Found this total revelation via the twitter feed at the Rajeev2004 blog. Rajeev merely made a comment about inbreeding in Europe w.r.t. the following news. But IMO, the implications are a whole lot more explosive.
rt.com/news/260469-bronze-age-ancestors-dna/
Before anything else, here's a relevant comment at the link, since hyperactive christians are starting to hyper-ventilate in delusional excitement over an opportunity to tie nonsensical biblical junk to the news:
Back to the main article.
I need a moment. Still can't get over the implication - unless I misunderstood it all yet again - that all of 3 male oryans (3 male oryan lineages) on their chariots came wheeling down Europe, one went north, one went far west, one went to the near west. "We came, we saw, we conquered. 2/3rds!" (By the way, oryans is particularly implied in the whole "spread of horse-riding" etc paragraph.)
The implications that the genetic spread spoken of is now to have happened "after the spread of farming" is huge too. (C.f. From what I understand of others, the Vedam seems to speak of a non-farming - what others explain as pre-farming - era and a farming/post-farming one.)
Note it concerns the *Bronze Age*, right? (In Europa)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age_Europe
Compare the dates to Priyadarshi's discussions, linked in previous 2 posts. Summary:
aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/3/
So where are all those Euros who were jumping up and down about the "diversity of IE" (the many branches) in Europe vs there being only one "branch" - 'Indo-aryan' - in India, hence IE origins being in Europe. Yet the genetic diversity - seen in 2/3rds in Europe deriving from 3 people in its bronze age - ain't in Europe. Quick someone, place locus of origination in Anatolia or the Steppes. Someone.
I'm not the one who brought in oryanism and tied it to the 3 ancestors of 2/3rds of Europe. Repeat:
The above is *far* from an oblique reference to Oryanism. It is a direct reference.
Weaponry and bronze age -> metallurgy, claimed for oryanism.
"Spread of horse riding" -> claimed for oryanism
"Change in burial practices" -> allusion to oryanism (probably ref to mounds or else burial urns after cremation.)
Soon peddlers of "Celtic civilisation/civilising influence seen in the Asian part of Eurasia, bang on against China" - like Victor Mair - will peddle that these all started off in the Asian part of Eurasia too, long before they reached any part of Europe proper.
And then they may even speak about the ancestors of western civilisation who left the Indus Valley...Oh wait, they already did that. Duh. I'm so far behind the times.
Except that it all comes down to just 3 people. Who could IMO just be riff-raff who were kicked out from wherever.
3 founding men (lineages) for 2/3rds of Europe's inhabitants post Bronze Age certainly doesn't yet deny my theory from previous posts:
Also, 3 founding fathers (their lineages) for 2/3rds of Europe - which the article tries to tie with the people "who spread horse-riding and brought a change in burial practices and developments in metallurgy" aka the "oryans" aka the source of IE language infusion - from whom eventually came the massive split into multiple "IE" language "branches". Actually now I think of it, any population whose ancestral language something is not, would naturally not care to preserve it in pristine manner, but readily continue changing it, resulting in all kinds of subbranches.
Whereas Skt has more built-in features to preserve its pristine nature as best as possible, and its ethnic=true speakers (i.e. ethnic Hindoos onlee) have more interest in maintaining it as well as possible (and have modes of transmission for this), because it is their language and they care to keep it intact well. <- Another explanation for the "great diversity" of IE language branches in Europa and the "limited" diversity of Indian languages. Though the true diversity is still India: which has the greatest number of languages in any country in the world, a great many if not most of which are deemed "Indo-Aryan" and are usually derived from Skt or from its sisters ("Dardic"). As per 80s British encyclopaedias, India has 900+ languages and dialects. And PNG or Indonesia was 2nd place with IIRC 300+ languages and dialects. Matches with ancientry of these spaces.
BTW, if 3 individuals connected with the "spread of horse-riding" etc (i.e. IE ism) brought IE languages/IE-ism to Europe, then there should only be at most 3 original IE language branches in Europa, nah? Which 3 shall it be? Greek definitely, but which others?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages#Diversification
Except for "Indo-Iranian" and Tocharian (Tarim Basin was an offshoot of Indic and possibly Iranian anyway as per archaeologists)
the rest are all... in Europe. Way too many PIE subbranches to appear in Europe from 3 people. So some of these subbranches (pre-<Euro-language>) must actually fold back into others. Unless they admit that several branches were not evolved in Europe at all. But in which case, the dates provided are also very recent: nothing natively "European" about European languages.
