# Population Genetics > Paleogenetics > Paleolithic & Mesolithic >  6000 yo EHG pile dwellings near lakes and rivers in NW Russia : R1a1 -M17

## bicicleur

quote by Vladimir Semargl :

Quote from another discussion on FB:
Eight of the sixteen genotyped from skeletal remains of the Northern Dvina were R1a-M17. Age 6,000 years.
"R1a1-M17 (М417 не тестировалась, но весьма вероятна) найдена у охотника-собирателя в верховьях Западной Двины возрастом 6000 лет назад.
Сведения об этом факте опубликованы (точнее сказать -похоронены) в региональном археологическом сборнике, который ни поп-, ни прочие генетики без специальной наводки в жизни искать не станут: Археология озерных поселений IV—II тыс. до н. э.: хронология культур и природно- климатические ритмы. — СПб.: ООО «Периферия», 2014. Статья: Чекунова Е.М., Ярцева Н.В., Чекунов М.К., Мазуркевич А.Н. Первые результаты генотипирования коренных жителей и человеческих костных останков из археологических памятников Верхнего Подвинья. С. 287-294. Таблица на с. 294."

can anybody translate ?

these are R1a1a-M17
one step further down the tree compared to the Karelian EHG typed R1a1* in lake Onega, 5500-5000 BC

and link : https://www.academia.edu/9452168/Arc...olbunova_E._ed

is this the comb-ware culture which is beleived to be related with Kelteminar?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit%E2%...b_Ware_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelteminar_culture

if all this is true, another piece of the puzzle is solved

----------


## bicicleur

i have more info :
there were 4 x R1a1 and 2 x N1c

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater

i have allways beleived N1c brought pottery from the Amur basin (east-Siberia) to Europe
my guess is now :
Kelteminar was N1c
they mixed with R1a1 HG to form comb-ware culture

also note : 7000 yo Khvalynsk culture had the same type of pottery, it is the steppe pottery from which Yamnaya, BB and corded ware pottery was derived

----------


## Angela

Well, it may solve one piece of the puzzle, but it opens up another can of worms.

The sample(s) are supposedly mtDna "H" right? So, they went from Smolensk to the Caucasus to find brides? What did these Caucasus women have? Or what did theirs not have? I'm sorry to be flippant, but this doesn't make sense to me. It couldn't have been bride exchange because I'm sure there were no farmers up there. That might make sense somehow on the Steppe right near the Caucasus, but up there?

Maybe it's not "H"? Some of these academic studies are still just using HVRI.

If it _is_ H, is it possible the movement _was_ from the Caspian/Iran? If that's the case, then the autosomes should show some "Near Eastern", by this time, right? But we have the other R1a hunter-gatherer who had none, correct?

Could it just have been a slight diffusion from the Caucasus that got washed out in a couple of hundred years?

O.K. I officially don't get it. :)

----------


## Fire Haired14

They're R. We don't know if they are H because they weren't tested for H, or even R0 and HV SNPs.

----------


## Angela

> They're R. We don't know if they are H because they weren't tested for H, or even R0 and HV SNPs.


Thanks, Fire-Haired

----------


## Finalise

Actually it's confirmed that it was H2. Read it again.

----------


## bicicleur

who says they went all the way to the Caucasus to find brides and come back?
maybe they were a new arrival from the Caucasus or the steppe and allready had their brides with them
they were not the descendants of the Karelian EHG, who was R1a1* and who didn't build stilt houses (or did they, I don't know ?)
they were confirmed R1a1a-M17, and maybe even R1a1a1-M417 as they were not tested for M417
they were not corded ware either, these were R1a-L664 or Z-283 and came 1000 years later with wheels, but M17 was ancestral to them
there were simply multiple R1a expansions from the Caucasus area
the Karelian EHG were maybe the 1st of these expansions
these guys here were a later expansion
the corded ware R1a were even later
and the latest were the Indo-Iranian R1a-Z93
all the same family but not the same people
just a theory of course, but right now this looks the most likely to me

what I find even more interesting is N1c coming in for the first time

----------


## Alan

> Well, it may solve one piece of the puzzle, but it opens up another can of worms.
> 
> The sample(s) are supposedly mtDna "H" right? So, they went from Smolensk to the Caucasus to find brides? What did these Caucasus women have? Or what did theirs not have? I'm sorry to be flippant, but this doesn't make sense to me. It couldn't have been bride exchange because I'm sure there were no farmers up there. That might make sense somehow on the Steppe right near the Caucasus, but up there?
> 
> Maybe it's not "H"? Some of these academic studies are still just using HVRI.
> 
> If it _is_ H, is it possible the movement _was_ from the Caspian/Iran? If that's the case, then the autosomes should show some "Near Eastern", by this time, right? But we have the other R1a hunter-gatherer who had none, correct?
> 
> Could it just have been a slight diffusion from the Caucasus that got washed out in a couple of hundred years?
> ...



My initial believe that ANE came from South_Central Asia or Iran seems getting stronger.

What if these EHG guys with R1a came directly from South_Central Asia or through the Caucasus together with mtDNA H?

The bride exchange theory gets more and more impossible. It was already impossible to me earlier. But it gets more impossible with time. There is no way EHG from Northwest Russia went all the way down to Caucasus to catch some brides.

----------


## Ike

> So, they went from Smolensk to the Caucasus to find brides? What did these Caucasus women have? Or what did theirs not have?


Bigger boobiez :)

----------


## Angela

Well, I walked right into that one, didn't I? You could have spared me the blushes.  :Ashamed:  I'm obviously clueless. How could I have forgotten the male preoccupation with them? Now all is clear. :Smile:

----------


## Fire Haired14

There's a confirmed H from Mesolithic Karelia and in the same site the R1a1* carrying Karelia_EHG from Haak 2015 was samplyed. This is evidence H(and C1g) existed in Europe free of near eastern and east Asian admixture. It leaves room for some non-U lineages to be of EHG, SHG, WHG, etc. origin. 

Also, did people of near eastern origin ever actually settle in Russia or did the HGs evolve culturally? Maybe their near eastern ancestry is via a female market. As crude as that sounds they have existed and do exist. Women of near eastern or European farmer origin could have been sold by their men and traded across Russia. That's just a shot in the dark, I know nothing of the pre-historic steppes.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> Actually it's confirmed that it was H2. Read it again.


Where was H2 confirmed?

----------


## LeBrok

When I watch an interesting documentary about last of hunter gatherers in Amazonia, by account of these HGs the theft of women and fire was the main problems they faced from other tribes.

