Brachycephaly..zation of the Steppe by 4500BC.

Here we go, we see more signs of vitamin D deficiency in ancient farmers in Europe. No wonder they needed to get white to survive in Europe.

I think you misunderstood this abstract? The rickets and other teeth deficiences are mentioned concerning Mesolithic groups in Yougoslavia. Or they made a mistake in the abstract ?(I did not red the full paper); it's would not be the first time a conter-statement is made by error. I saw that already, but not in abstracts and it's very very seldom.
 
@Olympus Mons
answer to your first post (I'm late, I know!)
You wrote among others:
[..."So, the part that is new and relevant in my opinion is essentially that it states that Mesolithic steppe populations (or Ukraine for that matter) were not Brachychephalic but Typolie and
Dnieper-Donets II were"...].

Moesan asks:
have you cephalic indexes of the pops in discussion here; by instance Tripolye and Dnieper-Donets II?
Because I fear that people confuse marked 'brachycephaly' with process of 'brachycephalization'...
 
@Olympus Mons
answer to your first post (I'm late, I know!)
You wrote among others:
[..."So, the part that is new and relevant in my opinion is essentially that it states that Mesolithic steppe populations (or Ukraine for that matter) were not Brachychephalic but Typolie and
Dnieper-Donets II were"...].

Moesan asks:
have you cephalic indexes of the pops in discussion here; by instance Tripolye and Dnieper-Donets II?
Because I fear that people confuse marked 'brachycephaly' with process of 'brachycephalization'...


Hi Moesan. I am not so sure now.
Got accces to the excel and made the index according to formula. See bellow. What do you make of it?

RegionCultureAv. BPIndex
IberiaIberia Mesolithic900070
IberiaCardial Average750074
IberiaNeolithic/Eneolithic Average485773
IberiaAlmeria Average467567
IberiaNeolithic Average460372
IberiaBell Beaker Average425070
IberiaMiddle Neolithic Average425071
IberiaEneolithic Average414073
IberiaLos Millares Average393171
IberiaPunic Average248074
IberiaTalayot Average226776
IberiaHellenistic Average216671
LevantEpipalaeolithic Average1198271
LevantNatufian Average1090972
LevantLevant Mesolithic1000073
LevantChalcolithic Average517571
LevantBronze Age Average397271
LevantSyro-Hittite (Chatal Hueyuek) Average262570
LevantGreek Average216377
LevantHellenic (Chatal Hueyuek) Average212385
UkraineUkraine Mesolithic1000073
UkraineMiddle Mesolithic Average964270
UkraineDnieper-Donets II Average550073
UkrainePit-Graves Average511373
UkraineCatacomb graves Average446473
UkraineTripolye 3 Average418873
UkraineTripolye Average414374
UkraineTimber graves Average342772
UkraineTauri Average280072
UkraineScythian-Samartian Average239673
UkraineScythian Average233875
UkraineLate Scythian Average230074
 
Just two added notes.
1 - See how Late Bell beakers in Iberia, even with Copper daggers, Ivory V.shape buttons, etc... where actually quite Dolicochefalic?

2 - Dont know about How those Hellenic (Chatal Hueyuek), but I think related to Hittites... and very Brachy, right?

 
If you mean Catal Huyuk, that's an ancient site in Anatolia, first a mesolithic site and then a Neolithic one. Ancient samples from near there from the mesolithic to neolithic transition have been analyzed.

See:

http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdfExtended/S0960-9822(16)30850-8

It's discussed by us here:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...tolian-Neolithic?highlight=Neolithic+Anatolia

I don't know if enough information has been published on the craniometry to do an analysis, but it would be interesting to know details about the earliest foragers there, and then see how the measurements changed in the actual Neolithic. However, there was obviously gene flow into the area from the south as well as the east so I don't know if it would be possible to untangle differences based on migration versus adaptation to a Neolithic diet.


The Hittites were speakers of Indo-European languages. One would expect them to have some degree of "steppe" ancestry. How much we may soon find out, since they recently found some remains.


http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ot-remains-found-in-Turkey?highlight=Hittites
 
Perhaps the "Hellenic" label points to later periods (and yet: 'helladic' or true 'hellenic'? I don't know): I said the most of true brachycephals appeared lately in Near-Eastern Anatolia (few decades before 2000 BC); a Balkans people influx is not excluded I think. SOmetimes the same site is studied for several cultures different in time and origin, but stratified there.
 
If you mean Catal Huyuk, that's an ancient site in Anatolia, first a mesolithic site and then a Neolithic one. Ancient samples from near there from the mesolithic to neolithic transition have been analyzed.

