Eurasia
Interestingly, after yesterday’s complex post and the ongoing genetic debate on the origins of the Indus Valley culture and thus modern-day Indians, a new study into the genetic migrations of the Steppes has produced some interesting results.
But let’s jump straight to the argument. The main cultures of the Steppes have been the Scythians, the Mongols and the Huns, and if we take these genetic features literally then we do not see them in the Indian people. We do see them, of course, in modern-day Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet and China. These people have influenced the far north of India, but certainly not the Indus Valley. What I mean is, of course, those with Mongoloid features. This is largely missing in India, and if we were to conclude there was the Aryan migration into India then we would perhaps see more of a Mongol influence in the genetics. Although this study was not about India at all, it was fully aware of the Aryan migration debate, thus the following statements have been made:
“The Science study also uncovered evidence of two waves of migration from the western Eurasian steppes into South Asia, a topic that has been hotly debated by both archaeologists and linguists alike. Although the Yamnaya and Afanasievo cultures have been proposed as the most likely groups to have traveled south and introduced western Eurasian genetic signatures into South Asian populations, the authors behind today’s paper found no evidence that either group did so.
Instead, the team uncovered suggestions of two waves of migration into South Asia: a very early one prior to the Bronze Age (ruling out the Early Bronze Age Yamnaya and Afanasievo) and a second during the Late Bronze Age, 3,200-4,300 years ago, which may have introduced Indo-Iranian languages into the region.
Before everyone gets all up in arms about these findings (you Yamnaya afficionados in particular can be insufferable), it’s important to remember that these are early findings. Exciting, yes, but still early. And though the database of ancient genomes is increasing in number, geographical and chronological range and also quality, there is still plenty more information to be found and reconciled with the archaeological, linguistic and historical records.”
The paper suggests people shouldn’t get “all up in arms” about these findings but I cannot help but get excited, for this does contradict yesterday’s report. An earlier migration from western Eurasian Steppes as far back as pre-Bronze Age is something that was missing in yesterday’s paper. If you remember, a stand-in sample was used where DNA samples from the early Indus Valley culture was missing. In this report, we have those earlier DNA markers and thus a suggestion there was indeed an earlier migration from the Steppes into the Indus Valley – the infamous Aryan migration.
But the article also clearly points to a later migration from “Indo-Iranian” peoples rather than “Indo-European” peoples, bringing that migration form the west rather than the north. That, to me, would rectify the lack of physical attributes of the Mongol race in India. It eradicates the markers of the earlier migration to a large degree, removes the physical features by natural breeding over time, and would clearly explain the origins of Sanskrit. It would also explain the links between the Indus Valley culture and Mesopotamia.
Are you following?
This debate is only getting started. Watch this space…
India
One of the most hotly debated questions in history – and one of the most complex – is Indian migration, the origins of Sanskrit, the DNA of the Indus Valley civilisation and, ultimately, the answer that all modern Indians are seeking.
People have argued and fought over this question for a long time, but it is so confusing you’ll be pulling your hair out once you delve into the subject. I have many times – pulled my hair out that is – and had to re-read most articles on the subject many times over just to understand them, such is the complexity of the subject.
Back in September last year I published this article, a DNA study which suggested that there was indeed a migration from the Steppes, in what is famously known as the Aryan migration into India:
This DNA study was so profound and so convincing that it was a simple matter of dotting the Is and crossing the Ts and a full understanding of the Indian story would be stamped into the history books forever. And it’s actually a nicely fitting model, because the Aryans would have brought with them the original tongue of Sanskrit – the mother of the modern Hindi language. And after all, there’s nothing like a theory that fits like a glove.
But now we have a massive problem; a large spanner in the works.
A new DNA study has stated categorically that there was no migration from the Steppes, and thus Sanskrit could not have arrived with an Aryan migration because non existed.
This is such a revelation, it’s a bit like a DNA study determining that the Romans never arrived in Britain!
