0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

8 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
sceptic
sceptic
8 days ago

Absolute tour-de-force from Razib, very few can marshal the archaeological and genetic analysis with such depth and clarity.

I do think in the future some wrinkles will be added. I am partial to Parpola’s multiple migration theory, with non-Vedic Indo Aryans arriving first and probably mingling with late IVC people, and Vedic Aryans arriving later, probably due to Iranian pressure. But its still just a speculation.

Regarding the current paper, I wonder if the Southern Arc de-emphasises the “lactase-persistence” theory of Yamnaya expansion.

Mohan
Mohan
7 days ago

Razib didn’t get a chance to speak on it, but I wonder whether he believes any of the languages spoken in the northern IVC, prior to the arrival of Indo-Iranians, may have been related to Indo-Anatolian? Or did northern IVC speak a language isolate that is now dead?

Pandit Brown
Pandit Brown
12 hours ago
Reply to  Mohan

Razib’s said a few times (on different podcasts) that he believes at least some of the northern IVC languages were related to Burushaski (now a language isolate and spoken only in Gilgit-Balitistan or thereabouts.)

Mohan
Mohan
11 hours ago
Reply to  Pandit Brown

Thank you. Yes I’ve heard him say that and it makes sense. I’m just pondering the possibility that some of the northern IVC languages may be related to Indo Anatolian and wanted to know his thoughts on it.

R D
R D
5 days ago

This podcast episode and the one about srilanka genetics are promising but become almost unwatchable due to the insufferable and useless interruptions of Razib’s cohost. Guy needs to stfu.

DaThang
DaThang
4 days ago

“…the main thing that is different between them and Yamnaya is the Yamnaya have ancestry from the indigenous foragers of the Dnieper river valley, who are basically a mix … majority western hunter gatherer with a minority eastern hunter gatherer ancestry.”

By Dnieper river valley, are you referring to Ukraine_N? If so, they are more EHG than WHG:

Target: Ukraine_N
Distance: 3.8593% / 0.03859279
63.4 Russia_Sidelkino_HG.SG
36.6 Italy_North_Villabruna_HG

However, they do have a little bit less EHG and a little bit more WHG than the older Ukraine_Mesolithic population:

Target: Ukraine_Mesolithic
Distance: 3.5812% / 0.03581249
70.8 Russia_Sidelkino_HG.SG
29.2 Italy_North_Villabruna_HG

Although you can say that Ukraine_N and Ukraine_Mesolithic are 40% to 50% ANE, so Ukraine_N would be mostly WHG if you decompose EHG into ANE + WHG. However that would be anachronistic because EHG certainly predates all known Ukraine_N and Ukraine_Mesolithic samples.

Adding Anatolia_N and CHG to the models doesn’t change much, and just for an extra check, there isn’t any Tyumen either (not relevant to what you said, but I did this to cover some extra ground anyway for clarification, they are ~95% EHG + WHG):

Target: Ukraine_Mesolithic
Distance: 3.2692% / 0.03269177
67.4 Russia_Sidelkino_HG.SG
28.6 Italy_North_Villabruna_HG
2.8 Turkey_Barcin_LN.SG
1.2 Georgia_Kotias.SG
0.0 Russia_Tyumen_HG

Target: Ukraine_N
Distance: 3.3198% / 0.03319771
57.4 Russia_Sidelkino_HG.SG
37.0 Italy_North_Villabruna_HG
3.8 Georgia_Kotias.SG
1.8 Turkey_Barcin_LN.SG
0.0 Russia_Tyumen_HG

DaThang
DaThang
4 days ago
Reply to  DaThang

A few more notes:

From what I know, Sintashta ancestry among Brahmin subgroups peaks with Gujarati Nagar Brahmins for whatever reason. More than Punjabi Brahmins, Kashmiri Brahmins/Pundits, Rajasthani Brahmins and UP Brahmins. Non-Nagar Brahmins of Gujarat however have less Sintashta than the aforementioned groups.

As mentioned in the podcast, Rors have more Sintashta than Brahmins and they do not have Maratha ancestry. My guess is that they may have been employed as soldiers by Marathas at some point, and so the identity of their employers stuck with them or something.

I don’t think the Eastern Iranians had any separate Siberian geneflow. I think it is just excess ANE ancestry being picked up by models which use Western Iranians as a proxy for South Asians. The extra ANE would probably be eliminated when a suitable Eastern Iranian proxy is discovered, then the Eastern Iranian proxy can be tested for late Siberian admixture by modelling it as West Iranian + ANE + post-ANE Siberians. If it ends up as 0% post-ANE Siberian, then one can assume that the extra ANE in it is from the same wave that gave ANE to Western Iran in the first place, Eastern Iran could simply have more of it because that is where the ANE in Western Iran came from in the first place as it was getting diluted by moving Westward through Iran.

Brown Pundits
8
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x