Still, European Paleolithic Continuity Theory for Indo-European languages may not be the case any more: if a mere 3 individuals had such influence to change the culture of Europe via new imported developments in the neolithic and in fact in the Bronze age part, they could have changed the language too (certainly introducing the terms for these new developments).
I now also seriously suspect, as Dhu etc had done long before, that the west is going to slyly introduce OIT to its public - since it's already accepted by some of their elites, as seen in the journal article discovered by Dhu - but in such a way that the west claims the Indus Valley Civilisation as its own originality/its own origins even by making it sound "western" in ownership/creation and indeed as "western all along". And the west will further make it seem that it was "right all along" too in its (so obviously motivated) analyses, while the Indians were nationalist, wrong and Hindoo of course, even if Hindoos are eventually grudgingly admitted as first peddling OIT. Just like aliens only rarely admit that Hindus came up with a Paleolithic Continuity Theory before the European spin off (which was clearly inspired by the Hindu excample), and even then, the admission only ever appears if the west can throw in an insult with it:
I hope Hindoos will eject alien claims to appear hereafter on the Vedam and Vedic religion. Via the alien disease's inevitable excuse that suddenly "So now it belongs equally to us/is equally ancestral to us" excuse. Not at all. Just cause some stray people were kicked out of Iran (and perhaps NW India) in the Bronze age - when development of weaponry and spread of horse-riding and change in burial practices arrived in Europe - is no claim on Hindoos' Vedic religion, which far precedes that oh-so-late date. And Roma/Gypsies also ended up in Europe, but many were not of communities steeped in direct knowledge of the Vedam (in terms of being able to quote from it). Aliens certainly have no claim on the Vedam or its civilisation. The dabbling demons can stop dabbling, and should be made to stop IMO.
Another Q: did Europe turn "white" in the bronze age? We know that 7000 years ago, there lived a hunter gatherer in Spain with Scandinavian genes - complete with genes coding for blue eyes in him - except for those genes which encoded his by all accounts African skintone. So it's some point thereafter that Europe must have turned "white".
And it must have been a powerful spread too: because Europe's been "white" ever since. Could it have spread with the now-infamous 3 fathers of 2/3rds of Europe? Since they are known to have had a drastic effect on the European gene pool.
Have the scientists of this study already worked out the skintone phenotype of the 3 male fathers of 2/3rds of modern Europe, or is that that can't be inferred from the genetic data available to the study?
Did these 3 male ancestors carry some whiteness genes?
(And: where they kicked out from wherever they came from for sporting a "white" phenotype on their part? After all, "whiteness" is not common in other parts of the world, only in Europa, those of European-origin always say. 'Claim to fame/claim to uniqueness.' [Whereas light eye colours are not unique to Europa. Nor to humans either, of course.]
Modern Africans don't trust Albino Africans, who regularly get murdered by other Africans, and some even sell certain body parts of Albino Africans, as per the news. And even modern Indians have a hard time comfortably identifying with albino ethnic Hindoos in their midst. And IIRC Indians or Iranians at some forum quoted from supposedly primary sources how ancient Iranians didn't trust blue/green-eyed people, and shunned them or sent them packing or something. So the question is not unreasonable.)
The news was:
Full text at link or start of this post. The following contains only excerpts.
More news on the subject is presumably at DailyMail UK
rt.com/news/260469-bronze-age-ancestors-dna/
rt.com/news/260469-bronze-age-ancestors-dna/
Quote:Family trio: Majority of European men descended from just 3 ancestors, study finds
Published time: May 20, 2015 17:26
Reuters / Paul Hackett
1.3K973
Tags
Europe, History, Science
Two-thirds of modern-day European males trace their genetic roots to just three Bronze Age forbears, who almost literally launched the "population explosion" many centuries ago, a new DNA study suggests.
Before coming to this conclusion, a research team from the University of Leicester analyzed the DNA sequences of 334 modern European men from 17 different European and Middle Eastern populations, focusing on the large portions of the Y-chromosome passed exclusively from fathers to sons.