Now, try reading both of these papers and let me know if you can get your head around it. And people are well versed in this subject, such is the importance of this debate. You only have to look at the comments below the main article here to see how people are not convinced but also how mind-bogglingly confusing this subject is.
The interesting part about the latest report is that many other scholars have backed it, and it appears to be flawless, as the article says, “There is no question of the model being flawed. It is a most solid piece of work—no new study will overturn it. Our own work which will be out very soon provides solid evidence for the model.”
However, let’s take a look at an earlier paragraph:
“The paper, however, does not include a study of any ancient DNA from the Indus Valley people, a lacuna that will be filled only when the paper Rai referred to becomes available. In its absence, the study that was published in the March 2018 paper used a stand-in population, whose DNA was based on that of three outlier samples of ancient DNA from between 4000 and 5000 years ago, which were found in the eastern Iranian region, and whose DNA profile resembles that of 41 other samples from the Swat site of the Indus Valley from a millennium later, after its decline.”
So we await the other paper to fill in this gap, but missing out ancient DNA from the Indus Valley culture in a study of this magnitude is a revelation in itself, regardless of whether a stand-in sample was used. To me, that’s not very good science, but then so many scholars are backing the report.
So what does this all mean?
It means we are back to square one in many ways. We are without an Aryan migration – an Indo-European migration that pinpoints the origins of the Sanskrit language. What we are left with is South Indians and Iranian farmers. Now, there are some similarities between Persian and Hindi, but not enough to suggest that one evolved from another. There is a crossover of words in that a Persian speaker would recognise some words from Hindi but, again, it’s not enough to say Sanskrit originated in Persia. The simple answer to that is – it didn’t.
So, where does this language – the most beautiful language in the world as far as I am concerned – originate?
The Sanskrit language, along with its most ancient religion, are becoming something of an enigma. It’s the kind of mystery that I love, and in some ways I don’t want the answers to be found. I want to continue to imagine that Lord Shiva, and all of the rest of the Hindu gods, really did arrive from elsewhere and brought the Sanskrit language with them.
And what again about the Indus Valley people – where do they really fit in, because they were surely already there before the influx of Iranian farmers and South Indians..?
Don’t go down this rabbit hole unless you have a mind made of stern stuff…
http://www.caravanmagazine.in/vantage/indus-valley-genetic-contribution-steppes-rakhigarhi
The World
There is no longer any “may”, “maybe”, “might have”, or any other kind of remark related to “possibly”.
It’s time to simply stop wondering and just accept – the world was a much different place in the past to the one we believe it was. And we have religion to ultimately blame for our stupid misconceptions and misinterpretation, for religion places Man at the centre of everything… and this just a few thousand years ago. Although we moved away from those ideas long ago, the stigma still clings to our subconscious like a baby does to its parent.
There is no question, “Did they travel around the Mediterranean by boat?”
There is no question to answer.
They did.
One hundred per cent.
It was the norm for all ancient humans and human relatives to have been travelling around our planet by boat for hundreds of thousands of years.
These people were not stupid.
We are the stupid ones, still clinging to our Victorian, religious, Darwin evolution nonsense.
Once you accept that this was the norm then all of the concepts I promote are simple to understand.
It’s time to change our perceptions.
It’s time to just stop listening to these so-called experts, who are programmed by the same intellectual doctrine of human evolution that originated in those Victorian days where Darwin’s model was born. Until the universities stop brainwashing each generation of so-called experts, then they are still going to come at us with the same theories, generation after generation, refusing to budge from the current model. Only those thinking outside the box will change the paradigm.
I am Thankful to be in the latter camp.
It’s a scary thought to be told what to believe and then told if you teach otherwise you will lose your job.
That’s pretty much how it works for those indoctrinated by university.
Many have had their careers ruined by this process.
Let’s keep fighting, for the truth is slowly coming to the surface.