Angela, I am happy that not everyone else but me knows Chattel Huyuk. but its not at all Catal Huyuk. at least its usually linked to Tell Al Judaidah in an arch that goes from north anatolia to Israel by 2300 BP.

I don't know if enough information has been published on the craniometry to do an analysis...

No, no, no. Craniometry is subject to environmental forces. So there is always that argument. But Nonmetric Dental traits is purely genetic! (or pretty much).


The Hittites were speakers of Indo-European languages. One would expect them to have some degree of "steppe" ancestry. How much we may soon find out, since they recently found some remains.

I find it strange anyway. See my thread about non metric dental as proxy for Adna. What I am saying is we have a nm dental traits linking Mesolithic and neolithic Anatolia to Steppe cultures. Its easy to find millennia upon millennia that trail. from 9000BC to 2000 bc. So its always strange when someone says from Steppe to Anatolia. It the other way around, AFAIK.
 
Hi Moesan. I am not so sure now.
Got accces to the excel and made the index according to formula. See bellow. What do you make of it?

RegionCultureAv. BPIndex
IberiaIberia Mesolithic900070
IberiaCardial Average750074
IberiaNeolithic/Eneolithic Average485773
IberiaAlmeria Average467567
IberiaNeolithic Average460372
IberiaBell Beaker Average425070
IberiaMiddle Neolithic Average425071
IberiaEneolithic Average414073
IberiaLos Millares Average393171
IberiaPunic Average248074
IberiaTalayot Average226776
IberiaHellenistic Average216671
LevantEpipalaeolithic Average1198271
LevantNatufian Average1090972
LevantLevant Mesolithic1000073
LevantChalcolithic Average517571
LevantBronze Age Average397271
LevantSyro-Hittite (Chatal Hueyuek) Average262570
LevantGreek Average216377
LevantHellenic (Chatal Hueyuek) Average212385
UkraineUkraine Mesolithic1000073
UkraineMiddle Mesolithic Average964270
UkraineDnieper-Donets II Average550073
UkrainePit-Graves Average511373
UkraineCatacomb graves Average446473
UkraineTripolye 3 Average418873
UkraineTripolye Average414374
UkraineTimber graves Average342772
UkraineTauri Average280072
UkraineScythian-Samartian Average239673
UkraineScythian Average233875
UkraineLate Scythian Average230074


Thanks. I had a lot but not all these averages (averages are averages) - surely unequal stuff with some samples bigger and more regional (so more informative) and others smaller and obtained by pooling disparate stuff, as always. But they are useful nevertheless. As we see the most of these pops were dolichos or meso-dolichos; averages under 71 as a rule are rather small samples for I know by experience (familial bias possible, as for some non-metric dental traits in some buryings).
I'm surprised and interested (just a little) by the mean IC of your Catal Höyük 'hellenic';
to compare: Celts nobility were between 76 and 79 for the most with a mean around 78, except some scores around 80 in Switzerland. The British BBs (round barrows) were around 82, with extremes from 74 to 89 (individuals!): evidently a mix! BBs fromWorms around 81 - SOM attarded neol around 81 but mix here too: roughly 72 to 90 (individuals): but not the same mix as Britihs BBs!!! CI is not in itself a precise tool to appreciate phoenotypes mixture, it does not exprime shapes. But it 's an element among others and can be used in stable pops to evaluate mesologic evolution in some part; sure when a pop passes in only some centuries from an average of 74 to an average of 86 it's hard to pretext a lone mesologic effect!
The Iberian BBs are very dolichocephalic compared to others: have you the sample number?
 
The Hittites were speakers of Indo-European languages. One would expect them to have some degree of "steppe" ancestry. How much we may soon find out, since they recently found some remains.


http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ot-remains-found-in-Turkey?highlight=Hittites
The Hittites were the remnants of the early first wave of PIE. The same wave that migrated from Leyla-Tepe into Maykop and then into Yamnaya. Yamnaya was just a second stage of late PIE that later spread into Europe.

Greeks, Indo-Iranians (Mitanni) ,Tocharians and Hittites belonged to the first wave of PIE from Leyla-Tepe (Iranian Plateau) and existed before Yamnaya.


So, with other words, the Hittites never came from Yamnaya, but were native to West Asia. Original PIE had nothing to do with Yamnaya.
 
