So the Indo-Iranians are the most direct descendants (ethno-culturally speaking) of ancient "stay behind" Yamna Indoeuropeans, right? As for why they adopted bronze metallurgy with such intensity, I guess it may have to do with the arrival of (probably Tungusic) Seima-Turbino culture via the taiga. There was an old study on the mtDNA of the are just north of Sintashta in this period and it shifted from what I interpret as (1) Uralic (high mtDNA C) to (2) Tungusic? (high mtDNA D, Seima-Turbino period), to (3) Uralic again and to (4) Iranic (high European mtDNA, Iron Age), followed surely by another Uralic wave later on, not reported in the paper.
No. The Indo-Iranians are the descendants of the Sintashta branch. Because of the amount of the amount of ethnic and cultural mixing with the pre-existing civilizations of Afghanistan Iran and India they are not currently their closest relatives genetically or culturally
@@alexdunphy3716 - Maybe but Sredny-Stog II (there is a Sredny-Stog I, which was part of Dniepr-Don pre-IE Paleoeuropean Neolithic culture) was a mixed complex and not strictly Yamna-derived and that's quite interesting IMO because it suggests that some Indoeuropeans were already admixed peoples, this surely applies to Corded Ware Western Indoeuropeans (from which Celto-Italic, Balto-Slavic and Germanic) but probably also to (early Thracian) Ezero culture, which doesn't use Indoeuropean burials (kurgans/tummuli with the body in crouched position) but rather buried people per the Dniepr-Don Paleoeuropean tradition (extended position, lots of ochre). However most other Indoeuropeans don't seem Dniepr-Don derived: Western Yamna produced Dacians (via Cotofeni culture surely) and Greco-Phrygians (Greco-Armenians) via Vucedol culture and these, like Afanasievo Indoeuropeans (proto-Tocharians) are R1b-Volga in patrilineage (unlike Corded Ware, who are R1a-Dniepr instead). I'm a bit uncertain about the genetics right now but probably the Maykop > Kura-Araxes > Anatolian IE sequence also fits with direct Yamna descendancy (even if maybe admixed with other Caucasus peoples but not Dniepr-Don/Sredny-Stog ones).
@@alexdunphy3716 - According to this video, Sintashta is Poltava-derived, which is East Yamna-derived, so true original IEs at the root. Do you have something against the aboriginal peoples of Afghanistan and India? Incidentally their "ANI" genetic component is almost identical to the West Asian part of early Indoeuropean complex (admixed) genetics (the rest is West Uralic = EHG). This is something well known since long ago, when it was evident that there was a "Caucasus-Baloch" genetic component shared from India to Europe, a component we now understand better as Zagros Neolithic (sometimes called "Caucasus" or "Iran Neolithic"). This is something Neolithic Indians (Dravidians by language) and Indoeuropeans (and also separately Tyrsenians and to some extent Semitics and the various Caucasus smaller ethnicities) have shared for many millennia and something that contrasts with Paleoeuropean (WHG to EHG cline) and also with PPN A/B in the Neolithic Levant and Upper Euphrates (Göbekli Tepe or Nevaliçorian culture), as well as with the proto-Vasconic EEF component. Indoeuropeans and pre-IE Indians (at least the Neolithic ones of Elamo-Dravidian ethnicity) have a lot in common in terms genetic.
Interesting video, I thought it was a little odd to show wagon pictures while describing chariots though and mounted horse back riders while discussing a period centuries before there's any historical evidence of them existing.
The fact that they do not mention race in their descriptions of their people doesn't mean that it didn't matter to them... it is more likely that it was so integral to their identity that it didn't need to he mentioned to them... of course their rituals would only apply to them, their group... the modern idea of "multiculturalism" would have been baffling to them... there would have been no jeed for them to say "this only applies to us (out group/tribe, etc) because of course it did... why would they do it for some other group?...
Maybe the definition for "race" at the time was other, maybe near to actual sense for aparented "nationlities" or populations. Since 15th Century to actual common sense "race" is used like sinonymous for color. Geneticists use ''race" today more for true subespecies in Homo Sapiens (trinomial definitions), like Homo s. sapiens, Homo sapiens neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens idaltu.
Good video. Just one thing - several images of generative AI are laughably absurd, lihe horses with 6 legs, chariots with 3 wheels or bronze foundry located on horse´s back. Pehaps such topic is too complicated for generative AI a should be used less...