----------


## bicicleur

> When I watch an interesting documentary about last of hunter gatherers in Amazonia, by account of these HGs the theft of women and fire was the main problems they faced from other tribes.


those were the days

----------


## epoch

> those were the days


It was actually rather harsh. The first British that came into contact with aboriginals were appalled at the treatment of women by aboriginal men. They were treated worse than slaves. (Source: The Original Australians, by Josephine Flood)

On the theft of women and thecontinuous warfare and violence of HGs in the Amazone one should readNapoleon Chagnons work.

----------


## bicicleur

the image that has been cultivated for decades is of European colonists invading and destroying peaceful societies living in perfect harmony with nature
blaming the west for whatever goes wrong in this world and trying to make us feel guilty (and some things go wrong)

----------


## Angela

> those were the days


If this was an attempt at humor, I don't find the idea that a world where women were routinely kidnapped, raped, and treated like chattel was the "good old days" at all funny.

----------


## Angela

> It was actually rather harsh. The first British that came into contact with aboriginals were appalled at the treatment of women by aboriginal men. They were treated worse than slaves. (Source: The Original Australians, by Josephine Flood)
> 
> On the theft of women and thecontinuous warfare and violence of HGs in the Amazone one should readNapoleon Chagnons work.


I haven't read the paper which is the subject of this thread in its entirety, but unless I'm mistaken people who have read it report that the women in this group of hunter gatherers from what is now Russia were severely malnourished in comparison to the men and showed signs of extreme violence. There is nothing to be lauded here.

----------


## Alan

> Also, did people of near eastern origin ever actually settle in Russia or did the HGs evolve culturally? *As crude as that sounds they have existed and do exist. Women of near eastern or European farmer origin could have been sold by their men and traded across Russia.* That's just a shot in the dark, I know nothing of the pre-historic steppes.


 :Smash: 


Yep since we have 100% evidence that farmers sold their females. For what actually? What had the H&G they could give the farmers for exchange.

Are people now losing totally the sense for reality. Are you even aware how wrong these theories get over time? Bro there is a huge distance between NW Russia and Western Asia. So People went on a month long journey through unknown and therefore dangerous terrain just to sell females :Laughing: 

And these female market must have been huge. 


How about to think that EHG is not really an ancestral people but just a mixture of WHG and ANE (What they are) and R1a/R1b and their H Haplogroups came together with ANE to NW Russia via South Central Asia or even somewhere in North Caucasus? 

Of course not it is too simple better expect some female slave market where farmers took their brides to exchange it with the rich H&G of Russia  :Laughing: 

And to the bride kidnapping story. bride Kidnapping works with other tribes in close range. Never have I heard of bride kidnapping from people living over a huge distance.


My theory, EHG = Western H&G who mixed with South_Central Asian/Iran ANE H&G and became EHG. At the end of the day even in modern times ANE peaks in this region so we can only assume how strong this component was in ancient times. Those ANE guys already had mtDNA H from Iran. 

Don't forget 43000 year old Kostenki already had Basal Eurasian genes and was autosomally closer to populations of Western Asia. There was a never ending geneflow from the the Near East to everywhere around the world.

----------


## bicicleur

> If this was an attempt at humor, I don't find the idea that a world where women were routinely kidnapped, raped, and treated like chattel was the "good old days" at all funny.


read my post above yours, which was in reaction to the post of epoch , and judge for yourself

besides that, I think that the males of the tribes that were being raided and that were unable to defend themselves against the raiders were probably even worse of than the females ; the winner simply took it all

----------


## bicicleur

> I haven't read the paper which is the subject of this thread in its entirety, but unless I'm mistaken people who have read it report that the women in this group of hunter gatherers from what is now Russia were severely malnourished in comparison to the men and showed signs of extreme violence. There is nothing to be lauded here.


neither have I, but I find no posts in this thread which mention anything about the women actually written in the paper
only speculation and reference to other papers about other HGs

----------


## MOESAN

> It was actually rather harsh. The first British that came into contact with aboriginals were appalled at the treatment of women by aboriginal men. They were treated worse than slaves. (Source: The Original Australians, by Josephine Flood)
> 
> On the theft of women and thecontinuous warfare and violence of HGs in the Amazone one should readNapoleon Chagnons work.


_I think rather as Bicicleur that in more than a "primitive" society females are better treated than in more evolved ones: look at southern Amazone Amerindians (where females can mock the males in a good mood and where hunting of fishing products are shared by all - that said, uneasy to establish general rules... 
I suppose in ancient times were life was hard females had a high value for their big resistance and capacity to give sons and daughters to the group - it is the evolved arms possessed by a little group of "elite" males which favorized the agressive inequalitary deportment of males and their little respect for females - 

the females exchanges have existed at the mergins and between geographically close population, before a true trade of slaves was permitted by material and organization "progress" -apart of that I think it's not a hazard if mt-H is ne of the most spred and most variated mt-DNA, at least in Eurasia: as Y-R1, it's the result of a largely spred original population - I 'll try to find some clue but I think mt-H was old enough in more than a region, before Neolithic, from North to South and West to East (or the contrary) -_

----------


## Tomenable

Table 3. from page 294/295 of publication in the link below:

https://www.academia.edu/9452168/Arc...olbunova_E._ed

6000 - 5000 years old R1a1 from the vicinity of Velizh (archaeological site Serteya) in Smolensk Oblast:

Together with mtDNA haplogroup H in the same individual:

----------


## Tomenable

More info:

Page 1: http://s22.postimg.org/741m47e6p/image.png



Page 2: http://s21.postimg.org/edi6d9m1j/image.png

----------


## Tomenable

Looks like bicicleur was one day faster than me:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...-Smolensk-area

----------


## Fire Haired14

Alan, I guess it is possible the ANE-affinity(ANE may not be a real thing, the whole tree-model was questioned in Haak 2015) in EHG may be from south or north of the Caucasus, we don't know. I'm very skeptical about R1 being exclusively from north Eurasia, because of basal forms in west Asia. Although it is pretty clear that R1 has a long history with Russia. 

Think about it. The post-Mesolithic people of Russia had pretty much 100% Y DNA R1a, R1b, and N1c, like Mesolithic ones. But they also had alot of near eastern ancestry unlike the Mesolithic ones. Where did it come from. Since it is possible their Y DNA is from EHG and they had alot of typical west Asian mtDNA, a logical conclusion is that they had alot of west Asian mothers. So, the female trade network is simply an attempt to explain this. I'm not into the east European-macho man with 50 wives like others(maybe Davidski at Eurogenes), I just want to figure out what happened.

----------


## Tomenable

> I'm very skeptical about R1 being exclusively from north Eurasia, because of basal forms in west Asia.


But M417 could emerge only in one place - either north Eurasia or west Asia. Basal forms of M417 exist in both regions.

It doesn't matter where did ancestors of M417 come from over a dozen thousands years ago, but where was first M417 born.

After all, M417 is as much as 99% of entire modern R1a. Now more evidence indicates M417 emerged in Eastern Europe.