NO, craniometric is not submitted to environmental stress in big proportions and the genetic part of work is the strongest. Climate can have effects and surely has had but after long time and when we compare pops living in climatic close enough regions for a long time, the metric differences (teeth comprised) can help very much - when complete enough and after a bit of typology -.
non-metric traits (not only teeth) are even more genetic, OK. But their use is complicated and gives the big bit to differences more than to ressemblances I think. its use in distances is uneasy. That said what its shows is true but uneasy to use for distances between mixed close pops. Tha said I will read the thread you opened about non-metric (it would have been better put in Anthropology)
 

Thanks. I had a lot but not all these averages (averages are averages) - surely unequal stuff with some samples bigger and more regional (so more informative).....
o: roughly 72 to 90 (individuals): but not the same mix as Britihs BBs!!! CI is not in itself a precise tool to appreciate phoenotypes mixture, it does not exprime shapes. But it 's an element among others and can be used in stable pops to evaluate mesologic evolution in some part; sure when a pop passes in only some centuries from an average of 74 to an average of 86 it's hard to pretext a lone mesologic effect!
The Iberian BBs are very dolichocephalic compared to others: have you the sample number?


Moesan.
Not Catal bu Chattel... which I have no ideia what it is. See what I wrote to angela. But those were big head guys for sure and the sample were over 12. I red somewhere that had something to do with Hittites.

Bell Beakers . Yes. and all males! weird.
IberiaSalamo 3Bell Beaker45004000M73.9
IberiaSalamo 1Bell Beaker45004000M73.5
IberiaSalamo 2Bell Beaker45004000M72.0
IberiaTotana 1Bell Beaker45004000M71.6
IberiaSalamo 3Bell Beaker45004000M70.7
IberiaSalamo 1Bell Beaker45004000M69.3
IberiaTotana 1Bell Beaker45004000M67.5
IberiaSalamo 2Bell Beaker45004500M64.2
 
....(it would have been better put in Anthropology)

Not if the question is if it is a good proxy for aDna. Which I think it is.
 
In modern day, people in NW Europe have mesocephalic to dolichocephalic heads, likely leaning to the former. I have noticed people originating in SE Europe and the Caucasus are very brachycephalic....

NW Europeans are s ~36% Anatolian_Neo, ~25% CHG/Iran_Neo, ~25% EHG and 15% WHG.

I have noticed that some of the most brachycephalic broad faced people in West Eurasia are from the Baltics area.....

As I wrote a heavy brachycephalization process took place throughout the world during the Copper and Bronze Age.
 
Last edited:
...
As I wrote a heavy brachycephalization process took place throughout the world during the Copper and Bronze Age.

Alan, Can you define world in that sentence?
Could you please point those Copper to Iron age places?
 
Alan, Can you define world in that sentence?
Could you please point those Copper to Iron age places?

I should have written West Eurasia. In West Eurasia the people of the Balts are known to me being often meso-brachycephalic and broad faced while in the Balkans the people are known to have a trend to Brachycephalization too however not that much towards broad faces. What People called the Dinaric type and which the Bell Beakers were described as too. While the brachycephalic Balts are often rather very broad faced.


We have a sign towards brachycephalization in Anatolia, in Central Europe (Bell Beakers) and the Balkans starting with the Bronze Age. Now that doesn't mean the people of those regions became Brachycephalic just that they were drifting towards it in comparison to the people living on the same land prior. We have a trend from predominantly Dolichocephalic towards mesocephalic on Anatolia for example.
 
I should have written West Eurasia. In West Eurasia.... Dolichocephalic towards mesocephalic on Anatolia for example.

Alan, its fine.
Its just when I look broadly at the places you mention it just strikes as funny that "back then" it looked like north Korea these days. You know black spot, no lights.

When I see those youtube animations its truth that most start at AD, but how different the bronze/iron age must have been? and Balkans, north europe, central europe, steppe, etc... actually look like north korea. What it means is that "Nobody" lived there. While southern europe was sparkling with site of over 1 million people. so Westeurasion PEOPLE, lived in south and western atlantic continental europe.
 
Not if the question is if it is a good proxy for aDna. Which I think it is.

OK, very dolicho these fellows - 4500/4000; is it BP? Totana: Murcia? I did not find Salamo.
'çatal' in turk is [chatal] in english roughly said; So I don't know where to put YOY Chatal Huyuk? Could you precise the place and time please;
non-metrics are not so easily interpreted as you seem thinking; their results are not expressed (in the surveys conclusions so for us readers) under form of %s as for admixtures components or haplo's and they are not DNA, even if linked to; Physical Anthropology in fact encompasses genetics as well as phoenotypes (themselves greatly genetic); so my point (not an obligation) was to reserve to anthropology threads the technical points and use their conclusions in the diverse threads linked because as you I think all these knowlege "tools" serve for History, as do linguistics, DNA and archeology. NO true opposition to you here, in fact, just a personal suggestion. Even like this, it good for me.
 

This thread has been viewed 19272 times.

Back
Top