https://publons.com/researcher/1775469/iurii-l-mosenkis/
Researcher (Academic) - Taras Schevchenko National University of Kyiv
The Sumerians - Fall of the First Cities - video
So citing my previous blog posts:
Not to mention that Linguistically Braham means Bull and in IndoEuropean "Gott" as God also originates from Bull. So a definition connection indeed. "The name Sîn (earlier Suen, Suin) survived in the Aramaic speaking world as the name of the moongod residing in Harran. This cult, already attested at the beginning of the second millennium in Mari, was promoted by Nabonidus who gave Sîn epithets such as ‘Lord/King of the Gods’, or even ‘God of Gods’ . . . . For this reason, the Aramaic name of the god Mrlhʾ (Marilahe, ‘Lord of the Gods’) has been identified with Sîn of Harran. Normally, the name of the moongod was Šah(a)r among the Aramaeans. In Mesopotamia, the Sumerian and Babylonian moongod, Nanna/Sîn, was venerated everywhere, but Ur remained the centre of his cult.4 So, Yahweh, the God of the Bible and of Israel, took territory (Israel) from a foreign deity (Sin) who had been considered the god of gods — a decision in biblical history that was described in Genesis 11, the Tower of Babel (which obviously has a strong Mesopotamian context)." So we know the Zoroastrians and Vedics worshiped the female cow as the Moon - and in Sumeria and Hathor the Cow is the Moon - and Brahma means Bull as God. So if Abraham was worshipping Sin as the Cow Moon God - then it is no surprise that Brahman means God as Bull just as God means Bull from the indo-european and sumeria.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6102297/
The material culture of the Late Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant (4500–3900/3800 BCE) is qualitatively distinct from previous and subsequent periods. Here, to test the hypothesis that the advent and decline of this culture was influenced by movements of people, we generated genome-wide ancient DNA from 22 individuals from Peqi’in Cave, Israel. These individuals were part of a homogeneous population that can be modeled as deriving ~57% of its ancestry from groups related to those of the local Levant Neolithic, ~17% from groups related to those of the Iran Chalcolithic, and ~26% from groups related to those of the Anatolian Neolithic. The Peqi’in population also appears to have contributed differently to later Bronze Age groups, one of which we show cannot plausibly have descended from the same population as that of Peqi’in Cave. These results provide an example of how population movements propelled cultural changes in the deep past.
One hypothesis is that the Chalcolithic culture in the region was spread in part by immigrants from the north (i.e., northern Mesopotamia), based on similarities in artistic designs12,13. Others have suggested that the local populations of the Levant were entirely responsible for developing this culture, and that any similarities to material cultures to the north are due to borrowing of ideas and not to movements of people2,14–19.
This suggests that the Levant_ChL population may not be directly ancestral to these later Bronze Age Levantine populations, because if it were, we would also expect to detect an Anatolia_N component of ancestry
First, an allele (G) at rs12913832 near the OCA2 gene, with a proven association to blue eye color in individuals of European descent40, has an estimated alternative allele frequency of 49% in the Levant_ChL population, suggesting that the blue-eyed phenotype was common in the Levant_ChL.
Second, an allele at rs1426654 in the SLC24A5 gene which is one of the most important determinants of light pigmentation in West Eurasians41 is fixed for the derived allele (A) in the Levant_ChL population suggesting that a light skinned phenotype may have been common in this population, although any inferences about skin pigmentation based on allele frequencies observed at a single site need to be viewed with caution42.
Our finding that the Levant_ChL population can be well-modeled as a three-way admixture between Levant_N (57%), Anatolia_N (26%), and Iran_ChL (17%), while the Levant_BA_South can be modeled as a mixture of Levant_N (58%) and Iran_ChL (42%), but has little if any additional Anatolia_N-related ancestry, can only be explained by multiple episodes of population movement. The presence of Iran_ChL-related ancestry in both populations – but not in the earlier Levant_N – suggests a history of spread into the Levant of peoples related to Iranian agriculturalists, which must have occurred at least by the time of the Chalcolithic.
Wow - the ancient Garden of Eden Fertile Crescent proven!!
We additionally find that the Levant_ChL population does not serve as a likely source of the Levantine-related ancestry in present-day East African populations (see Supplementary Note 4)24.