Why? Because basal forms in west Asia come only from modern people. While in north Eurasia we have basal forms from hunter-gatherers.

It may become interesting when we get samples from Poland. There is an ongoing project on ancient DNA there - info from April 2014:

*"This year [2014] begins a major research program, the goal of which is to examine ancient DNA from several dozen archaeological sites from the area of Poland. This project is supposed to test ancient DNA of inhabitants of Poland from pre-Roman, Roman, early Medieval and Medieval times and compare it to DNA of modern inhabitants. Research is going to last at least 5 years, its authors are - among others - prof. Hanna Koćka-Krenz and prof. Janusz Piontek."*

----------


## LeBrok

> _I think rather as Bicicleur that in more than a "primitive" society females are better treated than in more evolved ones: look at southern Amazone Amerindians (where females can mock the males in a good mood and where hunting of fishing products are shared by all - that said, uneasy to establish general rules... 
> I suppose in ancient times were life was hard females had a high value for their big resistance and capacity to give sons and daughters to the group - it is the evolved arms possessed by a little group of "elite" males which favorized the agressive inequalitary deportment of males and their little respect for females_


They not necessarily were treated bad, but they were kidnaped on rather big scale. The farmer's women were the "educated ones" and therefore priced high by HGs. They knew how to do textile, pottery, grow gardens with vegetables, milk animals and do all types of cheeses, and some more. But it came with a price. By kidnapping farmer's women HGs changed their genome and culture. After few hundreds of years they became a different people. I'm not sure for better or worse, but different.

----------


## Tomenable

Sample A4 was R1a1 from Anashkino Hill-Fort dating to 8th - 5th centuries BC:

http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~nas13/AS/2...hanov_etal.pdf

Anashkino was an Iron Age settlement (see the link above, page 181/189 onwards).

----------


## Finalise

> They not necessarily were treated bad, but they were kidnaped on rather big scale. The farmer's women were the "educated ones" and therefore priced high by HGs. They knew how to do textile, pottery, grow gardens with vegetables, milk animals and do all types of cheeses, and some more. But it came with a price. By kidnapping farmer's women HGs changed their genome and culture. After few hundreds of years they became a different people. I'm not sure for better or worse, but different.


Do you know how crazy you sound? H was thought to be a Neolithic farmer mtDna because it was only found in those groups. Now it's not anymore. End of story.

----------


## LeBrok

> Do you know how crazy you sound? H was thought to be a Neolithic farmer mtDna because it was only found in those groups. Now it's not anymore. End of story.


I was more referring to Samara mtDNA and general talk about farmers mtDNA, and how it get into HGs population. This H2 is unusual and very rare today I have no comment on this one.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> I was more referring to Samara mtDNA and general talk about farmers mtDNA, and how it get into HGs population. This H2 is unusual and very rare today I have no comment on this one.


There is no confirmed H in this study. All they got results for was the HV1 region. All we know is that these samples had R, and not any of the major non-RO clades in Europe(U5, U4, U2, U3, U1, U8a1a, U8b1, K, JT, X, N1a1a, I, W). 

The authors of this study are very old school, their knowledge of genetics is in 2006. They said R1b and H came out of an Iberian refuge 15,000YBP and all that other 2006 stuff. Just like authors of old ancient DNA studies they treat all CRS(which is really just the R-haplotype) as H.

----------


## bicicleur

QUOTE=Fire Haired14;450915]Alan, I guess it is possible the ANE-affinity(ANE may not be a real thing, the whole tree-model was questioned in Haak 2015) in EHG may be from south or north of the Caucasus, we don't know. I'm very skeptical about R1 being exclusively from north Eurasia, because of basal forms in west Asia. Although it is pretty clear that R1 has a long history with Russia. 

Think about it. The post-Mesolithic people of Russia had pretty much 100% Y DNA R1a, R1b, and N1c, like Mesolithic ones. But they also had alot of near eastern ancestry unlike the Mesolithic ones. Where did it come from. Since it is possible their Y DNA is from EHG and they had alot of typical west Asian mtDNA, a logical conclusion is that they had alot of west Asian mothers. So, the female trade network is simply an attempt to explain this. I'm not into the east European-macho man with 50 wives like others(maybe Davidski at Eurogenes), I just want to figure out what happened.[/QUOTE]

remember the origin of R1a :

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l-et-al-(2014)

----------


## Angela

Well, I guess we don't actually have the end of the story yet. 

Let's assume, for the moment, that these samples are retested and they are indeed mtDna "H" and furthermore that these samples are also found to be 100% "EHG" whatever that turns out to be, exactly.

We know that mtDna "H" seems to have a star burst expansion from the general area of the Caucasus. So, could some of it have moved north with people who remained hunter-gatherers, while some remained further south and became caught up in the development of agriculture? That's possible, it seems to me, but then how did mtDna bearers become "southern" autosomally? Was it from bearers of other mtDna and y dna lineages? (I don't see how it's helpful to call mtDna "H" mesolithic. ALL our lineages were mesolithic before some of them created agriculture.)

That doesn't, however, totally answer the question of how and with whom the "Near Eastern" half of their ancestry entered the steppe.

Perhaps it was indeed the mtDna "H", but I think there are some problems with the proposed pathways. Although I've seen a lot of talk about a movement of farmers into the Pontic-Caspian steppe from the Caucasus or from Turkmenistan north onto the steppe, I've yet to see a study posted which documents it. Nor have I been able to find one on my own. So, did the bride exchange/bride kidnapping take place with Caucasus populations? It seems a long way to go.

Also, I think the theory is that it is by this method that the steppe hunter gatherers learned pastoralism, farming etc. However, if they were still hunter gatherers what could they offer that was so valuable in terms of bride price? I suppose furs or something? There is the bride kidnapping to consider, but from what I know of pre-history this usually happened with neighboring cultures, and as I said before, I don't see much documentation for a farming culture on the steppe that derived from the Caucasus or Turkmenistan, and it's a long way to go up into the mountains or clear to the South Caucasus to get women. This to some satisfying image of eastern European he men with horses and large harems of women seems to me, even if it occurred, to belong to a much later period than the one under discussion. I find that this is a problem with all discussions of the "Indo-Europeans". People take the culture of the first millennium BC or even later and back project that culture onto much earlier steppe periods. It seems to me we have to talk about the culture of the people 5,000 to 4,000 BC perhaps, or a bit earlier?

The scale of the bride exchange or kidnapping that would be required is also worrying. Does anyone know off hand what percentage of Yamnaya mtDna was "U" versus the rest? Anyway, the autosomal impact was very large. Maybe someone can do the math and see if it's plausible that if you have a numerically small group of hunter-gatherers and and they mate with X percent of "Near Eastern" women (in larger percentages than their own?) for Y years this could be the result in the necessary time frame. 