@@elforeigner3260 - An more of our finite energy supplies. More input for such a foolish "intelligence" probably means more legs for horses in the end: centipede horses, milipede horses! 🤣
Jamnaja (haplogroup r1b) cames to westeurope not to east/baltic. The pre sintashta cultures were a mix of west and eawtern hunter gatherer and not from yamnaya
Why gengis khan and his mongol worriors didnt used chariots like old indoeuropean cultures? . The landscape in western and eastern eurasian steppe and ecologie was not that diffrent.
0:15 renowned for its metallurgy? really? as far as i know they didnt produce any advanced metal objects... mesopotamians and chinese Erlitou culture had much more advanced casting methods.
Never mind that the oldest bronze ever was forged at the lower Danube in pre-Indoeuropean times and it was true tin bronze not poisonous arsenic bronze. But, anyway, guess that renown is relative.
@we dont know where the first bronze was casted, maybe in the danube valley or in the near east, but we know for sure that metallurgy started some where in the near east. If u want to see how skilled the ancient chinese were with metal casting look up "sanxingdui bronze".
You are misinformed then. The largest ancient mines of the bronze age were founded and run by the Indo-European steppe peoples. Aside from the pre-indo-european invention of bronze in the Balkans, Indo-Europeans since then have been responsible for the most advanced metallurgy of their day and exported huge quantities of metal to other civilizations
@@alexdunphy3716 - That's probably a bit exaggerated a claim. I'll grant you that Indoeuropeans were heavily involved with metallurgy but the fact that they were using (poisonous) arsenic bronze instead of true (tin) bronze, clearly indicates that they were not at the most advanced stage of metallurgy at all.
So the Indo-Iranians are the most direct descendants (ethno-culturally speaking) of ancient "stay behind" Yamna Indoeuropeans, right?
As for why they adopted bronze metallurgy with such intensity, I guess it may have to do with the arrival of (probably Tungusic) Seima-Turbino culture via the taiga. There was an old study on the mtDNA of the are just north of Sintashta in this period and it shifted from what I interpret as (1) Uralic (high mtDNA C) to (2) Tungusic? (high mtDNA D, Seima-Turbino period), to (3) Uralic again and to (4) Iranic (high European mtDNA, Iron Age), followed surely by another Uralic wave later on, not reported in the paper.
No. The Indo-Iranians are the descendants of the Sintashta branch. Because of the amount of the amount of ethnic and cultural mixing with the pre-existing civilizations of Afghanistan Iran and India they are not currently their closest relatives genetically or culturally
The Yamnaya aren't actually ancestral to most Indo-European peoples, the closely related Sredny Stog culture is.
@@alexdunphy3716 - Maybe but Sredny-Stog II (there is a Sredny-Stog I, which was part of Dniepr-Don pre-IE Paleoeuropean Neolithic culture) was a mixed complex and not strictly Yamna-derived and that's quite interesting IMO because it suggests that some Indoeuropeans were already admixed peoples, this surely applies to Corded Ware Western Indoeuropeans (from which Celto-Italic, Balto-Slavic and Germanic) but probably also to (early Thracian) Ezero culture, which doesn't use Indoeuropean burials (kurgans/tummuli with the body in crouched position) but rather buried people per the Dniepr-Don Paleoeuropean tradition (extended position, lots of ochre).
However most other Indoeuropeans don't seem Dniepr-Don derived: Western Yamna produced Dacians (via Cotofeni culture surely) and Greco-Phrygians (Greco-Armenians) via Vucedol culture and these, like Afanasievo Indoeuropeans (proto-Tocharians) are R1b-Volga in patrilineage (unlike Corded Ware, who are R1a-Dniepr instead). I'm a bit uncertain about the genetics right now but probably the Maykop > Kura-Araxes > Anatolian IE sequence also fits with direct Yamna descendancy (even if maybe admixed with other Caucasus peoples but not Dniepr-Don/Sredny-Stog ones).
@@alexdunphy3716 - According to this video, Sintashta is Poltava-derived, which is East Yamna-derived, so true original IEs at the root.
Do you have something against the aboriginal peoples of Afghanistan and India? Incidentally their "ANI" genetic component is almost identical to the West Asian part of early Indoeuropean complex (admixed) genetics (the rest is West Uralic = EHG). This is something well known since long ago, when it was evident that there was a "Caucasus-Baloch" genetic component shared from India to Europe, a component we now understand better as Zagros Neolithic (sometimes called "Caucasus" or "Iran Neolithic"). This is something Neolithic Indians (Dravidians by language) and Indoeuropeans (and also separately Tyrsenians and to some extent Semitics and the various Caucasus smaller ethnicities) have shared for many millennia and something that contrasts with Paleoeuropean (WHG to EHG cline) and also with PPN A/B in the Neolithic Levant and Upper Euphrates (Göbekli Tepe or Nevaliçorian culture), as well as with the proto-Vasconic EEF component.