(No comment about sample size. But when they say "European and ME populations", surely that should include the Steppes/Ukraine and Caucasia and Anatolia and Russia too, right?)
Their findings were published in the Nature Communications.
After that they compared the DNA from each population in order to trace the key mutations in the genomes and find out when they might have occurred. Such an approach allowed the scientists to trace paternal lines down through a long period of history.
One mutation they found originated around 4,750 to 7,340 years ago and is prevalent in Norwegian and Orcadian populations. The second occurred between 3,700 and 6,500 years ago and has spread throughout Spain, Italy, France, England and Ireland. The third dated from about 3,470 to 5,070 years ago is prominent in the Sami in Lapland, Norwegians, Danes and Friesian populations in the Netherlands, as well as being found in France, Hungary, Serbia and Bavaria, the study reports.
(Date ranges are very interesting.
Sami may have got it from Norwegians, since there has been known Norwegian-Sami etc mixing. Even the best-looking Norwegian - looks as close as a human can to Thor, IMO :Thor: - was "accused" of having "indigenous", i.e. Saami, ancestry.)
Read more
Missing link? African bones predate earliest-known humans by 400,000yrs
According to the researchers, these three paternal lines account for about 63 percent of modern European men. That means that from 371.25 million males currently living in Europe around 233 million are descendants of just three men, as reported by the Daily Mail.
Those branches of the European genetic tree are fairly young, which suggests most modern populations settled in Europe only after the spread of farming during the Neolithic era, rather than during the period of hunter-gatherers moving across the continent in the Paleolithic era, as previously thought.
(Oooh, did they just shoot down the European Paleolithic Continuity Theory (PCT) for 2/3rds of Europe, which IIRC insisted on modern population/genetic and language configurations in Europe having persisted since the Paleaolithic. 'Coincidentally' sounds a bit like the 2/3rds of Europe that falls under the oryanism infamy
According to the scientists, the time of "population explosion" was also a period of social, economic and technological advances.
"The population expansion falls within the Bronze Age, which involved changes in burial practices, the spread of horse-riding and developments in weaponry," Professor Mark Jobling, a lead researcher and geneticist at the University of Leicester, said.
"Dominant males linked with these cultures could be responsible for the Y chromosome patterns we see today," he added.
Although it is still unclear who exactly the 'fathers' in these paternal lineages were, or even if they were born in Europe, the scientists believe they were influential and powerful individuals, likely tribal chieftains.
(Wait wait. All of a measly 3 individual male oryans seeded 2/3 of European gene pool - and it reached there only since the bronze age? Classic.
So much for Oryan males thundering over Europe in their horse-drawn chariots. More likely 3 gotras kicked out of some Iranian or Indian land. Oh, did I faux-pas?)
Read more
Mankind's missing microbe-link found in deep sea � study
According to the researchers, people in positions of power would tend to travel more widely and father far more children than their subjects, so their lineages became dominant.
"We think that a social structure in which resources and power are more easily accessible to only some men may allow for a few paternal lineages to become very frequent in a short amount of time," Dr. Chiara Batini, a co-author of the research and a geneticist at the University of Leicester, said.
The scientists are now planning to continue their study, as it can help them to gain deeper understanding of how the three identified paternal lineages spread across Europe.
"Given the cultural complexity of the Bronze Age, it's difficult to link a particular event to the population growth that we infer," Batini said.
"But Y-chromosome DNA sequences from skeletal remains are becoming available, and this will help us to understand what happened, and when," she added.
Before anything else, here's a relevant comment at the link, since hyperactive christians are starting to hyper-ventilate in delusional excitement over an opportunity to tie nonsensical biblical junk to the news:
Quote:Nova Shpakova
C9V706
Quote:Those 3 men where Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. The j's are from Esau mixed with a strand of every othermore...
No way whatsoever! Besides, since all 3 of those you mentioned HAVE the same male ancestor, there wouldn't be any differences shown as are seen, in their Y-chromo sequences. They were all from toatlly distinct patronages... that was the point of this study. Further, the test doesn't show any from semitic or middle-eastern origins.
Back to the main article.
I need a moment. Still can't get over the implication - unless I misunderstood it all yet again - that all of 3 male oryans (3 male oryan lineages) on their chariots came wheeling down Europe, one went north, one went far west, one went to the near west. "We came, we saw, we conquered. 2/3rds!" (By the way, oryans is particularly implied in the whole "spread of horse-riding" etc paragraph.)