All of this would make much more sense in terms of interactions with the Neolithic communities to the west. According to Anthony, domesticated animals, rudimentary farming, metallurgy, all of it came onto the steppe from those communities. However, that is a different component from the "Near Eastern" component is it not? 

The only other possibility is that some R1b "EHG" people, from whatever direction they reached the steppe then went south, acquired "Near Eastern" autosomal admixture, and back migrated.

I'm not totally persuaded by any of these scenarios. Perhaps there is some aDna or some archaeological study in the pipeline that will illuminate matters.

If the samples are *not* mtDna "H", then at least some of the complexity is removed.

----------


## epoch

> Alan, I guess it is possible the ANE-affinity(ANE may not be a real thing, the whole tree-model was questioned in Haak 2015) in EHG may be from south or north of the Caucasus, we don't know. I'm very skeptical about R1 being exclusively from north Eurasia, because of basal forms in west Asia. Although it is pretty clear that R1 has a long history with Russia. 
> 
> Think about it. The post-Mesolithic people of Russia had pretty much 100% Y DNA R1a, R1b, and N1c, like Mesolithic ones. But they also had alot of near eastern ancestry unlike the Mesolithic ones. Where did it come from. Since it is possible their Y DNA is from EHG and they had alot of typical west Asian mtDNA, a logical conclusion is that they had alot of west Asian mothers. So, the female trade network is simply an attempt to explain this. I'm not into the east European-macho man with 50 wives like others(maybe Davidski at Eurogenes), I just want to figure out what happened.


I think it was Maju that made the following thought experiment. Say you have a small group of HG's (n=100) and a large group of farmers (n=10000). Swap 10 women in a nice celebration, you know how these dance parties go. Friendly neighbours and all. Autosomically the HG would have changed a lot (10%) whereas the farmers barely a noticeble bit (0.1%). Repeat a few times. Now the HG's adopt farming and their numbers grow to the same level of the neighbouring farmers. Voila.

----------


## epoch

O, and everybody considers the basal eurasian part of K14 ancestral to nobody. That is obviously very convenient for a number of theories but may not be entirely true.

----------


## Alan

> The only other possibility is that some R1b "EHG" people, from whatever direction they reached the steppe then went south, acquired "Near Eastern" autosomal admixture, and back migrated.
> 
> I'm not totally persuaded by any of these scenarios. Perhaps there is some aDna or some archaeological study in the pipeline that will illuminate matters.
> 
> If the samples are *not* mtDna "H", then at least some of the complexity is removed.


I have said it already. Since the most basal forms of R1b and R1a are found in the Near East. How about some R1a/R1b moving together with ANE earlier into the region and mixing with the local HG population?



Sounds at least more plaussible to me than a too speculative bride exchange/kidnapping theory.

And as I said there is evidence of influx from the south into Yamna in form of the Kurgan burials alone.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> I have said it dozen times but I will say it again. Since the most basal forms of R1b* are found in the Near East. How about some R1b mixing into the general HG population (some sort of Elite Dominance)?
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds at least more plaussible to me than a ridiculously too speculative bride exchange/kidnapping theory.
> 
> And as I said there is evidence of influx from the south into Yamna in form of the Kurgan burials alone.


The R1a1* and R1b1* individuals from Mesolithic Russia had no near eastern ancestry. IF they did they had something like 0.000001%. I'm 25% Puerto Rican and admixture tests can identify I have a spec of west African ancestry. I usually score 1-2%. It's a very minor part of my ancestry but it's still identifiable. If the EHG samples had near eastern ancestry we would know. 

No one is banking on the female kidnapping thing. It's a way to explain away the dominance of likely EHG-derived Y DNA after near eastern ancestry was acquired. I agree with you that there are forms of R in west Asia that can't be ignored.

----------


## Alan

> The R1a1* and R1b1* individuals from Mesolithic Russia had no near eastern ancestry. If they did they had something like 0.000001%.


Depends on what someone considers "Near Eastern" ancestry. I doubt that ANE is local to the EHG region. I see one bunch of R1a/R1b bringin ANE into southern Russia and mixing with the local H&G.

I also see a second wave of R1a and R1b who are more farmer admixed moving later with pastoralism into the region. As simple as that.

----------


## arvistro

Was not 100% ANE Malta boy in Russia 10s of thousands years ago? 
Some Native tribes in Brazil are like 40% ANE.

----------


## Alan

> Was not 100% ANE Malta boy in Russia 10s of thousands years ago? 
> Some Native tribes in Brazil are like 40% ANE.




"Russia" is not just Russia. Mal'ta boy was found somewhere in Siberia which is less connected to Western Russia than West Asia is to Europe. 

We don't have yet any ancient samples from South_Central Asia but the fact that we know R* evolved somewhere further South brings us close to the conclusion that Mal'ta belonged to a wave of migrants who came from further South. Also additional to that ANE in modern populations peaks around South_Central Asia, now put the fact that R* has it's most diversity there into this all. And you will come to the conclusion South_Central Asia/Iran might be the original homeplace of ANE or either R1* or R* as a whole.

----------


## Robert6

> i have more info :
> there were 4 x R1a1 and 2 x N1c
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater
> 
> i have allways beleived N1c brought pottery from the Amur basin (east-Siberia) to Europe
> my guess is now :
> Kelteminar was N1c
> they mixed with R1a1 HG to form comb-ware culture


The N1c in your picture is from the time 4500BP(*"middle of III mill. BC"*) it is close to
the end of* Pit–Comb Ware culture

*

----------


## LeBrok

> Also, I think the theory is that it is by this method that the steppe hunter gatherers learned pastoralism, farming etc. However, if they were still hunter gatherers what could they offer that was so valuable in terms of bride price? I suppose furs or something? There is the bride kidnapping to consider, but from what I know of pre-history this usually happened with neighboring cultures, and as I said before, I don't see much documentation for a farming culture on the steppe that derived from the Caucasus or Turkmenistan, and it's a long way to go up into the mountains or clear to the South Caucasus to get women. This to some satisfying image of eastern European he men with horses and large harems of women seems to me, even if it occurred, to belong to a much later period than the one under discussion. I find that this is a problem with all discussions of the "Indo-Europeans". People take the culture of the first millennium BC or even later and back project that culture onto much earlier steppe periods. It seems to me we have to talk about the culture of the people 5,000 to 4,000 BC perhaps, or a bit earlier?
> 
> The scale of the bride exchange or kidnapping that would be required is also worrying. Does anyone know off hand what percentage of Yamnaya mtDna was "U" versus the rest? Anyway, the autosomal impact was very large. Maybe someone can do the math and see if it's plausible that if you have a numerically small group of hunter-gatherers and and they mate with X percent of "Near Eastern" women (in larger percentages than their own?) for Y years this could be the result in the necessary time frame.