[Nowadays, the highest genetic diversity of haplogroup E1b1b is observed in Northeast Africa, especially in Ethiopia and Somalia, which also have the monopoly of older and rarer branches like M281, V6 or V92. This suggests that E1b1b may indeed have appeared in East Africa, then expanded north until the Levant ]
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_E1b1b_Y-DNA.shtml
West Eurasian components were masked out, and the remaining African haplotypes were compared with a panel of sub-Saharan African and non-African genomes. We showed that masked Northeast African haplotypes overall were more similar to non-African haplotypes and more frequently present outside Africa than were any sets of haplotypes derived from a West African population. Furthermore, the masked Egyptian haplotypes showed these properties more markedly than the masked Ethiopian haplotypes, pointing to Egypt as the more likely gateway in the exodus to the rest of the world. Using five Ethiopian and three Egyptian high-coverage masked genomes and the multiple sequentially Markovian coalescent (MSMC) approach, we estimated the genetic split times of Egyptians and Ethiopians from non-African populations at 55,000 and 65,000 years ago,
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016073
Secondly, within E1b1b1 (E-M35), two haplogroups (E-V68 and E-V257) show similar phylogenetic and geographic structure, pointing to a genetic bridge between southern European and northern African Y chromosomes
Haplogroup E-M329, on the other hand, was observed almost exclusively in eastern Africa [10], [12 and R.S. unpublished data], where E-M2 is virtually absent. The second basal branch of E1b1, E-M215, has a broad geographic distribution from southern Europe to northern and eastern Africa where it has been proposed to have originated [8]. The new topology here reported has important implications as to the origins of the haplogroup E1b1. Using the principle of the phylogeographic parsimony, the resolution of the E1b1b trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of E-M2 and E-M329 strongly supports the hypothesis that haplogroup E1b1 originated in eastern Africa, as previously suggested [10], and that chromosomes E-M2, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in eastern Africa.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929715001561
It has been suggested that some Late Chalcolithic burial customs, artifacts and motifs may have had their origin in earlier Neolithic traditions in Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia8,13,47. Some of the artistic expressions have been related to finds and ideas and to later religious concepts such as the gods Inanna and Dumuzi from these more northern regions6,8,47–50. The knowledge and resources required to produce metallurgical artifacts in the Levant have also been hypothesized to come from the north11,51.Our finding of genetic discontinuity between the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age periods also resonates with aspects of the archeological record marked by dramatic changes in settlement patterns43, large-scale abandonment of sites52–55, many fewer items with symbolic meaning, and shifts in burial practices, including the disappearance of secondary burial in ossuaries56–59. This supports the view that profound cultural upheaval, leading to the extinction of populations, was associated with the collapse of the Chalcolithic culture in this region18,60
Ancient DNA reveals a multistep spread of the first herders into sub-Saharan Africa
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6448/eaaw6275.abstract
Later Stone Age individuals form part of a forager genetic cline, early pastoral and Pastoral Neolithic individuals are most closely related to present-day Afro-Asiatic speakers, and Pastoral Iron Age individuals show affinities to present-day Nilotic speakers. A child buried at an Iron Age agricultural site has shared ancestry with western Africans and Bantu speakers.
We propose a four-stage model that fits the data. First, admixture in northeastern Africa created groups with approximately equal proportions of ancestry related to present-day Sudanese Nilotic speakers and groups from northern Africa and the Levant. Second, descendants of these northeastern Africans mixed with foragers in eastern Africa. Third, an additional component of Sudan-related ancestry contributed to Iron Age pastoralist groups. Fourth, western African–related ancestry, similar to that found in present-day Bantu speakers, appeared with the spread of farming.
So as I had argued before - this proves that indeed the Iron Bantu culture spread from the spread of pastoralism into Africa via the ancient Fertile Crescent origins....
https://pure.spbu.ru/ws/portalfiles/portal/53198823/Proto_Indo_Europeans_The_prologue_2019_.pdf
So an ancient Fertile Crescent expansion....
Ok so here is the origins of West Asian farming...
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/anthropology/v1007/baryo.pdf
So what we are talking about by Solar Ritual Priests is the 5th Millennium BCE.
So it's BEFORE the wheel wagon and later chariot culture but AFTER the creation of farming...
It's also AFTER the domestication of animals (with the wild bull being the last to be domesticated)...
So it's very much tied to global climate change....
