Talk:Afanasievo culture

message: In the overwhelmigly Mongoloid surroundings, the Afanasyevo tribes belonged to the so-called paleo-European stock (Great Soviet Encyclopedia' sentry on Afanasyevo Culture). Perhaps this information is worthy of inclusion in our article? --Ghirlandajo 20:43, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  How old is this entry??2A02:8108:9640:AC3:6DFD:8A4F:5AB8:28FD (talk) 07:18, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled Comment

message: * Should this article be at Afanasievo, or Afanasyevo instead? Both have more google hits than Afanasevo (3,900; 1,840; vs 1,370) and google book hits (22, 7, 5). The Cambridge History of China and Charles Higham's Early Cultures of Mainland Southeast Asia both use Afanasievo; we should probably use the official Russian spelling of the name, if anyone knows what that may be--Confuzion 18:31, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In ALL romanization systems of Russian, except "Passport" (see Romanization of Russian) the "ь" (here in "Афана́сьевская культу́ра") is transliterated by variants of " ' ". Anything else is in fact misspelled. Nevertheless, for reasons of traceability from misspellings in the literature, these should be added as "misspelled". HJHolm (talk) 07:00, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: The cited work 'The Tarim Mummies' by  Mallory and Mair is probably the most up to date reference in English for this pre-historic culture, and in the light of this the reference in the Great Soviet Encyclopaedia above can be considered very outdated. The authors make clear that the presence of Indo-European pastoralists (Tocharians) in Central East Asia, specifically in the Tarim Basin and Turfan, preceded by many centuries that of the Chinese and the Turkic tribes, although the Tocharians were ultimately affected quite radically by the Hsiung-Nu, and the expansion of various Turkic tribal groupings in the early centuries CE. 
In reading Mallory's and Mair's book I felt that I would personally have benefited from a basic knowledge and understanding of the historic climatology of the regions in question which were, regrettably, scarcely touched upon, apart from the references to 'oasis agriculture'. Geoff Powers (talk) 16:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference

message: Diffs: , , . This user tries to insert his POV and false/wrong content using an unreliable source. --Zyma (talk) 19:27, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent POV-pushing (inserting non-RS) and edit warring 

message: The sentence
:"Yet, Tarim mummies are genetically closer to Andronovo culture than to Yamnaya culture or Afanasevo culture."
a minor tweak of the original added by User:Ilber8000, is sourced to two articles, Haak et al (2015) and Allentoft et al (2015).  However, Haak (which is focussed on European origins) does not mention Afanasevo, Andronovo or the Tarim.  Allentoft says Androvno is clearly distinct from Afanasevo and Yamnaya, which are genetically indistinguishable (p169), and mentions Mallory&Mair's suggestion that Afanasevo could be the origin of the Tocharians in the Tarim (p171), but has no mention of Tarim mummies.  Kanguole 13:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks; I've reverted myself. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tarim mummies 

message: "Afanasevo were genetically indistinguishable from Yamnaya people"</br>
Shouldn't it be grammatically improved? Maybe, the Afanasevans? Or the Afanasevo? Or the Yamna people?--Adûnâi (talk) 16:26, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I dared to correct some more stylistic nonsense.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8108:9640:AC3:7425:8AFD:E06A:C278 (talk) 13:43, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Afanasevo culture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20030827012358/http://members.chello.at/suedtirolerplatz/ethnologie/gesamtversionzas1_7.doc to http://members.chello.at/suedtirolerplatz/ethnologie/gesamtversionzas1_7.doc
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:30, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "from the pre-Yamnaya culture Repin culture" - So now changed according to the cited Anthony (2007=2010).2A02:8108:9640:AC3:40BD:40E1:A051:A933 (talk) 06:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Anthony has Khavalynsk and Repin in the same area (lower Volga), both antecedents of Yamnaya. The dates cited for Late Khavalynsk sites are a bit earlier than Repin, but these may not be comprehensive. Kanguole 11:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  The chronological sequence is Hvalynsk/Khvalynsk - Repin (contained in the following wiki)  - Yamnaya (A-B) - Catacomb.HJHolm (talk) 06:52, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repin BEFORE Yamnaya 

message: Because the long branch names tend to be changed every year, it is better to rely upon the defining main SNP. Thus I combined "Haplogroup R-M269|R1b1a1a2a(2)". See ISOGG for more information.2A02:8108:9640:AC3:39F5:C3F3:38E5:BB5D (talk) 08:01, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haplogroup terminology 

message: The statement referring to Mallory, is sloppily quoted and thus completely misleading. Correctly cited [differences capitalized], Mallory wrote, "Artistic representations of wheeled vehicles ENGRAVED ON STONE have been found within the region and have been attributed BY SOME to the Afanasevo culture (ALTERNATIVELY TO THE LATER OKUNEVO CULTURE)." This is as much as nothing. A representative overview of oldest vehicles and their probable relation to Indo-Europeans can be found in Holm (2019).2A02:8108:9640:AC3:A558:55B6:22F:781E (talk) 14:52, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  No vehicles proven 

message: Many thanks for the time-consuming work of extracting the genetics from the different sources. However, please note that newer studies generally include the results of older ones, which should not lead to the many undetected repetitions of the SNPs found, not only in this article.HJJHolm (talk) 13:49, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a summary, avoiding these doubles/overlappings.HJJHolm (talk) 08:34, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  New article on populational genetics of Xinjiang, showing some presence of Afanasievo: https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/14/eabd6690 189.122.57.144 (talk) 16:11, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics 

