experts who give me enough arguments for a Northern Iran/Southern Caucasus migration into the Steppe region.


 
Last edited:
And to be even more clear:
those two arrows (https://imgur.com/a/ANeaSyZ) are stating that both Sredny Stog as well as orlovka culture are derivatives of the Shulaveri-Shomu.

Funny also how at Reich Lab the communication mantra went from Iran Neolithic DNA to Iran_N/CHG to in latest twitter from Laziridis to Iran_N/CHG/ARMENIA. Really cute – Ashot Margaryan (from Caucasus paper) told me that the Shulaveri samples (Armenia from Aratashen) they had extracted Mtdna (I1, H15 and H2) from, were now being used by another project to extract nuclear data as well. --- Looks like Reich already did it, doesn’t it?


https://shulaverianhypothesis.blogs.sapo.pt/
https://r1b2westerneurope.blogs.sapo.pt/

Interessting, I've been waiting years for some samples from early neolithic caucasus. Any information about Y-DNA because the MtDNA north and south of the steppe are basically the same.

Btw, the map from Jena is in accordance to my thoughts, there were two separate migrations from the South. One is going into the Lower Don region and one is going to the Lower Volga region both about 6500-6000BC. In the Early Eneolithic (5400-5100) climate changes and big movements from these southern regions to the North begins leading to the formation of Khvalynsk.
 
Last edited:
As far as I know, the following image is used by the Johannes Krause group at Jena (MPI SHH) as of mid 2019 regarding neolithization of Europe.
Have they already and finally figure it out as well? - *https://imgur.com/a/ANeaSyZ


Those two arrows are not going from IRAN to the steppe! those two orange blobs are EXACTLY the boundaries of the Shulaveri-Shomu culture and those two arrows are going directly from the Shulaveri-shomu to the steppe. And that is what today, one of the 2 powerhouses for ancient DNA in the planet believe -- again, and since 2015 I just say - No shit, Sherlock.

But you realise that this is a dashed line with a question mark and it refers explicitly to the introduction of Neolithic techniques. Its about the small scale immigration of hunter-fishers with Neolithic techniques which reached the Lower Don area and helped to form the LDC. That can only be proven with sufficient ancient DNA from the various settlements, especially R. yar. Until that isn't out, it is conjecture. And as things stand, its rather unlikely that this was the main vector for the spread of the CHG-like population, rather it was a limited settlement in the Lower Don by a few incomers which culturally influenced the CHG-rich population before it was overtaken by the EHG clans directly North of them.

Whether they were there, or not, and which impact they had demographically is up to debate. In the papers of the group discussed above, similarities of the earliest stages in the Lower Don region to the M'lefatien Culture were proposed. Unfortunately the information I could find about the M'lefatien is rather scarce. In Neolithisierung im unteren Donbecken, p. 163, they write that the pressure technique used by the M'lefatien could have spread from it, or developed independently. In any case, some authors assume that the original spread of the technique was the original CHG-rich push, no independent development at the Lower Don, with the tool production of that kind starting in the 8th to 7th mill, exact relations unknown. Its about the pressure flaking technique and geometrical microliths.

From the English paper, Neolithisation? in the NE Sea of Azov region: one step forward, two steps back, p. 146:
The assemblage of the Rakushechnyi Yar group is especially familiar to us, due to the materials of the extended M?lefatien cultural group (following S. Kozłowski) (Kozłowski 1999.51?75) in the eastern wing of the Fertile Crescent, except for the above-listed features, and also exhibits a distinctive ensemble of geometric microliths. The latter is rarely encountered in the Middle East.

Another problem in the Black Sea area is that the sea level changed and the coastal line is now not the same as it was when the CHG-rich population might have spread or even the later part-Neolithicised colonists came. This means a large portion of the remains which are decisive for which people migrated when up to the North might be now under water. This is something also pointed out in the papers of the research group for the settlements, from p. 141:
In the Holocene between (11th?6th millennium BP), the Sea of Azov, as part of the Black Sea basin, underwent a sustained transgression of its surface, which was 3.5 to 4m lower than at present, with an ensuing flood of the coastal shelf (Balabanov 2007.715). There are different scenarios of transgression of the Black Sea level, with both a rapid and gradual flooding of the coastal shelf

So its even possible that there was a real flight of a coastal people which had to come to terms with locals further inland when the sea level was rising.
There are still a lot of unknowns and there is still a lot to do for coming closer to the truth. But large scale sampling from the LDC's different places and stages might prove to be absolutely key for the whole debate.

My still somewhat speculative interpretation is: An early Mesolithic CHG-rich people moved up the coast, but they were part of a wider network going to the South coast of the Black Sea. There, Neolithicised settlers appear and a new wave of cultural innovations and settlements starts, but at the lower Don only a small portion of new genetic ancestry makes it. These part Neoliticised people had contacts with hunter fishers from up the rivers, with which they eventually began to mix and this EHG-rich clans became, somehow, someway, the dominant element, largely replacing the other ("Southern") lineages. This fits perfectly into the scenario even Anthony recently proposed, with the PPIE being a language introduced by EHG foragers, with a (possibly Caucasian leaning?) substrate. Sredny Stog is the central cultural formation for all later steppe cultures and its source lays in the Lower Don people after their homogenisation.
 
Actually, the first thing they said, years and years ago, via Lazaridis, was "Armenian like". Eurogenes had a conniption fit and so did all his followers. God forbid the holy Indo-Europeans were partly descended from people related to ARMENIANS! :)

You haven't been around long enough.

If It made Eurogenes have a fit... God bless Lazaridis for that.
 
Interessting, …. because the MtDNA north and south of the steppe are basically the same.


Partly so. However the mtdna thus far associated with Shulaveri (I1, H15, h2) is seen increased in the steppe (progress2 R1b has it) and not in the Caucasus (as per wang et al), as well as the “mother” haplo for I (N1a) and afaik also the W haplo that has the oldest instances in Anatolia (but not part of Neolithic migration). Actually, if IRC jean Manco had Halaf as mtdna W. don’t really know how correct that is.



Btw, the map from Jena is in accordance to my thoughts, there were two separate migrations from the South. One is going into the Lower Don region and one is going to the Lower Volga region both about 6500-6000BC. In the Early Eneolithic (5400-5100) climate changes and big movements from these southern regions to the North begins leading to the formation of Khvalynsk.

All that it shows (the map) is that Neolithic went from the Shulaveri to North Caucasus/steppe both for the western (black Sea) and Eastern movement (Caspian sea). We know that neolithization from the Shulaveri North was already undergoing by 5600BC with the Chokh cultures up there in the big mountains going down into northern Caucasus. It’s just they didn’t stop there and kept moving.
the only fact that remains is: The Shulaveri were the most (or one of the most) evolved Neolithic and pastoral packages at those days. When they suddenly vanish is when the neolithization and animal complex husbandry of many species truly inprint in the northern lands of the black and Caspian sea. So, they didn’t die. They just flew north.
Or they died which would have been weird. They were many (!). People forget, Sioni appear in the same region more than 600 years after they vanished.
 

This thread has been viewed 55217 times.

Back
Top