"people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia."
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/059311v1.full.pdf
So the pastoralists into South Asia where the later Vedic Brahmin culture and that farming had spread north but originated from the West.
"farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian steppe"
The Iranian farmers were genetically from Africa and so out of the Levant region: .
"We used qpAdm7 to estimate Basal Eurasian ancestry in each Test population. We obtain the highest estimates in the earliest populations from both Iran (66±13% in the likely Mesolithic sample, 48±6% in Neolithic samples), and the Levant (44±8% in Epipaleolithic Natufians) (Fig. 2), showing that Basal Eurasian ancestry was widespread across the ancient Near East."
So the use of sickles started in the Levant way back 23,000 years ago!
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0167151
This sickle use then spread across the Fertile Crescent. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379116301780
So even though the different regions (Iran and Levant) had different hunter-gatherer population origins - it appears that the technology of sickle use spread from the Levant to Iran as a single event - although a later establishment in Iran due to drier conditions.
the prevailing warming trend occurring at the end of the Pleistocene Epoch (which lasted from 2.6 million to 11,700 years ago).
Stadials are periods of colder climate while interstadials are periods of warmer climate.
stadials endure for a thousand years or less, and interstadials for less than ten thousand years, while interglacials last for more than ten thousand and glacials for about one hundred thousand.
So then there was a "stadial" cooling period that caused the first Western ecological crisis!!
And so the Mother Goddess Farm Fertility religion was born - the first origins of Techno-Feminism!!
So then the surplus continued to spread....
So what started as an expansion of abundance due to warmer weather then was accelerated by the stadial Younger Dryas cooling.... as a kind of technological catalyst... which then became a positive feedback amplification requiring FURTHER expansion around the globe....
And so it accelerated ....
And became the foundation of Western civilization - as farming - spreading into Africa through the Bantus use of iron hoe technology and pastoralism.... and into India and into Europe, and then as Western colonialism as Ecological Imperialism around 500 years ago....
https://indo-european.info/game-clans-clash-chiefs.pdf
The impact of the Near Eastern 94 farmers extended beyond the Near East: farmers related to those of Anatolia spread 95 westward into Europe; farmers related to those of the Levant spread southward into 96 East Africa; farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian 97 steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of 98 the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/059311v1.full.pdf
Our data document continuity across the hunter-gatherer / farming transition, separately in 225 the southern Levant and in the southern Caucasus-Iran highlands. The qualitative evidence 226 for this is that PCA, ADMIXTURE, and outgroup f3 analysis cluster Levantine hunter-227 gatherers (Natufians) with Levantine farmers, and Iranian and Caucasus Hunter Gatherers 228 with Iranian farmers (Fig. 1b; Extended Data Fig. 1; Extended Data Fig. 2). We confirm this 229 in the Levant by showing that its early farmers share significantly more alleles with Natufians 230 than with the early farmers of Iran: the statistic f4(Levant_N, Chimp; Natufian, Iran_N) is 231 significantly positive (Z=13.6). The early farmers of the Caucasus-Iran highlands similarly 232 share significantly more alleles with the hunter-gatherers of this region than with the early 233 farmers from the Levant: the statistic f4(Iran_N, Chimp; Caucasus or Iran highland hunter-234 gatherers, Levant_N) is significantly positive (Z>6).
Wow - so farming arose separately in the Fertile Crescent and the Levant....
Or I guess they include the whole area together....
For the first time we integrate quantitative data on lithic sickles and archaeobotanical evidence for domestication and the evolution of plant economies from sites dated to the terminal Pleistocene and Early Holocene (ca. 12000–5000 cal. BCE) from throughout the Fertile Crescent region of Southwest Asia. We find a strong correlation in some regions, throughout the Levant, for increasing investment in sickles that tracks the evidence for increasing reliance on cereal crops, while evidence for morphological domestication in wheats (Triticum monococcum and Triticum dicoccum) and barley (Hordeum vulgare) was delayed in comparison to sickle use. These data indicate that while the co-increase of sickle blades and cereal crops support the protracted development of agricultural practice, sickles did not drive the initial stages of the domestication process but rather were a cultural adaptation to increasing reliance on cereals that were still undergoing selection for morphological change.