message: The map has several shortcomings. The author cites Anthony 2007, obviously not noting that Anthony 2007 is outdated because he dated the Afanas'evo migration 400 years later in his 2013 and 2017 papers. Further the author did not recognize that the cited remarks from Eurogenes blog (2017) are unsourced ad-hoc assumptions and complete nonsense. I propose to take the map out until this and more corrections.2A02:8108:9640:AC3:6DFD:8A4F:5AB8:28FD (talk) 07:33, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Migration of Yamnaya-related people" is contradicted and outdated as reported in the Text by the paper of Zhang et al. 2021!!! HJJHolm (talk) 14:17, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Migration map questionable 

message: The Genetics section heavily highlights uniparental lineages, to the point that Narasimhan et al. (2019) are claimed to have "interpreted these [=Y-DNA/mtDNA-related] results as evidence for a migration from the Pontic–Caspian steppe". All studies cited however mainly focus on full-genome allele-sharing (Narasimhan et al. is all about f4/f3-stats) and we should not give undue weight to secondary aspects of our sources. A haplogoup-focused reading of modern genomic studies is something that certain blogs do, but this should not be imitated in WP.  Any objections if I throw out the haplogroup cruft, or at least put it into a note? Austronesier (talk) 20:15, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: We certainly shouldn't be stating that, referring to the haplogroups,  if the authors don't actually say this. As far as I can tell, the authors do not state this anywhere in their paper or the supplement, but it is a bit late I suppose... Stick the haplogroupzzz counts in a note, I'll try and find a source that explicitly links the haplogroups to the Afanasievo migration (I think one does exist, somewhere...)  Tewdar  22:08, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Afanasievo genetics between ca. -3'200 and 2'500 mainly shows R1b-Z2103 with naturally mainly ANE, however, also a spur of WHG admixture in nearly all tested individuals (Narasimshan, Wang), from which we may conclude upon an origin from at least Eastern Europe, if not Yamnaya. Anything else would require some improbable parallel mutations. HJJHolm (talk) 06:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

text:  In addition: The sentence in sub para "Successors", "The Yamnaya and Afanasevo cultures were also found to be genetically distinct from the Andronovo culture.[5]" must be wrong because Allentoft (2018: 169) clearly state, "The Early Bronze Age Afanasievo culture in the Altai-Sayan region is genetically indistinguishable from Yamnaya, confirming an eastward expansion across the steppe (Figs 1 and 3b; Extended Data Fig. 2b and Extended Data Table 1), ...". This contradiction requires correction of that miscitation.HJJHolm (talk) 07:37, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This must be a misunderstanding. The statement is about the genetic difference between the Andronovo and Afanasievo populations. I will restore the previous text ("The Yamnaya and Afanasevo cultures were also found to be genetically distinct from the Andronovo culture"), since it is explicitly supported by the source: . –Austronesier (talk) 08:19, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics, again 

message: Indo-Europeanists have pursued an appealing narrative for some time now that the arrival of the Afanasievans (allow me to use this simplisitic identification of an archeological cultural complex with the people the associated with it) must somehow be linked to the introduction of the ancestral language of the Tocharian branch of Indo-European to this area. There were of course other (and later) archeological cultures with clear links to the western steppe (= Andronovo) that also expanded to the periphery of the Tarim Basin, but since they are generally held to be the precursors of the Indo-Iranians, this leaves the Afanasievo culture as a plausible candidate for the origin of the Tocharian languages, in spite of the huge temporal gap.
At the moment, we just have name dropping and a citebomb about this hypothesis in the lede section and a short mention in "Successors". Let's do a section about it of its own, with all the recent twists to earlier simplistic narratives (such as the "White Mummies" bullshit that circulated in the media and for which Victor Mair can be held responsible), especially with the groundbreaking paper by Zhang et al. (2021) that comes as a spoilsport to all who try to claim "ownership" of Xinjiang's past. In the end, history belongs to the people of the past that lived through it, and to no one else.
I'll fiddle around with a draft in the next days in my sandbox. Ping me if you're interested in joining. Austronesier (talk) 16:22, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afanasievo and (proto-)Proto-Tocharian 

message: Please update to "Poliakov et al.: A Review of the Radiocarbon Dates for the Afanasyevo Culture (Central Asia): Shifting Towards the “Shorter” Chronology. In: Radiocarbon 61-1 , Feb 2019 , S. 243–263; doi:10.1017/RDC.2018.70." Thank You. HJJHolm (talk) 09:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates outdated 

message: Thanks for the correction regarding the Afanasievo's "leapfrogging" across central central Asia. I did not anticipate that this would be in the very large Supplenentary Info file from Narasimhan 2019 (out of all the references), and so assumed it was just POV. One thing I must say however is that the quote you reference appears to be on page 229, rather than 235. Are we looking at the same file? I downloaded mine from the PubMed link. Regards, - Hunan201p (talk) 23:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I always take layout-dependent details like pagination from the publisher version, since even peer-reviewed accepted versions often are only saved as raw files (*.doc etc.) in repositories. The Science version of the SI has it on p. 235. –Austronesier (talk) 10:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Central Steppe EMBA