Excuse the pun.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04/neandertals-stone-age-people-may-have-voyaged-mediterranean
Scotland
The driest and best summer I have ever experienced in the UK has brought some super things along with it.
Not only have we just witnessed the best World Cup ever, but the lack of precipitation has revealed many hitherto unknown archaeology sites across the country.
I hope we have many summers like this in the future.
However, the last time we experienced this kind of summer was in 1976, and I certainly don’t remember that. If it’s another 42 years until the next one, I certainly won’t be around to witness it. How horrible to think I may only experience one perfect summer in my entire life! Time to move to Greece I think!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-44812713
**Breaking News**
Africa / The World
Is it correct that sometimes we have the right to blow our own trumpets when our own theory could finally be taken seriously?
After all the ridicule I have faced over many years I think the answer is yes!
Those of you who actually follow my posts and the ongoing story – that’s probably two of you! – will know my thoughts and feelings about the out of Africa human migration theory. My point of view is this – it’s utter nonsense from start to finish and sooner or later it will be proven otherwise.
So what’s my take on this contentious yet engrained-in-every-school-book, Darwin nonsense, theory?
I believe human beings evolved in different places around the world; that we did not all originate from one single group in Africa. I wrote this in my book ‘The Evolution’.
The problem with that is how does one species evolve into another, single species at the same time in different places?
Well firstly there’s the Hundredth Monkey effect.
Secondly it’s been proved that certain basic creatures like bacteria can evolve at the same time all over the planet, so why not larger creatures (employing the Hundredth Monkey effect)? What about at different times, but almost concurrently?
We also have differences in human beings already existing on the planet – the three races – Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid. Science tells us these differences are apparent because we evolved these features after leaving Africa. I don’t believe that idea one bit. I think we evolved differently in these places at different times. In other words, we did not all evolve from a single group that left Africa.
So in this article we find that someone has finally had the balls to think outside the box.
We actually didn’t all evolve from a single group.
We evolved from different groups in different places.
The article still places these evolving features in Africa, but for now it’s good enough.
However, if it’s accepted that we evolved from different groups within Africa and then left the continent then that’s pretty much the same thing. What it does is finally destroy the original theory that we evolved from one group in Africa. And that’s the end game.
Slowly but surely, we’re getting there…
Oh, and I don’t care if I come across as an arrogant git, sometimes I have the right to do so!
People are quick to shoot you down but they disappear when you’re due recognition or a pat on the back.
I’ll let the article do the talking:
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/07/the-new-story-of-humanitys-origins/564779/
**Breaking News**
Ireland
The persistent heatwave over the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland that has led to numerous records being broken has also uncovered ancient sites that were previously unknown.
This large henge has been discovered at the Newgrange site in the Republic of Ireland, and is thought to be around 4,500 years old, although that’s clearly a guess as with most other archaeological announcements.
Either way, someone’s suddenly got a lot of work to do…
**Breaking News**
China
Stone tools 2.12 million years old have been found in China, pushing evidence of human ancestors outside Africa back by another 270,000 years. The previous record was in Georgia, 1.85 million years ago. Georgia is relatively close to Africa compared with China. This is one small step forward for our history books, but one giant leap backwards for the prevailing theory.
More head scratching I can sense is going on here, there and everywhere.
Of course I’m not surprised.
It goes on and on.
I’m just waiting for the smoking gun, the one that says, “Er, hang on chaps, we’ve got to alter the theory itself, not just the dates.”
It will happen.
It’s getting closer by the day.
Philippines
I’m honestly sitting here laughing, thinking how those poor researchers are scratching their heads and wondering yet again how to stretch and manipulate Darwin’s evolution, and the dates hominins and humans left Africa.
When is someone going to finally stand up and say, “Perhaps we need to scrap these theories and start again?”
But no, they just keep coming, evidence after article, one almost every day, destroying the models and screaming at us to rethink human evolution.
But still they keep with the old theory.
Still they keep scratching their heads, which by now must be so thick with stupidity that stupidity itself has become a solid object, measurable in a laboratory.