Archaeobotanical evidence reveals the origins of bread 14,400 years ago in northeastern Jordan
cereal domestication during the Neolithic in southwest Asia. In this study we analyze a total
of 24 charred food remains from Shubayqa 1, a Natufian hunter-gatherer site located in …
Composite sickles and cereal harvesting methods at 23,000-years-old Ohalo II, Israel
hunter-gatherers' camp on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, Northern Israel, provides the
earliest evidence for the use of composite cereal harvesting tools. The wear traces indicate …
Use-wear analysis of five glossed flint blades found at Ohalo II, a 23,000-years-old fisher-hunter-gatherers’ camp on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, Northern Israel, provides the earliest evidence for the use of composite cereal harvesting tools. The wear traces indicate that tools were used for harvesting near-ripe semi-green wild cereals, shortly before grains are ripe and disperse naturally. The studied tools were not used intensively, and they reflect two harvesting modes: flint knives held by hand and inserts hafted in a handle. The finds shed new light on cereal harvesting techniques some 8,000 years before the Natufian and 12,000 years before the establishment of sedentary farming communities in the Near East. Furthermore, the new finds accord well with evidence for the earliest ever cereal cultivation at the site and the use of stone-made grinding implements.
Furthermore, evidence for grinding cereals on the floor of Brush Hut 1 was well-preserved. First, the unique distribution of cereal grains around a carefully set flat stone suggests the stone was used for food preparation [45]. Second, a thorough study of the stone, including sonication for the retrieval of microscopic remains, showed that the stone was indeed used for grinding wheat, barley and oats. The grinded cereals were supposedly used for making a baked product in an adjacent baking installation, which in turn increased the caloric intake of the inhabitants [46,47]. A use-wear analysis of the stone corroborates the previous conclusions [48]. Additional lower and upper grinding stones were studied, again reflecting the use of such implements in food processing at the site [48–50]. Furthermore, a recent botanical-ecological study showed that the Ohalo II people were cultivating cereals, probably on a small scale; this is by far the earliest example of its kind [51].
video of Archaeological excavations at Ohalo II
Meet the First Farmers: DNA analyses reveal genetic identities of world's first farmers - video
https://hms.harvard.edu/news/meet-first-farmers
Let's expand beyond a point to a discussion:
"Instead, the spread of ideas and farming technology moved faster than the spread of people"
(source the same as this vid upload).
So that proves "my" point. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/059311v1.full.pdf
And now for the "discussion" part.
"The population structure of the ancient Near East was not independent of that of Europe (Supplementary Information, section 4), as evidenced by the highly significant (Z=-8.9) statistic f4(Iran_N, Natufian;WHG, EHG) which suggests gene flow in ‘northeastern’ (Neolithic Iran/EHG) and ‘southwestern’ (Levant/WHG) interaction spheres (Fig. 4d). This interdependence of the ancestry of Europe and the Near East may have been mediated by unsampled geographically intermediate populations37 that contribute ancestry to both regions."
So just as the Yamnaya take over of Europe around 3000 BCE relied on Iranian farming origins so too did the later Vedic-Brahmin take over of India (around 2000 BCE). The difference being that the Yamnaya did not use chariots. Only wagons at the time. Similarly there is IndoEuropean language in Anatolia BEFORE the wagon wheel.
Gojko Barjamovic, Senior Lecturer on Assyriology at Harvard University, explains:
"In Anatolia, and parts of Central Asia, which held densely settled complex urban societies, the history of language spread and genetic ancestry is better described in terms of contact and absorption than by simply a movement of population."
He adds:
"The Indo-European languages are usually said to emerge in Anatolia in the 2nd millennium BCE. However, we use evidence from the palatial archives of the ancient city of Ebla in Syria to argue that Indo-European was already spoken in modern-day Turkey in the 25th century BCE. This means that the speakers of these language must have arrived there prior to any Yamnaya expansions."
So that proves that the Indo-European language originated from farming. The Iranian genes are in the Levant by the 5th Millennium BCE. So the Iranian farmers spread into the Steppes and also back into the Levant - and then the STEPPE pastoralist culture spread into India later just as the Yamnaya culture spread into Europe later (also bringing farming that originated from the older traditions on top of the Anatolian farming already there). So yeah I totally agree with you that Europeans are NOT Aryans - if that is your emphasis.