I wouldn't be surprised if Mykop turned R1b rich too, and actually they have moved north with their women into HGs territory catching 50% HG's admixture.

----------


## bicicleur

> The N1c in your picture is from the time 4500BP(*"middle of III mill. BC"*) it is close to
> the end of* Pit–Comb Ware culture
> 
> *


indeed, there is only 1 older sample here, it is A3, which is R1a1
so we don't know whether N1c was there at the beginning of Pit-Comb
the only hint is the arrival of pottery, which I associate with N1c

----------


## arvistro

> "Russia" is not just Russia. Mal'ta boy was found somewhere in Siberia which is less connected to Western Russia than West Asia is to Europe. 
> 
> We don't have yet any ancient samples from South_Central Asia but the fact that we know R* evolved somewhere further South brings us close to the conclusion that Mal'ta belonged to a wave of migrants who came from further South. Also additional to that ANE in modern populations peaks around South_Central Asia, now put the fact that R* has it's most diversity there into this all. And you will come to the conclusion South_Central Asia/Iran might be the original homeplace of ANE or either R1* or R* as a whole.


ANE in Modern populations peaks in native Brazilian tribe :) So, I suspect it was quite popular in Syberia HG long time ago. Much longer than PIE Language, Yamna, etc. I mean 10000s of years older. 
Did it get to Malta boy from West Asia 30k years ago? Or from Malta boys to West Asia and Karintian Brazilians and EHG? To me Malta looks in the middle of this. 
OK, looking for info where is Syb Malta and how high is ANE in Syberian indigenous tribes..

----------


## Alan

> ANE in Modern populations peaks in native Brazilian tribe :) So, I suspect it was quite popular in Syberia HG long time ago. Much longer than PIE Language, Yamna, etc. I mean 10000s of years older. 
> Did it get to Malta boy from West Asia 30k years ago? Or from Malta boys to West Asia and Karintian Brazilians and EHG? To me Malta looks in the middle of this. 
> OK, looking for info where is Syb Malta and how high is ANE in Syberian indigenous tribes..



Yeah my fault I should have cleared my self that I meant in Eurasia it is peaks in South_Central Asia. But the fact that P, R* and even Q has it's highest diversity in the region around South/Southeast and Central Asia speaks for that it came from here.

Native Americans are simply a mix of East Eurasian + ANE. And Native Americans just have ~5% more ANE than Burusho or Kalasha for example who can some have as much as 40% ANE.

----------


## arvistro

I dont know from where it arrived originally but since it was 30k years ago in Syberia, it had plenty of time to hunt and spread wide areas. 

Look at ANE admixture map in eupedia, indigenous Saami and other not so indigenous Finno-Ugric people and Northern Russians have higher ANE than IE folk. I still could not find ANE levels for Syberia FU people.

----------


## holderlin

> Alan, I guess it is possible the ANE-affinity(ANE may not be a real thing, the whole tree-model was questioned in Haak 2015) in EHG may be from south or north of the Caucasus, we don't know. I'm very skeptical about R1 being exclusively from north Eurasia, because of basal forms in west Asia. Although it is pretty clear that R1 has a long history with Russia. 
> 
> Think about it. The post-Mesolithic people of Russia had pretty much 100% Y DNA R1a, R1b, and N1c, like Mesolithic ones. But they also had alot of near eastern ancestry unlike the Mesolithic ones. Where did it come from. Since it is possible their Y DNA is from EHG and they had alot of typical west Asian mtDNA, a logical conclusion is that they had alot of west Asian mothers. So, the female trade network is simply an attempt to explain this. I'm not into the east European-macho man with 50 wives like others(maybe Davidski at Eurogenes), I just want to figure out what happened.


Werd




> ANE may not be a real thing


I'm starting to wonder about this

----------


## holderlin

> But M417 could emerge only in one place - either north Eurasia or west Asia. Basal forms of M417 exist in both regions.
> 
> It doesn't matter where did ancestors of M417 come from over a dozen thousands years ago, but where was first M417 born.
> 
> After all, M417 is as much as 99% of entire modern R1a. Now more evidence indicates M417 emerged in Eastern Europe.
> 
> Why? Because basal forms in west Asia come only from modern people. While in north Eurasia we have basal forms from hunter-gatherers.
> 
> It may become interesting when we get samples from Poland. There is an ongoing project on ancient DNA there - info from April 2014:
> ...


You're a savior to these forums

----------


## holderlin

> the image that has been cultivated for decades is of European colonists invading and destroying *peaceful societies living in perfect harmony with nature*
> blaming the west for whatever goes wrong in this world and trying to make us feel guilty (and some things go wrong)


I still can't believe how much traction this seems to get, even among academics. With a straight face, people have been talking about the origin of all the problems of the modern world being traced back to IE expansions. Truth is stranger than fiction I guess.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> I still can't believe how much traction this seems to get, even among academics. With a straight face, people have been talking about the origin of all the problems of the modern world being traced back to IE expansions. Truth is stranger than fiction I guess.


Now people want to be descended from Indo Europeans not "Old Europe"(EEF). East Europeans are having a great time with recent discoveries, especially the load R1a in Mesolithic Russia. The woman who created the kurgan hypothesis and put feminist ideals in it, was Lithuanian. They have about as much Yamna-like ancestry as anyone. She was probably hoping IE expansion was an elitist thing. I wonder how she would react to learning most of her ancestors were evil patriarchal IEs.

----------


## holderlin

> Now people want to be descended from Indo Europeans not "Old Europe"(EEF). East Europeans are having a great time with recent discoveries, especially the load R1a in Mesolithic Russia. The woman who created the kurgan hypothesis and put feminist ideals in it, was Lithuanian. They have about as much Yamna-like ancestry as anyone. She was probably hoping IE expansion was an elitist thing. I wonder how she would react to learning most of her ancestors were evil patriarchal IEs.


I know. Lithuanian. She basically spoke PIE lol.

The Indo-European world. A testament to what men can accomplish when they're not being nagged by Marija Gimbutas.

----------


## bicicleur

> I know. Lithuanian. She basically spoke PIE lol.
> 
> The Indo-European world. A testament to what men can accomplish when they're not being nagged by Marija Gimbutas.


she idealized Old Europe and demonised IE
the Varna necropolis findings proved her wrong

but it is amazing to see how naive many people were in accepting this theory

----------


## Aberdeen

If you silly little boys weren't so afraid of the big, bad womenz, you'd realize that in many ways Gimbutas was quite prophetic. Yes, she may have exaggerated how peaceful Neolithic society was, but she was quite right about IE coming originating with a Bronze Age kurgan culture from the steppes. And it is quite true that Neolithic Europe was, in general, less violent, less patriarchal and less socially stratified than the Bronze Age cultures that replaced it.