Indoeuropeans and pre-IE Indians (at least the Neolithic ones of Elamo-Dravidian ethnicity) have a lot in common in terms genetic.
Indirectly, yes. But directly more closed to Sintashta.
Interesting video, I thought it was a little odd to show wagon pictures while describing chariots though and mounted horse back riders while discussing a period centuries before there's any historical evidence of them existing.
The fact that they do not mention race in their descriptions of their people doesn't mean that it didn't matter to them... it is more likely that it was so integral to their identity that it didn't need to he mentioned to them... of course their rituals would only apply to them, their group... the modern idea of "multiculturalism" would have been baffling to them... there would have been no jeed for them to say "this only applies to us (out group/tribe, etc) because of course it did... why would they do it for some other group?...
Maybe the definition for "race" at the time was other, maybe near to actual sense for aparented "nationlities" or populations. Since 15th Century to actual common sense "race" is used like sinonymous for color. Geneticists use ''race" today more for true subespecies in Homo Sapiens (trinomial definitions), like Homo s. sapiens, Homo sapiens neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens idaltu.
Good video. Just one thing - several images of generative AI are laughably absurd, lihe horses with 6 legs, chariots with 3 wheels or bronze foundry located on horse´s back. Pehaps such topic is too complicated for generative AI a should be used less...
We’re witnessing the FIRST steps of AI,
In less than a decade we’ll be AMAZED how good it turns out.
AI just needs more input!
The half man half furnace is my favourite. A furmaid, if you will.
@@elforeigner3260 - An more of our finite energy supplies.
More input for such a foolish "intelligence" probably means more legs for horses in the end: centipede horses, milipede horses!
🤣
Some of the spoked wheels look like they were designed by Salvador Dali 😂
I thought the chariots back then had a crew of two, a driver that sat down and an archer or javelin man.
Yes! Chariots have always worked with the driver and charioteer. The Sintashta has a lot of evidence pointing to a javelin man as opposed on archer.
So Yamnaya, Sintashta and others brought metal, horses and BBQs to us!
I never tried horse with BBQ sauce, only regular fried horse steak, my favorite!
To our women only. They killed most of the cooking 🍳 daddies, lol.
The horse harnesses shown were invented more than two thousand years later.
your timelines are off. Corded ware is descended from yamnaya, not its neighbour.
Corded Ware and Yamnaya are descended from Sredny Stog actually
Basically it was late surviving yamnaya. It was not a linear relationship new cultures emerged while older cultures also evolved
Jamnaja (haplogroup r1b) cames to westeurope not to east/baltic. The pre sintashta cultures were a mix of west and eawtern hunter gatherer and not from yamnaya
SintashtA. The stress needs to be on the last syllable.
The AI images in between are not accurate otherwise the video is very good. I think AI needs more input to generate more accurate depiction of events
Why gengis khan and his mongol worriors didnt used chariots like old indoeuropean cultures? . The landscape in western and eastern eurasian steppe and ecologie was not that diffrent.
Smokestack riding a house suggests AI-generated trash art.
So does Arab shepherd in the middle of Russia.
I laughed at that too.
0:15 renowned for its metallurgy? really? as far as i know they didnt produce any advanced metal objects... mesopotamians and chinese Erlitou culture had much more advanced casting methods.
Never mind that the oldest bronze ever was forged at the lower Danube in pre-Indoeuropean times and it was true tin bronze not poisonous arsenic bronze. But, anyway, guess that renown is relative.
That was much later. The best bronze working ⚒ in China 🇨🇳 came when most of the advanced parts of Afro-Eurasia was in the Iron Age.
@we dont know where the first bronze was casted, maybe in the danube valley or in the near east, but we know for sure that metallurgy started some where in the near east. If u want to see how skilled the ancient chinese were with metal casting look up "sanxingdui bronze".
You are misinformed then. The largest ancient mines of the bronze age were founded and run by the Indo-European steppe peoples. Aside from the pre-indo-european invention of bronze in the Balkans, Indo-Europeans since then have been responsible for the most advanced metallurgy of their day and exported huge quantities of metal to other civilizations
@@alexdunphy3716 - That's probably a bit exaggerated a claim. I'll grant you that Indoeuropeans were heavily involved with metallurgy but the fact that they were using (poisonous) arsenic bronze instead of true (tin) bronze, clearly indicates that they were not at the most advanced stage of metallurgy at all.