The study also shows that the spread of the Indo-Iranian languages to South Asia, with Hindi, Urdu and Persian as major modern offshoots, cannot result from the Yamnaya expansions. Rather, the Indo-Iranian languages spread with a later push of pastoralist groups from the South Ural Mountains during the Middle to Late Bronze Age.
Prior to entering South Asia, these groups, thought to have spoken an Indo-Iranian language, were impacted by groups with an ancestry typical of more western Eurasian populations. This suggests that the Indo-Iranian speakers did not split off from the Yamnaya population directly, but were more closely related to the Indo-European speakers that lived in Eastern Europe.
I'm just saying that in terms of farming - there was a spread of technology "faster" than the spread of changing over the population genetics. For example it's also proven now that Eastern European farming spread into the Yamnaya culture which then spread into India.
"An influx of men from the steppe of Central Asia may have swept into India around 3,500 years ago and transformed the population. The same mysterious people — ancient livestock herders called the Yamnaya who rode wheeled chariots and spoke a proto-Indo-European language — also moved across Europe more than 1,000 years earlier. Somehow, they left their genetic signature with most European men, but not women, earlier studies suggest."
https://www.livescience.com/59703-north-india-populated-by-central-asian-invaders.html
The practicalities of processing plants drew humans into pathways that led to intensification, population increase, sedentism and domestication. Much the same can be said for other human-made things such as sickles, storage bins, domestic animal dung and refuse. The dialectical tensions between human-thing dependence and dependency generated the movement towards Neolithicization. Human-thing dependence (involving human dependence on things, thing dependence on humans and thing dependence on other things) afforded opportunities towards which humans (always already in a given state of entanglement) were drawn in order to solve problems. But this dependence also involved dependency, limitation and constraint, leading for example to increases in labour. In order to provide that labour or in other ways to deal with the demands of things and their entanglements with other humans and things, humans made further use of the affordances of things. There was thus a generative spiral leading to sedentism and domestication.
Things and the Slow Neolithic: the Middle Eastern Transformation
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory volume 25, pages155–177(2018
even after accepting the role of Yamnaya as the most evident population expanding Late PIE to western Europe – and the different ancestry that spread with Indo-Iranian to South Asia 1,000 years later.
Our finding that the Copper Age (~3300 BCE) Namazga-related population from the borderlands between Central and South Asia contains both Iran Neolithic and EHG ancestry but not CHG-specific ancestry provides a solution to problems concerning the Western Eurasian genetic contribution to South Asians. Rather than invoking varying degrees of relative contribution of Iran Neolithic and Yamnaya ancestries, we explain the two western genetic components with two separate admixture events. The first event, potentially before the Bronze Age, spread from a non-IE-speaking farming population from the Namazga culture or a related source down to Southern India. Then the second came during the Late Bronze Age (~2300 to 1200 BCE) through established contacts between pastoral steppe nomads and the Indus Valley, bringing European Neolithic as well as CHG-specific ancestry, and with them Indo-Iranian languages into northern South Asia. This is consistent with a long-range South Eurasian trade network ~2000 BCE (4), shared mythologies with steppe-influenced cultures (41, 60), linguistic relationships between Indic spoken in South Asia, and written records from Western Asia from the first half of the 18th century BCE onward (49, 67).
https://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_657899_en.html
The authors demonstrated that the mounted Scythian Nomads of the steppe who were of European genetic origin and spoke an Indo-Iranian language were gradually mixed with East Asian Turkic- speaking people who later, under the name of Huns, nearly brought the Roman Empire to a fall when they invaded. This was followed by the Justinian plague, whose origin for the first time can be identified into Central Asia, with its spread linked to intensified contact, perhaps along the Silk Road, an ancient network of trading routes.
Professor Kristian Kristiansen, from the Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg, led the second paper with Professor Willerslev. He said: “Genetically and linguistically what happened is the people living in the steppe were being gradually replaced from European ancestry to being East Asian.”
and https://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(18)30757-7.pdf
This is consistent with Anatolian/Early European farmer ancestry, but not steppe ancestry, in the Copper Age Balkans (68) and implies that the Anatolian clade of IE languages did not derive from a large-scale Copper Age/Early Bronze Age population movement from the steppe [unlike the findings in (4)]. Our findings are thus consistent with historical models of cultural hybridity and “middle ground” in a multicultural and multilingual but genetically homogeneous Bronze Age Anatolia (69, 70).