----------


## Angela

As far as I'm concerned this is all stuff and nonsense gentlemen. It has nothing to do with some left wing, feminist ideology. Some acquaintance with the History of Ideas in Europe might have disabused you of that notion. The "Bon Sauvage" concept developed out of 16th and 17th century European literature and philosophical writings where primitive societies or societies far in the past were idealized and held up as a reproach to the follies and problems of a modern society. However, the writings of Tacitus about the the Germans (De Origine et situ Germanorum) have much the same flavor and motivation. In terms of the later writings, you might want to acquaint yourself with the writings of Bartolome de las Casas. It might prove to mitigate as well the romanticized view of European hunter-gatherers which some people hold, people who then turn around and accuse Gimbutas of romanticizing "Old Europe". Some of you may see a feminist bias in Gimbutas' work, but I see a bias in this idealization of WHG hunters as well. 

I try to take a more balanced and, I hope, objective approach. As a humanist, like Montaigne, I suppose my position is that customs differ but people everywhere are prone to violence and cruelty.
See: Of Cannibals

However, it is illogical to say that because all people are capable of cruelty, all people in every place and time are _equally_ capable of cruelty. A wider acquaintance with cultural anthropology and history would disabuse you of that notion as well. There are indeed societies, even ancient societies, which were less warlike, less violent, or even if warlike, were not prone to ethnic cleansing and genocide. In the case of the position of women, there are many attested societies that even if warlike have matrilineal descent, and where the position of women is not quite so unequal. You may find an example in some Native American societies. Likewise, while "Old Europe" may not have been a place where women "_ruled",_ I think it's safe to say that a society where worship of a female fertility goddess was prevalent might indeed have been a place where women and perhaps even the counsel of women in certain spheres were more respected. I have no idea why women as a whole should be expected to celebrate the end of that state of affairs.

As to the Indo-Europeans in general, I don't subscribe to the belief that they were necessarily barbaric savages who achieved their prominence in Europe by swimming in an ocean of blood, killing every man and sexually enslaving every woman. I think it was probably more nuanced than that, if just for the fact that it appears there was quite a decline in population in central Europe before they ever arrived. However, there are undoubtedly more than a few "internet warriors" who seem to relish that view of the past. I really don't have much of anything to say to people like that in real life, nor do I wish to...I'll just end with this...that is no different than the butchery and savagery that is being committed by ISIS in the Middle East. To say that it is appalling and disgusting doesn't do it justice. If it happened, it happened, but anyone who is proud of it should be ashamed of himself. 

Ed. I didn't see your post, Aberdeen. I see you summarized it all in a much pithier way. :)

----------


## bicicleur

> If you silly little boys weren't so afraid of the big, bad womenz, you'd realize that in many ways Gimbutas was quite prophetic. Yes, she may have exaggerated how peaceful Neolithic society was, but she was quite right about IE coming originating with a Bronze Age kurgan culture from the steppes. And it is quite true that Neolithic Europe was, in general, less violent, less patriarchal and less socially stratified than the Bronze Age cultures that replaced it.


read this about violence among LBK neolithic tribes : 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talheim_Death_Pit

tell me why in the Varna necropolis all the gold was concentrated in just 4 or 5 graves
read about the slavery in Uruk
who do you think were digging all this copper ores and gold in the Balkan mines?
I guess they were slaves

with a little bit of imagination and phantasy one could fabricate a story in which the invading IE people liberated the slaves in the Balkan
and you wouldn't be able to disprove it

there are to many stories and there is to little we actually know

----------


## bicicleur

> As far as I'm concerned this is all stuff and nonsense gentlemen. It has nothing to do with some left wing, feminist ideology. Some acquaintance with the History of Ideas in Europe might have disabused you of that notion. The "Bon Sauvage" concept developed out of 16th and 17th century European literature and philosophical writings where primitive societies or societies far in the pasat were idealized and held up as a reproach to the follies and problems of a modern society. However, the writings of Tacitus about the the Germans (De Origine et situ Germanorum) have much the same flavor and motivation. In terms of the later writings, you might want to acquaint yourself with the writings of Bartolome de las Casas. It might prove to mitigate as well some of the romanticization of European hunter-gatherers in which people engage who then turn around and accuse Gimbutas of romanticizing "Old Europe". Some of you may see a feminist bias in Gimbutas' work, but I see a bias in this idealization of WHG hunters as well.


it is true since centuries the HG and even the neolithic societies were romanticized to be idylic 

but from what I understand Gimbutas did emphasize the contrasts between idylic 'Old Europe' and 'IE warriors' , as if IE were the source of all evil

somehow the IE must have founded societies that were more sustainable than the neolithic societies that existed before their arrival


I think Gimbutas was a brillant anthropologist
but appearantly even the brains of brillant academical people get troubled by their own personal convictions

----------


## Aberdeen

> read this about violence among LBK neolithic tribes : 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talheim_Death_Pit
> 
> tell me why in the Varna necropolis all the gold was concentrated in just 4 or 5 graves
> read about the slavery in Uruk
> who do you think were digging all this copper ores and gold in the Balkan mines?
> I guess they were slaves
> 
> ...


The discoveries at Varna do suggest that social inequity can be created by differences in wealth as a result in metal production, even without highly effective but expensive bronze weapons. And some recent discoveries do suggest that some Neolithic societies may have been more violent than was assumed in the past. That doesn't change the fact that, overall, Neolithic societies were probably, on average, less violent, less patriarchal and less stratified than Bronze Age societies. Nor does it change the fact that Gimbutas was a brilliant archeologist who created the Kurgan Hypothesis and led the way in exploring the idea of a Neolithic world that was more complex and socially developed than had previously been assumed. If her later, more political work can be criticized for a certain lack of balance, it's no more misleading than the writings of some people who want to imagine IE society as similar to a Conan the Barbarian novel. If we see The Odyssey and The Cattle Raid of Cooley as tales that probably originated in the Bronze Age, we see two violent and highly stratified societies, but the Irish tale shows us a world that is considerably less patriarchal than Bronze Age Greece. And even in the Odyssey, the brutish Achilles is depicted as an object lesson on how not to live one's life.

I think people would do well not to pontificate about what's wrong with Gimbutas's research unless they've actually read her work.

----------


## arvistro

If you are lucky enough to find English translation to Latvian folk songs Dainas (over 2,000,000 collected), you will quickly notice that you are dealing with most peaceful and nature loving people, our most aggressive war Daina - I rode through the Prussian land, playing kokle, singing song. 
Our Dievs is walking rāmi (slow and easy) and does not harm even a small green leaf. We have cult of mothers attested (mothers of wind, sea, fire, field, forest...) from Old or even Older Europe.