The implications that the genetic spread spoken of is now to have happened "after the spread of farming" is huge too. (C.f. From what I understand of others, the Vedam seems to speak of a non-farming - what others explain as pre-farming - era and a farming/post-farming one.)
Note it concerns the *Bronze Age*, right? (In Europa)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age_Europe
Quote:The European Bronze Age is characterized by bronze artifacts and the use of bronze implements. The regional Bronze Age succeeds the Neolithic. It starts with the Aegean Bronze Age in 3200 BCE[1] (succeeded by the Beaker culture), and spans the entire 2nd millennium BCE (Unetice culture, Tumulus culture, Terramare culture, Urnfield culture and Lusatian culture) in Northern Europe, lasting until c. 600 BCE.
Compare the dates to Priyadarshi's discussions, linked in previous 2 posts. Summary:
aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/3/
Quote:Conclusion: The domestic animals pig, goat, sheep, cow and horse were late to arrive in the steppe. This we can say on the basis of the archaeology, DNA studies and the linguistics. The Indo-European languages had spread widely before these animals arrived in the steppe. We find that the Slavic languages, the language of the steppe region is poor in vocabulary for the domestic animals. On the other hand, India shows a long history of domestication of these animals on the basis of archaeology, DNA studies and linguistics.
We find in our study that the steppe region fails to meet the requirements for being the homeland when the archaeological, genetic and philological facts are examined. On the other hand the South Asia, particularly India, passes all of the genetic, the archaeological and the philological tests. The evidence suggests at least two large migrations out of India having impact on other cultures. One at the dawn of the Neolithic marked by the R1a1a and the J2b migrations, and the other at the Chalcolithic period about 3,000-2,500 BCE.
So where are all those Euros who were jumping up and down about the "diversity of IE" (the many branches) in Europe vs there being only one "branch" - 'Indo-aryan' - in India, hence IE origins being in Europe. Yet the genetic diversity - seen in 2/3rds in Europe deriving from 3 people in its bronze age - ain't in Europe. Quick someone, place locus of origination in Anatolia or the Steppes. Someone.
I'm not the one who brought in oryanism and tied it to the 3 ancestors of 2/3rds of Europe. Repeat:
Quote:"The population expansion falls within the Bronze Age, which involved changes in burial practices, the spread of horse-riding and developments in weaponry," Professor Mark Jobling, a lead researcher and geneticist at the University of Leicester, said.
"Dominant males linked with these cultures could be responsible for the Y chromosome patterns we see today," he added.
The above is *far* from an oblique reference to Oryanism. It is a direct reference.
Weaponry and bronze age -> metallurgy, claimed for oryanism.
"Spread of horse riding" -> claimed for oryanism
"Change in burial practices" -> allusion to oryanism (probably ref to mounds or else burial urns after cremation.)
Soon peddlers of "Celtic civilisation/civilising influence seen in the Asian part of Eurasia, bang on against China" - like Victor Mair - will peddle that these all started off in the Asian part of Eurasia too, long before they reached any part of Europe proper.
And then they may even speak about the ancestors of western civilisation who left the Indus Valley...Oh wait, they already did that. Duh. I'm so far behind the times.
Except that it all comes down to just 3 people. Who could IMO just be riff-raff who were kicked out from wherever.
3 founding men (lineages) for 2/3rds of Europe's inhabitants post Bronze Age certainly doesn't yet deny my theory from previous posts:
Quote:But don't get why Indians like Priyadarshi still continue to call them *Indo-European* (IE) languages, though. As such an equally-weighted name still gives undeserved importance to the aliens (the 'European' part of the term), by pretending they have anything to do with all this, other than that the so-called "IE-ness" they exhibit - language and religio-culture - is no more than an accidental by-product of a few outward trajectories and their being a receptacle for knowledge.("Iranians - let's blame them, since they're dead" -> ancestral pre-Zoroastrian Iranian religion, hence Iranian identity is dead. Plus in Iran itself islamised people are part Arabic, and some are part Turkic because of recorded forced mixing perpetrated by islam. Also happening again now to Yezidis: masses of kidnapped Yezidi women are being raped by islamic males from Iraq/Syria and beyond, and forced to have their children.)
