Craniometric investigation of the Bronze Age settlement of Xinjiang
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
©2003
Brian E. Hemphill 1, J.P. Mallory
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Indus Valley samples are identified as sharing slightly closer affinity to samples from Iran and Turkmenistan than to Bactrian samples. Affinities among Indus Valley samples are rather diffuse. In fact, the <b>early sample from western China, Qäwrighul (QAW), is identified as possessing closer affinities to the two samples from Harappa (HAR and CEMH) than exhibited by the third Indus Valley sample, Timargarha (TMG). </b>The remaining samples form a loose cluster composed of sedentary agricultural groups from Iran (TH2, TH3, and SHS) and Turkmenistan (GKS, ALT, and KAR), as well as steppe samples from the Caucasus (SAMB) and Tajikistan (TMM).
..
<b>Turkmenian samples from Geoksyur (GKS) and Altyn depe (ALT) serve as a phenetic link between Indus Valley samples (HAR, TMG, and CEMH) that feature the closest affinities to one another. </b>In a departure from the results obtained by WPGMA analysis, the sample from Kara depe (KAR) occupies a unique position among Turkmenian samples by exhibiting much closer affinities to Iranian samples (especially TH3 and SHS) than to samples from Bactria.
..
An examination of this array confirms the patterns of interregional affinities identified by neighbor-joining cluster analysis (Fig. 3). Hainan (HAI) reflects the most divergent sample. The two later western Chinese samples, Krorän (KRO) and Alwighul (ALW), feature the closest affinities to Sapalli (SAP), the earliest of the Bactrian samples. Two of the samples from Turkmenistan (Altyn depe (ALT) and Geoksyur (GKS)) span the phenetic space between Iranian samples and Bactrian samples, with Geoksyur exhibiting closer phenetic affinities to Bactrians (especially the latest sample, Molali (MOL)), while Altyn depe shares closer phenetic affinities to Iranians. The steppe Bronze Age sample from the Caucasus (SAMB) represents a phenetic outlier to all other samples, exhibiting only a very distant affinity to the sample from Altyn depe. <b>Indus Valley samples share rather close affinities to one another but are strongly segregated from all other samples, except the early western Chinese sample from Qäwrighul (QAW).</b>
..
Once again, the two later western Chinese samples, Krorän (KRO) and Alwighul (ALW), exhibit the closest affinities to the earliest Bactrian sample, Sapalli (SAP). Bactrian samples (SAP, DJR, KUZ, and MOL) exhibit the closest affinities to one another. The two Turkmenian samples from Geoksyur and Altyn depe occupy an intermediate phenetic position between Bactrians and northern Iranians, in which the former (GKS) shares the closest affinities with the latest Bactrian sample (MOL), while the latter (ALT) shares the closest affinities with the earlier northern Iranian sample (TH2). <b>Indus Valley samples (HAR, CEMH, and TMG) are located in the lower left of this array and, once again, the earliest western Chinese sample, Qäwrighul (QAW), is identified as possessing closer affinities to Indus Valley samples than to samples from any other region. </b>Standing somewhat in contrast to results obtained by other analyses, principal coordinates analysis identifies an especially close affinity between the Late Bronze-Early Iron Age sample from the Swat Valley of Pakistan (TMG) and the early northern Iranian sample (TH2). As with other analyses, this array also indicates that the Turkmenian sample from Kara depe (KAR) is strongly separated from other sedentary Turkmenistan samples, but unlike other analyses, principal coordinates analysis indicates that this sample possesses no close affinities with any of the other samples considered.
..
Nevertheless, <b>there is no support for the hypothesis that steppe populations contributed significantly to Bronze Age populations of the Tarim Basin. </b>Despite numerous similarities between Afanasievo and Andronovo artifacts and Bronze Age artifacts from Xinjiang (Bunker, [1998]; Chen and Hiebert, [1995]; Kuzmina, [1998]; Mei and Shell, [1998]; Peng, [1998]), <b>all analyses of phenetic relationships consistently reveal a profound phenetic separation between steppe samples and the samples from the Tarim Basin (Qäwrighul, Alwighul, and Krorän). </b>Further, neither of the later Tarim Basin samples from Alwighul or Krorän appears phenetically closer to the Han Chinese sample from Hainan, thereby indicating an absence of East Asian influence in these samples.
..
Second, none of the Tarim Basin samples, not even those that postdate 1200 B.C., exhibit any phenetic affinities to any of the steppe samples included in this analysis.
..
<b>The absence of close affinities to outside populations renders it unlikely that the human remains recovered from Qäwrighul represent the unadmixed remains of colonists from the Afanasievo or Andronovo cultures of the steppelands, or inhabitants of the urban centers of the Oxus civilization of Bactria.</b>..