We have also the highest % of WHG on this planet (together with our bros Lithuanians).

So, I easily get upset when WHG is linked to aggression, I believe the patriarchal militarist IE model DID NOT come from WHG people or admixture. First of all because WHG before IE historically were not patriarchal militarists :)

----------


## Angela

> If you are lucky enough to find English translation to Latvian folk songs Dainas (over 2,000,000 collected), you will quickly notice that you are dealing with most peaceful and nature loving people, our most aggressive war Daina - I rode through the Prussian land, playing kokle, singing song. 
> Our Dievs is walking rāmi (slow and easy) and does not harm even a small green leaf. We have cult of mothers attested (mothers of wind, sea, fire, field, forest...) from Old or even Older Europe.
> 
> We have also the highest % of WHG on this planet (together with our bros Lithuanians).
> 
> So, I easily get upset when WHG is linked to aggression, I believe the patriarchal militarist IE model DID NOT come from WHG people or admixture. First of all because WHG before IE historically were not patriarchal militarists :)


Don't look at me, Arvistro. :Smile:  I'm certainly not laying the predilection for this kind of behavior at the feet of any of the ancient ancestral groups that make up "Europeans". I honestly don't believe this is "genetic", in the sense that one of these three groups is more genetically inclined toward patriarchy and militarism. Different _cultures,_ however, can be more or less so inclined. 

I'm not even laying it at the door of the "Indo-Europeans". That is being done by others as well.

----------


## Angela

I finally plowed through this whole collection of short papers. My take away is that these people did not have much to do with the "Indo-Europeans" as these are defined by Anthony and others, including Gimbutas.

Everyone can check for themselves, but there's no metallurgy (the tools are all bone or flint), no elite graves, certainly no horse riding or chariots. They're not pastoralists, either, in the sense that this word is applied to the steppe. These people seem to me to be primarily hunter-gatherer fishers, with a seasonal winter and perhaps summer camp, living off turtles, fish, birds-primarily water fowl, bears, elk, deer, etc. There is some cattle breeding, and they have pigs and sheep and goats, even in one case a horse, but some of these communities didn't get domesticated animals of any kind until the _mid 2nd millennium BC_. Others got it some time in the mid to late 3rd millennium BC, but the domesticated animals formed a small part of their consumption patterns. They did do some farming, but also relatively late. Mention is also made that some of this later influence came from Corded Ware moving east, or from communities to their south at later dates.

See the article by Sablin, MV, on page 224.
https://www.academia.edu/9452168/Arc...olbunova_E._ed

----------


## Alan

Please take a look at my comment here.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451439

----------


## Angela

> Please take a look at my comment here.
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451439


Yes, I saw it. I must be slow today. I am supposed to draw what inference? These people may indeed be _a_ source for Indo-European languages, but the culture which was the driver of the specific "Indo-European" culture which spread throughout the world, i.e. pastoralism, metallurgy, unequal distributions of wealth and prestige, militarism, horse based warfare, etc., did not, in my opinion, stem from these hunter-gatherers. Rather, they were an Indo-Europeanized people.

----------


## Alan

> Yes, I saw it. I must be slow today. I am supposed to draw what inference? These people may indeed be _a_ source for Indo-European languages, but the culture which was the driver of the specific "Indo-European" culture which spread throughout the world, i.e. pastoralism, metallurgy, unequal distributions of wealth and prestige, militarism, horse based warfare, etc., did not, in my opinion, stem from these hunter-gatherers. Rather, they were an Indo-Europeanized people.


Thats the point. I wouldn't call them "indo Europinzed" though. More a very early mixturre of PIE with H&G.

According to this paper. They were highlanders (Shepherds) from near a lake.

----------


## Aberdeen

> Thats the point. I wouldn't call them "indo Europinzed" though. More a very early mixturre of PIE with H&G.
> 
> According to linguistic_archeological evidences. They were highlanders (Shepherds) from near a lake and not Steppic people.


So, not a Steppic people but a Uralic people? But I have to admit the points Angela raised do point to IE culture possibly being a Caucasian culture that mingled with the Russian hunter gatherers. The one possible argument that could be raised against it is that there is perhaps a better correlation between IE language and R1a than between IE language and R1b. Those R1b groups that have IE languages usually have at least 5% R1a.

----------


## Alan

> So, not a Steppic people but a Uralic people? But I have to admit the points Angela raised do point to IE culture possibly being a Caucasian culture that mingled with the Russian hunter gatherers. The one possible argument that could be raised against it is that there is perhaps a better correlation between IE language and R1a than between IE language and R1b. Those R1b groups that have IE languages usually have at least 5% R1a.



I already answered that here.




> Near a lake
> 
> As far as I know there is no lake in or close enough to the Urals.
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Russia.svg.png
> 
> North of the Caspian or Black Sea would work, if it was mountainous, but it is Steppe land. 
> 
> South,East and West of the Caspian or South, East of the Black Sea is mountainous and near a lake.
> 
> ...


http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451461

----------


## Aberdeen

> I already answered that here.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451461


Wrong. There are numerous lakes in the Ural Mountains (Uvildy, Itkul, Turgyak, Boshoye Shchuchye, etc.). And the two oldest Y DNA samples we have from Russia are R1a1* and R1b1*, both over 7,000 years old. And the current distribution of R1a in eastern Europe suggests R1a coming from Russia, as does the fact that CW includes R1a. Let's remember that although CW is related to Yamnaya, it's not the same thing. Let's also remember that we have one R1a and two R1b samples from Spain that are also over 7,000 years old, so the story of Y haplotype R in Europe is actually quite complicated.

----------


## Alan

> Wrong. There are numerous lakes in the Ural Mountains (Uvildy, Itkul, Turgyak, Boshoye Shchuchye, etc.). And the two oldest Y DNA samples we have from Russia are R1a1* and R1b1*, both over 7,000 years old. And the current distribution of R1a in eastern Europe suggests R1a coming from Russia, as does the fact that CW includes R1a. Let's remember that although CW is related to Yamnaya, it's not the same thing. Let's also remember that we have one R1a and two R1b samples from Spain that are also over 7,000 years old, so the story of Y haplotype R in Europe is actually quite complicated.


Thanks for mentioning that there are bigger lakes in the Urals. I didn't knew that. But I doubt that they came from there, because there is no single theory so far which would settle the PIE so far North. Not a single.

But for the sake of God why is no one here able to understand that the date when this R1a or R1b was found in Russia or Spain is not of any importance for the age of the actual clade.

I had this discussion dozen times with a user who similary didn't understand it so this is why I am quite tired of explaining it.

The Sample found in Russia could be 100000 years old, it wouldn't matter because it doesn't change the fact that the clades are not basal. There is no R1b m343 or R1a m420. The Russian as well Iberian R1a/R1b are all downstream.