The previous date for the earliest hominins in thePhilippines was 67,000 years ago.
Well that fits nicely with the model, doesn’t it.
Now try this new one – 700,000 years ago.
Go on, give it a go…
Greece
A subject right up my lions gate – the Mycenaeans, my favourite of all ancient European cultures, and certainly the most fascinating.
First, I’m here yet again to expose another error – the second picture in this article says, “Grave Circle B”. Well, first of all that clearly isn’t a circle, and neither is it a grave. It is actually a part of the palace on the upper acropolis next to the megaron, the southernmost part of the palace, facing Argos, but who’s being pedantic?
Secondly, once again I have never agreed with the supposed demise of the Mycenaeans – large earthquakes.
Are you surprised I didn’t agree? Let’s face it, I don’t agree with much, but then again my conclusions are based on common sense, an ability that seems to be lacking in many a historian or archaeologist.
Having twice visited Mycenae and Tyrins, and once to Midea, it seems clear to anyone with a brain larger than a sheep that earthquakes did not cause their demise. Why? Because firstly it’s a cliche, a cop out, rather like “climate change” or some other convenient excuse based on modern science, or in this case the fact that Greece has more than its fair share of them, and secondly the cities are largely intact. When the outer walls of a city are still in place and thus the protection of the inhabitants still apparent, why would you move elsewhere and start again in a place where there is no such security? The answer is, you don’t. You rebuild the damaged structures inside the city and stay within the protective walls. This is what I mean by ‘common sense’. Because the alternative clearly has much less common sense and a lot more work and danger.
More sensible would be a lack of water (drought), warfare, disease, and so on. A lack of water requires a lot of transportation of a heavy substance across large distances and high altitude. Warfare and disease might wipe out the population entirely. That would certainly explain a culture’s “disappearance”. I also do not like the drought theory from most civilisation-ending disasters, certainly not in a place like Greece.
So here in this article we have yet another theory, so say.
But I’m not in favour of this either. Why?
Ancient cultures were not so black and white in their existence. Life is not so black and white. But western thinking is black and white, and therein lies the problem. What was occurring during these changes was not a single event or disaster. The complexities of the changes and shifts of life patterns, warfare, control, trade, and a hundred other aspects of life are so complex there cannot possibly be one simple reason why civilisations or cultures collapse and disappear.
It is about time we stopped these simplistic articles about what may have caused this and that, especially from so-called scholars who should know better than to make what is nothing more than a suggestion, seemingly more to make a name for themselves rather than contribute anything sensible to the table. And one certainly has to question them when they take years to come to these conclusions. One wonders if they even visit these historical sites in the first place.
Sweden
After the interesting article I posted a couple of days ago regarding research carried out by Maritza Villavicencio into the ancient Peruvian elite and that women held much higher positions of power than we currently believe, here we have a similar situation in Sweden.
A body, once assumed to be a male warrior simply because of the burial goods accompanying it, has turned out to be a female. Once again we find that archaeologists have to rethink their preconceived ideas and also we have to rewrite history. It beggars belief that we are still in an age where gender stereotypes are occurring – women wielded far more power in ancient times than they did up until very recently. Like the Darwin model of evolution, still the mindset and thought processes that dominate archaeology and history are often stuck in Victorian times.
Italy
A background story of Pompeii and Herculaneum and their destruction by Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD is not required here as everyone should know this story, and if you don’t – look it up! And shame on you too!
Pompeii itself is without doubt the best preserved ancient city in the world and its preservation is, of course, caused by the town being buried in hot ash from the pyroclastic flow that followed the eruption. Naturally the same fate was to befall its sister town, Herculaneum. It was Herculaneum, however, that would turn out to contain the best treasures – 1,800 scrolls, charred by the heat and fires and considered lost to history. But that could be about to change. An X-ray machine called a synchrotron might be able to reveal what’s written in the scrolls, and it could expose unknown writings from “Aristotle, Virgil, and Euripides.” If they did, they would be some of the best treasures ever discovered in the history of archaeology.
