Waters of Memory – Telegram
Channel created
Calculators:

WOM Ancestral Calculator:
https://justpaste.it/e4ml3
(Updated June 2024. Remove Volosovo if you are not of Uralic, East Baltic, or Central/North Russian ancestry)

Fennoscandian Bronze Age Calculator:
https://justpaste.it/ab3uf

Mesolithic (for Europeans): https://justpaste.it/ave6d

Paleolithic Experiment w/ YvngFinn (work in progress): https://justpaste.it/fvspu

Hunter Gatherer vs Farmer: https://justpaste.it/9vzxj

Indo-Aryan: https://justpaste.it/bxe5s
(Note - If you are South Indian, add this to the source:
AASI,-0.017354205,-0.304894303,-0.268679085,0.181329575,-0.039351991,0.073271504,-0.022843875,0.037359828,0.187881353,0.126707043,-0.010024877,-0.004718921,0.008198494,0.036303194,-0.056184046,-0.072647447,-0.011352189,0.00825265,0.004209097,0.038425578,0.00661663,0.026988706,0.007609686,0.01678573,-0.009232161)
👍165
Waters of Memory pinned «Calculators: WOM Ancestral Calculator: https://justpaste.it/e4ml3 (Updated June 2024. Remove Volosovo if you are not of Uralic, East Baltic, or Central/North Russian ancestry) Fennoscandian Bronze Age Calculator: https://justpaste.it/ab3uf Mesolithic…»
Here you can see how the Tarim mummies and early Tocharian speakers differed.
The Tarim mummies were almost entirely WSHG with a slight East Asian shift, while the early Tocharian speakers were a mix of them and Afanasievo migrants
👍3
Using the neolithic calculator on WSH’s provides a bit more insight into their ancestry. Most probably did have some Neolithic Iranian dna that most likely came with CHG admixture. Some Yamnaya had a small amount of WSHG admixture. In the eastern ones it most likely came from Kumsay-related admixture, while in the Caucasus probably from interactions with the Steppe Maykop
🔥81👎1
The likely candidates for the trace WSHG admixture
🔥6
Addendum: The likely reason the Botai have some extra EHG is because their steppe ancestry comes from WSH and not steppe eneolithic. Steppe eneolithic were relatively more CHG-rich being about 52/48% EHG/CHG. When I model them using WSH both the kumsay and steppe maykop show extra CHG, indicating they were descended from older steppe eneolithic tribes and not WSH
👍1
Forwarded from Genos Historia (Samuel Andrews)
Grave goods from a Corded Ware barrow in the Netherlands.

Battle Axe, Stone axe, Flint Blade, and Beaker vessel.

The man was buried under a burial mound. Barrow=Burial mound.

Wentink, K. (2020). The role of grave sets in Corded Ware and Bell Beaker funerary practices. Sidestone Press. Page 33, Figure 3.2
3👍1
Forwarded from Genos Historia (Samuel Andrews)
Grave goods from a Bell beaker barrow in the Netherlands.

Arrow heads, wrist guard, and a Beaker vessel.

He has a different weapon than his Corded Ware ancestors did. He has arrow heads instead of a battle axe. But he has still a weapon. His burial is continuation of the same “warrior” burial tradition.

Wentink, K. (2020). The role of grave sets in Corded Ware and Bell Beaker funerary practices. Sidestone Press.
4
Baltic Hunter Gatherers:

During the mesolithic and neolithic the East Baltic region was inhabited by hunter gatherers who, like mesolithic Scandinavians and Ukrainians, harbored mixed ancestry between WHG and EHG.

For most of the mesolithic and early neolithic WHG DNA was predominant, excluding a few of the more northern samples in Latvia and Estonia.

Later into the neolithic we see a massive shift towards EHG dna. Among the early Comb Ceramic culture samples we can see some were largely the same as the earlier Narva samples, but some were nearly pure EHG’s and likely migrants from the north. These migrants would shift the DNA considerably, with later Comb Ceramic samples being ~65-70% EHG on average.

This shift was also portrayed in their haplogroups. Earlier samples being mostly R1b and I2, while the later Comb Ceramic samples were entirely R1a and R1b
7