Take a look at this Phylogenetic tree. And try to imagine a similar picture for R1a.

http://img4.fotos-hochladen.net/uplo...fcx0y3shbq.gif

----------


## Aberdeen

> Thanks for mentioning that there are bigger lakes in the Urals. I didn't knew that. But I doubt that they came from there, because there is no single theory so far which would settle the PIE so far North. Not a single.
> 
> But for the sake of God why is no one here able to understand that the date when this R1a or R1b was found in Russia or Spain is not of any importance for the age of the actual clade.
> 
> I had this discussion dozen times with a user who similary didn't understand it so this is why I am quite tired of explaining it.
> 
> The Sample found in Russia could be 100000 years old, it wouldn't matter because it doesn't change the fact that the clades are not basal. There is no R1b m343 or R1a m420. The Russian as well Iberian R1a/R1b are all downstream.
> 
> Take a look at this Phylogenetic tree. And try to imagine a similar picture for R1a.
> ...


I'm looking at that website and it states that L23 is in southeastern Europe and Anatolia and that it's a downstream subclade, Z2103, that's found in western Asia (and eastern Europe). And subclades downstream of L23 (L51 and L11 are already in Europe prior to the formation of P312 and those subclades downstream of it that make up most of the R1b in Europe. And the dates suggested by that website are way off according to this website.

www.yfull.com/tree/R1b/

It says that M269 formed 12700 years ago, L23 formed 7000 years ago, P312 formed 5000 years ago and those European subclades downstream of it formed about 4700 years ago, about when BB was expanding in that part of the world. So it appears that all that R1b diversity in western Europe formed there prior to the Bronze Age.

----------


## Angela

> Thats the point.* I wouldn't call them "indo Europinzed" though. More a very early mixturre of PIE with H&G.*
> 
> According to this paper. They were highlanders (Shepherds) from near a lake.


I'm not sure about that, certainly not in terms of culture...These papers aren't describing these groups in 6,000 or even 5,000 BC. They're describing them in 2500 BC and even 1500 BC and saying that is when the _first_ indications of animal domestication can be found, and agriculture as well. There's no metallurgy at all.

Regardless of how we come to understand the genesis of the "Indo-European" culture in the arid steppe lands, these people in the northwest were not the innovators or synthesizers of that culture; they _received_ this culture later, and in some cases much later, than the 4-3,000 BC period that Anthony highlights as the period when the Indo-European culture was "created". 

Language is a separate although related issue. They may well have been speaking a language related to the language spoken by the arid steppe dwellers to their south. 

As for genetic structure, I don't know. Certainly, I would think they might be EHG and/or WHG heavy. How much of the "Near Eastern" component they would have had is a very interesting question, but I would doubt they had very much. I do think, however, that these people may have contributed quite a bit to the Northeast European genome, which is why I think their "Yamnaya" relatedness is inflated, in my view.

----------


## nuadha

> I haven't read the paper which is the subject of this thread in its entirety, but unless I'm mistaken people who have read it report that the women in this group of hunter gatherers from what is now Russia were severely malnourished in comparison to the men and showed signs of extreme violence. There is nothing to be lauded here.


Neither is there anything to be generalized from. If we dig up just about any old bridge, mine, sailboat, or other artifact of harsh living conditions you will most likely find men who are malnourished or fatally wounded at a young age. Most workplace death still occur to men. 

The sentiment of this thread that when men have bad living conditions its their own fault while when women face bad living conditions its societies fault for "treating" them this way.

----------


## nuadha

> If this was an attempt at humor, I don't find the idea that a world where women were routinely kidnapped, raped, and treated like chattel was the "good old days" at all funny.


Id rather be kidnapped or just run off with the victor (which might also be the case) than be slaughtered for having the wrong genitalia.

----------


## Angela

> Id rather be kidnapped or just run off with the victor (which might also be the case) than be slaughtered for having the wrong genitalia.


Why would you assume that I would find the latter any more funny than the former? Or, put it another way, why would you assume that because I find the former appalling, I find the latter acceptable? I'm indeed appalled by the idea that population change may have come about in a lot of instances because incoming males slaughtered all or most of the men they encountered. You'd have to be a psychopath not to be appalled by it. 

Terrible things have been done throughout history to both women and men. If you would care to re-read the exchange, I was responding to a comment made about what was done to _women._




> Nuadha: Neither is there anything to be generalized from. If we dig up just about any old bridge, mine, sailboat, or other artifact of harsh living conditions you will most likely find men who are malnourished or fatally wounded at a young age. Most workplace death still occur to men. 
> 
> The sentiment of this thread that when men have bad living conditions its their own fault while when women face bad living conditions its societies fault for "treating" them this way.


We were not discussing injuries or death because of warfare. We were talking about malnutrition. If there is famine etc., most people will suffer, but the people at the top of the "food chain" literally, will suffer less. That is often the elite males. In warfare, warriors _generally_ get more of the provisions. The examples are numerous even if it wasn't always the case. 

Famine is often the result of forces beyond the control of any human being or society, today as well as in the past. However, it is also true that famine can result from war because crops are deliberately destroyed and the peasants who work the land are killed and distribution networks are disrupted. Most wars have been started by men, in case you hadn't noticed. That's not to say that women wouldn't have been as bad had they had the power, as Cleopatra and a few other examples prove, but the fact is that they didn't. 

Your conclusion as to the "sentiment" of this thread is incorrect.

----------


## LeBrok

> Id rather be kidnapped or just run off with the victor (which might also be the case) than be slaughtered for having the wrong genitalia.


That's exactly the case how people survived. However, we do different things just to survive, and different things how to be honest, righteous and tolerant in in normal society.
Welcome to Eupedia Nuadha.

----------


## MOESAN

> the image that has been cultivated for decades is of European colonists invading and destroying peaceful societies living in perfect harmony with nature
> blaming the west for whatever goes wrong in this world and trying to make us feel guilty (and some things go wrong)


_1- women rapts can have been common among neighbouring small tribes living i, conditions not favoring reproduction success - in other environment, and on large spaces I'm not so sure it was exactly the same, without excluding it.
2- concerning Amazone Amerindians, it seems the place of wives were not so bad these last times among some tribes: they had the right to moke males sometimes naking them after some "viril" feast with plenty of alcohol or something else - and among males, if the better hunters won some prestige, none is kept aside concerning food: the food, game or fish, was equally shared between all - so we have to be cautious in our statements: humanity is not uniform nor constant by time, and we are sometimes very astonished by the deportment of some "inferior" animals; concerning sociability and capacity of learning (it recall me an hyppopotamus charging a crocodile to save an antilope (what is not to surprising) BUT also trying and managing to push this harmed antilope onto the stabile ground with great mildness) -_

----------