The results, however, <b>fail to demonstrate even a low-level phenetic affinity between Qäwrighul and either steppe samples or samples from Oxus civilization urban centers. </b>Not only is there <b>no evidence for substantial immigration into the Tarim Basin by populations of these two adjacent regions; it also appears unlikely that either steppe populations or Oxus civilization populations served as a source of any significant gene flow commensurate with the appearance of the Bronze Age occupation of Qäwrighul. </b>..
The second alternative explanation to account for the human remains from Qäwrighul is that they are the product of emigration from a source area other than the Russo-Kazakh steppelands or Oxus civilization urban centers. While t<b>he results obtained indicate that there is no evidence that gene flow from either steppe or Oxus civilization populations led to the establishment of the Qäwrighul population, all analyses, except neighbor-joining cluster analysis (Fig. 3), disclose a low-level affinity between the Qäwrighul and Indus Valley samples. </b>Such affinities could be i<b>ndicative of some early interaction between the populations of these two regions. The implications of such early interaction are potentially profound.</b>
In a reversal of mainstream thought on a western Asian homeland (Urheimat) and eastward dispersal of Indo-European languages into Central Asia and India (Burrow, [1973]; Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, [1990]; Mallory, [1989]; Renfrew, [1988]), there is a body of scholars who have vigorously argued for an Indo-European homeland in the Indus Valley of India and Pakistan (surveyed at length in Bryant, [2001]), or that Indo-European languages disseminated from a locus somewhere in the vicinity of ancient Bactria-Sogdiana (Nichols, [1997], p. 137; see also Sargent, [1997]). If true, the dispersal of these Indo-European languages may have been accompanied by immigration and some gene flow from the Indus Valley homeland to the various historical seats of the Indo-European languages. In this way, Tocharian languages found in the Tarim Basin would be attributed to the influx of populations from Bactria whose ultimate derivation may be traced to the Indus Valley of India and Pakistan.
..<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
as usual, the hard facts are not allowed to speak for themselves and get overruled by various prejudiced notions. same is the case here also.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->..<b>all results indicate that these later inhabitants of the Tarim Basin manifest a unique affinity to Bactrians.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In summary, the SSVC ethnics migrated directly to the Tarim area. There was subsequent overlay of local Afghanis ("Bactrians") around this SSVC nucleus. The later afghani overlay also corresponded with a move north into the Oxus basin.
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
©2003
Brian E. Hemphill 1, J.P. Mallory
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Indus Valley samples are identified as sharing slightly closer affinity to samples from Iran and Turkmenistan than to Bactrian samples. Affinities among Indus Valley samples are rather diffuse. In fact, the <b>early sample from western China, Qäwrighul (QAW), is identified as possessing closer affinities to the two samples from Harappa (HAR and CEMH) than exhibited by the third Indus Valley sample, Timargarha (TMG). </b>The remaining samples form a loose cluster composed of sedentary agricultural groups from Iran (TH2, TH3, and SHS) and Turkmenistan (GKS, ALT, and KAR), as well as steppe samples from the Caucasus (SAMB) and Tajikistan (TMM).
..
<b>Turkmenian samples from Geoksyur (GKS) and Altyn depe (ALT) serve as a phenetic link between Indus Valley samples (HAR, TMG, and CEMH) that feature the closest affinities to one another. </b>In a departure from the results obtained by WPGMA analysis, the sample from Kara depe (KAR) occupies a unique position among Turkmenian samples by exhibiting much closer affinities to Iranian samples (especially TH3 and SHS) than to samples from Bactria.
..
An examination of this array confirms the patterns of interregional affinities identified by neighbor-joining cluster analysis (Fig. 3). Hainan (HAI) reflects the most divergent sample. The two later western Chinese samples, Krorän (KRO) and Alwighul (ALW), feature the closest affinities to Sapalli (SAP), the earliest of the Bactrian samples. Two of the samples from Turkmenistan (Altyn depe (ALT) and Geoksyur (GKS)) span the phenetic space between Iranian samples and Bactrian samples, with Geoksyur exhibiting closer phenetic affinities to Bactrians (especially the latest sample, Molali (MOL)), while Altyn depe shares closer phenetic affinities to Iranians. The steppe Bronze Age sample from the Caucasus (SAMB) represents a phenetic outlier to all other samples, exhibiting only a very distant affinity to the sample from Altyn depe. <b>Indus Valley samples share rather close affinities to one another but are strongly segregated from all other samples, except the early western Chinese sample from Qäwrighul (QAW).</b>
..