* They've not proven anything of IE other than that the west is an unwanted spin-off, probably of Iranians - let's blame them, since they're dead - and not at all of Indians.
Also, 3 founding fathers (their lineages) for 2/3rds of Europe - which the article tries to tie with the people "who spread horse-riding and brought a change in burial practices and developments in metallurgy" aka the "oryans" aka the source of IE language infusion - from whom eventually came the massive split into multiple "IE" language "branches". Actually now I think of it, any population whose ancestral language something is not, would naturally not care to preserve it in pristine manner, but readily continue changing it, resulting in all kinds of subbranches.
Whereas Skt has more built-in features to preserve its pristine nature as best as possible, and its ethnic=true speakers (i.e. ethnic Hindoos onlee) have more interest in maintaining it as well as possible (and have modes of transmission for this), because it is their language and they care to keep it intact well. <- Another explanation for the "great diversity" of IE language branches in Europa and the "limited" diversity of Indian languages. Though the true diversity is still India: which has the greatest number of languages in any country in the world, a great many if not most of which are deemed "Indo-Aryan" and are usually derived from Skt or from its sisters ("Dardic"). As per 80s British encyclopaedias, India has 900+ languages and dialects. And PNG or Indonesia was 2nd place with IIRC 300+ languages and dialects. Matches with ancientry of these spaces.
BTW, if 3 individuals connected with the "spread of horse-riding" etc (i.e. IE ism) brought IE languages/IE-ism to Europe, then there should only be at most 3 original IE language branches in Europa, nah? Which 3 shall it be? Greek definitely, but which others?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages#Diversification
Quote:Using a mathematical analysis borrowed from evolutionary biology, Don Ringe and Tandy Warnow propose the following evolutionary tree of Indo-European branches:[48]
Pre-Anatolian (before 3500 BC)
Pre-Tocharian
Pre-Italic and Pre-Celtic (before 2500 BC)
Pre-Armenian and Pre-Greek (after 2500 BC)
Pre-Germanic and Pre-Balto-Slavic;[48] proto-Germanic ca. 500 BC[49]
Proto-Indo-Iranian (2000 BC)
David Anthony proposes the following sequence:[12]
Pre-Anatolian (4200 BC)
Pre-Tocharian (3700 BC)
Pre-Germanic (3300 BC)
Pre-Italic and Pre-Celtic (3000 BC)
Pre-Armenian (2800 BC)
Pre-Balto-Slavic (2800 BC)
Pre-Greek (2500 BC)
Proto-Indo-Iranian (2200 BC); split between Iranian and Old Indic 1800 BC
Except for "Indo-Iranian" and Tocharian (Tarim Basin was an offshoot of Indic and possibly Iranian anyway as per archaeologists)
the rest are all... in Europe. Way too many PIE subbranches to appear in Europe from 3 people. So some of these subbranches (pre-<Euro-language>) must actually fold back into others. Unless they admit that several branches were not evolved in Europe at all. But in which case, the dates provided are also very recent: nothing natively "European" about European languages.
Still, European Paleolithic Continuity Theory for Indo-European languages may not be the case any more: if a mere 3 individuals had such influence to change the culture of Europe via new imported developments in the neolithic and in fact in the Bronze age part, they could have changed the language too (certainly introducing the terms for these new developments).
I now also seriously suspect, as Dhu etc had done long before, that the west is going to slyly introduce OIT to its public - since it's already accepted by some of their elites, as seen in the journal article discovered by Dhu - but in such a way that the west claims the Indus Valley Civilisation as its own originality/its own origins even by making it sound "western" in ownership/creation and indeed as "western all along". And the west will further make it seem that it was "right all along" too in its (so obviously motivated) analyses, while the Indians were nationalist, wrong and Hindoo of course, even if Hindoos are eventually grudgingly admitted as first peddling OIT. Just like aliens only rarely admit that Hindus came up with a Paleolithic Continuity Theory before the European spin off (which was clearly inspired by the Hindu excample), and even then, the admission only ever appears if the west can throw in an insult with it:
Quote:PCT appears, after all, to be the European answer to "Paleolithic Aryan" nonsense in India.