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6396/eaar7711
Wow - opposite evidence from linguistics and genetics!
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190319121742.htm
Nature Communications, confirms existing archaeological evidence that shows that Anatolian hunter-gatherers did indeed adopt farming themselves, and the later Anatolian farmers were direct descendants of a gene-pool that remained relatively stable for over 7,000 years.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170929112959.htm
It is words like sturgeon, shrimp, pea, bean and turnip that cannot be reconstructed to the Proto-Indo-European ancestor," Guus Kroonen explains and adds:
"This tells us that these words must have entered Indo-European after it had spread from the Caspian steppe to the various parts of Europe. In other words: the new Single Grave Culture is likely to have adopted much farming and hunting terminology from the local Funnel Beaker Culture that inhabited southern Scandinavia and Denmark till around 2,600 BC. When Indo-European in Northern Europe developed into Proto-Germanic, the terminology for local flora and fauna was preserved, which is why we know and can study the terms today."
Guus Kroonen adds that this farming terminology may be vestiges of a now extinct language spoken by the people who initially brought farming to Europe from Anatolia 9,000-6,000 years ago.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170202122800.htm
While the sequenced genomes showed no trace of the Levant farmer influence, one of the Latvian samples did reveal genetic influence from a different external source -- one that the scientists say could be a migration from the Pontic Steppe in the east. The timing (5-7,000 years ago) fits with previous research estimating the earliest Slavic languages.
Researcher Eppie Jones, from Trinity College Dublin and the University of Cambridge, was the lead author of the study. She said: "There are two major theories on the spread of Indo-European languages, the most widely spoken language family in the world. One is that they came from the Anatolia with the agriculturalists; another that they developed in the Steppes and spread at the start of the Bronze Age."
"That we see no farmer-related genetic input, yet we do find this Steppe-related component, suggests that at least the Balto-Slavic branch of the Indo-European language family originated in the Steppe grasslands of the East, which would bring later migrations of Bronze Age horse riders."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/09/190905145348.htm
One new line of evidence in favor of a steppe origin for Indo-European languages is the detection of genetic patterns that connect speakers of the Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic branches of Indo-European. The researchers found that present-day speakers of both branches descend from a subgroup of steppe pastoralists who moved west toward Europe almost 5,000 years ago and then spread back eastward into Central and South Asia in the following 1,500 years.
The new study reveals a similar dynamic in Iran and Turan (southern Central Asia), where the researchers found that Anatolian-related ancestry and farming arrived around the same time.
"This confirms that the spread of agriculture entailed not only a westward route from Anatolia to Europe but also an eastward route from Anatolia into regions of Asia previously only inhabited by hunter-gatherer groups," said Pinhasi.
Then, as farming spread northward through the mountains of Inner Asia thousands of years after taking hold in Iran and Turan, "the links between ancestry and economy get more complex," said archaeologist Michael Frachetti of Washington University in St. Louis, co-senior author who led much of the skeletal sampling for the Science paper.
but the Iranian-related ancestry they detected in South Asians comes from a lineage that separated from ancient Iranian farmers and hunter-gatherers before those groups split from each other.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5337992/
This pattern points to an admixture process between west and east Eurasian populations that began in earlier periods, certainly before the 1st millennium BCE13,50, a finding consistent with a recent study suggesting the carriers of the Yamnaya culture are genetically indistinguishable from the Afanasievo culture peoples of the Altai-Sayan region. This further implies that carriers of the Yamnaya culture migrated not only into Europe26 but also eastward, carrying west Eurasian genes—and potentially also Indo-European languages—to this region17. All of these observations provide evidence that the prevalent genetic pattern does not simply follow an isolation-by-distance model but involves significant gene flow over large distances.
All Iron Age individuals investigated in this study show genomic evidence for Caucasus hunter-gatherer and Eastern European hunter-gatherer ancestry. This is consistent with the idea that the blend of EHG and Caucasian elements in carriers of the Yamnaya culture was formed on the European steppe and exported into Central Asia and Siberia26. All of our analyses support the hypothesis that the genetic composition of the Scythians can best be described as a mixture of Yamnaya-related ancestry and East Asian/north Siberian elements.
Your white paper rendering alchemy is really helpful
ReplyDeletethanks for the kudos - first time I saw this comment.
Delete