Once again, the two later western Chinese samples, Krorän (KRO) and Alwighul (ALW), exhibit the closest affinities to the earliest Bactrian sample, Sapalli (SAP). Bactrian samples (SAP, DJR, KUZ, and MOL) exhibit the closest affinities to one another. The two Turkmenian samples from Geoksyur and Altyn depe occupy an intermediate phenetic position between Bactrians and northern Iranians, in which the former (GKS) shares the closest affinities with the latest Bactrian sample (MOL), while the latter (ALT) shares the closest affinities with the earlier northern Iranian sample (TH2). <b>Indus Valley samples (HAR, CEMH, and TMG) are located in the lower left of this array and, once again, the earliest western Chinese sample, Qäwrighul (QAW), is identified as possessing closer affinities to Indus Valley samples than to samples from any other region. </b>Standing somewhat in contrast to results obtained by other analyses, principal coordinates analysis identifies an especially close affinity between the Late Bronze-Early Iron Age sample from the Swat Valley of Pakistan (TMG) and the early northern Iranian sample (TH2). As with other analyses, this array also indicates that the Turkmenian sample from Kara depe (KAR) is strongly separated from other sedentary Turkmenistan samples, but unlike other analyses, principal coordinates analysis indicates that this sample possesses no close affinities with any of the other samples considered.
..
Nevertheless, <b>there is no support for the hypothesis that steppe populations contributed significantly to Bronze Age populations of the Tarim Basin. </b>Despite numerous similarities between Afanasievo and Andronovo artifacts and Bronze Age artifacts from Xinjiang (Bunker, [1998]; Chen and Hiebert, [1995]; Kuzmina, [1998]; Mei and Shell, [1998]; Peng, [1998]), <b>all analyses of phenetic relationships consistently reveal a profound phenetic separation between steppe samples and the samples from the Tarim Basin (Qäwrighul, Alwighul, and Krorän). </b>Further, neither of the later Tarim Basin samples from Alwighul or Krorän appears phenetically closer to the Han Chinese sample from Hainan, thereby indicating an absence of East Asian influence in these samples.
..
Second, none of the Tarim Basin samples, not even those that postdate 1200 B.C., exhibit any phenetic affinities to any of the steppe samples included in this analysis.
..
<b>The absence of close affinities to outside populations renders it unlikely that the human remains recovered from Qäwrighul represent the unadmixed remains of colonists from the Afanasievo or Andronovo cultures of the steppelands, or inhabitants of the urban centers of the Oxus civilization of Bactria.</b>..
The results, however, <b>fail to demonstrate even a low-level phenetic affinity between Qäwrighul and either steppe samples or samples from Oxus civilization urban centers. </b>Not only is there <b>no evidence for substantial immigration into the Tarim Basin by populations of these two adjacent regions; it also appears unlikely that either steppe populations or Oxus civilization populations served as a source of any significant gene flow commensurate with the appearance of the Bronze Age occupation of Qäwrighul. </b>..
The second alternative explanation to account for the human remains from Qäwrighul is that they are the product of emigration from a source area other than the Russo-Kazakh steppelands or Oxus civilization urban centers. While t<b>he results obtained indicate that there is no evidence that gene flow from either steppe or Oxus civilization populations led to the establishment of the Qäwrighul population, all analyses, except neighbor-joining cluster analysis (Fig. 3), disclose a low-level affinity between the Qäwrighul and Indus Valley samples. </b>Such affinities could be i<b>ndicative of some early interaction between the populations of these two regions. The implications of such early interaction are potentially profound.</b>
In a reversal of mainstream thought on a western Asian homeland (Urheimat) and eastward dispersal of Indo-European languages into Central Asia and India (Burrow, [1973]; Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, [1990]; Mallory, [1989]; Renfrew, [1988]), there is a body of scholars who have vigorously argued for an Indo-European homeland in the Indus Valley of India and Pakistan (surveyed at length in Bryant, [2001]), or that Indo-European languages disseminated from a locus somewhere in the vicinity of ancient Bactria-Sogdiana (Nichols, [1997], p. 137; see also Sargent, [1997]). If true, the dispersal of these Indo-European languages may have been accompanied by immigration and some gene flow from the Indus Valley homeland to the various historical seats of the Indo-European languages. In this way, Tocharian languages found in the Tarim Basin would be attributed to the influx of populations from Bactria whose ultimate derivation may be traced to the Indus Valley of India and Pakistan.
..<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
as usual, the hard facts are not allowed to speak for themselves and get overruled by various prejudiced notions. same is the case here also.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->..<b>all results indicate that these later inhabitants of the Tarim Basin manifest a unique affinity to Bactrians.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In summary, the SSVC ethnics migrated directly to the Tarim area. There was subsequent overlay of local Afghanis ("Bactrians") around this SSVC nucleus. The later afghani overlay also corresponded with a move north into the Oxus basin.