In my experience though, most scrolls turn out to be trading agreements, property deeds and even the odd shopping list or recipe!
Fingers crossed…
Peru
A ten-year study by Maritza Villavicencio suggests that women in ancient Peru weren’t just “priestesses” – high ranking in the religious elite – but were powerful monarchs who wielded immense power.
The article makes the point so there’s little for me to say, but I happen to agree with Maritza, since the annual procession during the Inti Raymi festival, still occurring today after more than 500 years*, clearly places the female – mother earth – in a high position alongside the sun king. Like most ancient cultures I think it’s clear women always had high status and were equal to men on many levels.
But that’s not all. Having spent almost a year in Peru and seen most of the main archaeological sites I never once saw a place where women were marginalised, given lesser burials, or seemed to have a lower status than men; Inca sacrifices of children were not sexually disproportionate.
I think it’s just logical. That’s it really. I’ll probably source a copy of Maritza’s book, I’m sure it will make intriguing reading.
* Some sources suggest the Inti Raymi festival has been occurring non-stop since the early 15th Century. The Spanish conquerors, however, outlawed the festival and it was reinvented in the 20th Century. It’s doubtful the current festival is anything like the original, especially since sacrificing children is illegal.
https://mg.co.za/article/2018-04-04-women-ran-things-in-ancient-peru-a-new-study-argues
Iraq
Look inside a fox burrow and what do you see?
An ancient port, fifteen feet (5m) deep and the size of more than nine Olympic swimming pools. Even Alice in Wonderland didn’t find such wonders down the rabbit hole.
That is exactly what happened in southern Iraq when archaeologists looked inside a fox hole and saw clay bricks that hinted of a structure, but no one could imagine what they would uncover.
The Italian team excavating the site not only found a harbour, but a canal that connected the harbour to the sea. But the astonishing thing is the sea is 200km away from the site, so how could there be a harbour at this desert site? The answer – the mighty rivers of ancient Iraq have deposited so much silt over the millennia, the sea is now at such a distance.
The article will reveal the rest of the details, but this discovery is one of the most remarkable this millennium, not only for its size but for its meaning – no Sumerian port has been discovered this far back in history…
Sumer is considered the first civilisation in history, in the context of what we would consider organised cities with specific facilities.
I have stated in many previous articles that I believe very strongly civilisation started in India, not with the Sumerians. For me there is a clue in this article which states, “The discovery confirms that the Sumerians, best known for creating one of the world’s earliest civilizations based on farming, had advanced seafaring skills too and were trading with distant lands, including the Indian subcontinent.”
The clue, of course, is in the last statement. Trading with India would mean only the Indus Valley civilisation, the place where I believe civilisation first started. Is it possible traders reached the Indus Valley culture and took these ideas to their own lands and built their own culture?
Mesopotamia is considered to have started “civilisation” around 6,000 years ago, but I believe in the Indus Valley civilisation it started as early as 8,000 years ago. Other findings have given other clues to this possibility. The 6,000-year-old sculpture of Lord Hanuman and Lord Rama found in Iraq shows a fully formed Hindu religion already in place at the time of the beginnings of Mesopotamian civilisation:
https://www.stephenmaybury.co.uk/6000-year-old-carving-of-lord-rama-and-lord-hanuman-found-in-iraq/
That discovery suggests something very profound – that India was indeed already highly advanced. And the location of the finding is also profound – Iraq and India were in communication 6,000 years ago.
But this port is only 4,000 years old, and the oldest known Sumerian port by a stretch. And that’s 2,000 years after the stone carving of Lord Hanuman and Lord Rama that was found in Iraq. Of course, this proves nothing in itself, but putting the pieces together slowly we can see that the Indus Valley culture is the likely source of civilisation – logical deduction makes the obvious conclusions.