Never Mind

Posted on March 16, 2017 by gcochran9

A bit ago I talked about a paper making the case for male-heavy gene flow when the Yamnaya founded the Battle Axe [Corded Ware] culture. Looks as if it was mistaken.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Never Mind

  1. pyrrhus says:
    March 16, 2017 at 7:09 pm

    But how about Woodley’s new paper on social epistasis….https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-017-0084-x

    Reply
  2. hronrade says:
    March 16, 2017 at 7:36 pm

    So they brought their womenfolk on those chariots…nice

    Reply
  4. Yudi says:
    March 16, 2017 at 8:12 pm

    For those who understand the science better than I, what does this replication failure tell us? Does the problem lie more with the software being used? The quality of the samples? Their theories and interpretation of the results? All three, or something else entirely?

    Reply
  5. j says:
    March 16, 2017 at 11:00 pm

    Considering the second century mass migrations from Germanic tribes into Europe, which is well documented by Cesar and other Roman writers, they came in organized wagons trains with their families. It must have looked more like the American “conquest of the West”, or the South African Boers trekking, or the Germans settling Central Asia, what today is Kazakhstan. Maybe like the Danes settling North East Britain. Much violence but nothing like the Mongol genocidal campaigns.

    Reply
    • j says:
      March 17, 2017 at 1:27 am

      I was trying to suggest above that the Yamnaya migration and founding the Battle Axe [Corded Ware] culture may have looked like the migrations we know from the Roman and almost contemporary times. The Battle Axe logo gives the wrong impression, could it be just some kind of Scandinavian Forest Axe?

      Reply
      • st says:
        March 17, 2017 at 9:11 am

        The paper does not argue against replacement. It argues that if there was any replacement, it had happened indiscriminately. If there was a population replacement (there was, according to the previous papers on the topic), it affected both sexes in neolitic Europe.
        There is something else -authors discuss individuals from CW culture from particular space and time – CE, about 2000 years BC. Who knows if there were any neolitic farmers there? All the paper says is that IE from central europe 4000 years ago did not intermary with farmer’s daughters more than they did with farmer’s sons- for whatever reson (i can think of more than one explanation);
        If CW was the stepping stone of the IE migrations to Europe, we can’t infer from the paper anything about the gender distribution of the migrations that followed initial migration – like those that carried CECW further west, north or even south. We they sex biased, unlike initial CW migration? We can’t say – not from the paper.

        Reply
      • sprfls says:
        March 17, 2017 at 10:00 am

        “The Battle Axe logo gives the wrong impression, could it be just some kind of Scandinavian Forest Axe?”

        Don’t think so. They had other axes used as tools. Anyways, what were the maces then?

        It’s common to say that the battle axes were ceremonial. Perhaps — but I think the ceremony would involve commemorating chopping the heads off some G2a men. 🙂

        Reply
        • Greying Wanderer says:
          March 17, 2017 at 12:19 pm

          there’s various mentions in later times of the ritual killing of cattle by kings/chiefs

          holy weapons for holy cattle killing?

          Reply
    • dave chamberlin says:
      March 17, 2017 at 9:49 am

      Near total replacement sounds pretty genocidal to me. Best chance the first farmers had was to move south, way south, ahead of the rapidly advancing Yamnaya. How were they to fight an enemy that not only had horses but were mobile while they were stuck on one piece of land for the growing season. David Anthony has talked about how the Yamnaya were able to attack and easily get away because they were on horseback.

      Reply
  6. vuzqk says:
    March 17, 2017 at 5:12 am

    Off-topic: are you selling these again anytime soon: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/manifest-destiny/?

    Reply
  7. sprfls says:
    March 17, 2017 at 9:41 am

    As far as I understand it Reich and Lazaridis merely invalidate the methods used in the previous paper, NOT the fact that Bronze Age migrations were sex-biased.

    Definitely some women came because novel EHG-derived mtDNA appears. But there’s no way overall the mating patterns didn’t favor elite/related steppe males and farmer females.

    The conversation is about exactly how it happened and getting precise figures, which is what makes this lightning-quick response from Reich and Lazaridis cool.

    Reply

Leave a comment