I hope Hindoos will eject alien claims to appear hereafter on the Vedam and Vedic religion. Via the alien disease's inevitable excuse that suddenly "So now it belongs equally to us/is equally ancestral to us" excuse. Not at all. Just cause some stray people were kicked out of Iran (and perhaps NW India) in the Bronze age - when development of weaponry and spread of horse-riding and change in burial practices arrived in Europe - is no claim on Hindoos' Vedic religion, which far precedes that oh-so-late date. And Roma/Gypsies also ended up in Europe, but many were not of communities steeped in direct knowledge of the Vedam (in terms of being able to quote from it). Aliens certainly have no claim on the Vedam or its civilisation. The dabbling demons can stop dabbling, and should be made to stop IMO.
Another Q: did Europe turn "white" in the bronze age? We know that 7000 years ago, there lived a hunter gatherer in Spain with Scandinavian genes - complete with genes coding for blue eyes in him - except for those genes which encoded his by all accounts African skintone. So it's some point thereafter that Europe must have turned "white".
And it must have been a powerful spread too: because Europe's been "white" ever since. Could it have spread with the now-infamous 3 fathers of 2/3rds of Europe? Since they are known to have had a drastic effect on the European gene pool.
Have the scientists of this study already worked out the skintone phenotype of the 3 male fathers of 2/3rds of modern Europe, or is that that can't be inferred from the genetic data available to the study?
Did these 3 male ancestors carry some whiteness genes?
(And: where they kicked out from wherever they came from for sporting a "white" phenotype on their part? After all, "whiteness" is not common in other parts of the world, only in Europa, those of European-origin always say. 'Claim to fame/claim to uniqueness.' [Whereas light eye colours are not unique to Europa. Nor to humans either, of course.]
Modern Africans don't trust Albino Africans, who regularly get murdered by other Africans, and some even sell certain body parts of Albino Africans, as per the news. And even modern Indians have a hard time comfortably identifying with albino ethnic Hindoos in their midst. And IIRC Indians or Iranians at some forum quoted from supposedly primary sources how ancient Iranians didn't trust blue/green-eyed people, and shunned them or sent them packing or something. So the question is not unreasonable.)
The news was:
Full text at link or start of this post. The following contains only excerpts.
More news on the subject is presumably at DailyMail UK
rt.com/news/260469-bronze-age-ancestors-dna/
Quote:Family trio: Majority of European men descended from just 3 ancestors, study finds
Published time: May 20, 2015 17:26
Reuters / Paul Hackett
Two-thirds of modern-day European males trace their genetic roots to just three Bronze Age forbears, who almost literally launched the "population explosion" many centuries ago, a new DNA study suggests.
Before coming to this conclusion, a research team from the University of Leicester analyzed the DNA sequences of 334 modern European men from 17 different European and Middle Eastern populations, focusing on the large portions of the Y-chromosome passed exclusively from fathers to sons.
One mutation they found originated around 4,750 to 7,340 years ago and is prevalent in Norwegian and Orcadian populations. The second occurred between 3,700 and 6,500 years ago and has spread throughout Spain, Italy, France, England and Ireland. The third dated from about 3,470 to 5,070 years ago is prominent in the Sami in Lapland, Norwegians, Danes and Friesian populations in the Netherlands, as well as being found in France, Hungary, Serbia and Bavaria, the study reports.
According to the researchers, these three paternal lines account for about 63 percent of modern European men. That means that from 371.25 million males currently living in Europe around 233 million are descendants of just three men, as reported by the Daily Mail.
Those branches of the European genetic tree are fairly young, which suggests most modern populations settled in Europe only after the spread of farming during the Neolithic era, rather than during the period of hunter-gatherers moving across the continent in the Paleolithic era, as previously thought.
According to the scientists, the time of "population explosion" was also a period of social, economic and technological advances.
"The population expansion falls within the Bronze Age, which involved changes in burial practices, the spread of horse-riding and developments in weaponry," Professor Mark Jobling, a lead researcher and geneticist at the University of Leicester, said.
"Dominant males linked with these cultures could be responsible for the Y chromosome patterns we see today," he added.
Although it is still unclear who exactly the 'fathers' in these paternal lineages were, or even if they were born in Europe, the scientists believe they were influential and powerful individuals, likely tribal chieftains.