Early Cushites rode Oxen?

It's been a minute so I thought I'd come back with a quick and interesting post. A few years ago I caught something presented in the findings of Sada Mire that left me somewhat bemused. In her findings at Dhambalin she says:

One of the hunting scenes depicts two hunters together, one standing and another hunter sitting on an animal, perhaps a horse, and holding a bow and arrow in position to hit antelopes surrounding him. Horses are still found/kept in Somaliland. [1]

Yet this makes little sense because the Dhambalin site is pre-historic by Horn African standards, dating to around 5,000 to 3,000 years ago according to her own paper [1]. This is important because domesticated horses originally come from the Eurasian Steppe where they were first domesticated by the people of the Botai Culture about 5,500 years ago [2]:

They only begin to appear in the Middle East after this by about 4,200 years ago from the Eurasian Steppe. [2] This is important because the Middle-East would have been where domesticated horses would have to spread to the Horn from and, unsurprisingly, the earliest known examples of horse domestication in the Horn so far date later than this to the Aksumites from about 2,000 years ago. [3] [4]

In the Somali Peninsula in particular, horses may have been introduced even later. The linguistic evidence implies as much at least, as the Somali word for "horse" (faras) is a loanword from Arabic [5], indicating that horses were possibly introduced during the Islamic period, approximately 1,400 years ago or after.

The gist is that these depictions could not have been of horses if the site indeed dates to around 5,000 to 3,000 years ago. At that time, domesticated horses, much like domesticated camels [6], were not present in the Horn of Africa. 

Instead, the animals kept by Horn Africans' ancestors at this time would have consisted of cattle, goats, sheep, and donkeys [7], as well as shepherd or hunting dogs often depicted in the cave-paintings across Somalia. These were the animals they brought with them as they seemingly migrated into the Horn from what is now Sudan and Southern Egypt [7]:

So, how could these Cushitic pastoralists have been depicting the mounting of horses? Well, if the depictions are not the people who made them simply being fanciful, I suggest that the answer is the following:

Footage of Baggara Arabs riding cattle

The man and his child you see above who are riding an ox belong to the Baggara Arab people of Chad and Sudan. Baggara = Baqara/بقرة in Arabic which means "cow", hence the group's name. They are aptly named after cattle because of their peculiar tradition of riding them. 

This is relevant because the Baggara people appear to be quite influenced by Cushitic pastoralists who once expanded into what is now Chad and Western Sudan around 4,000 to 3,000 years ago before being absorbed by waves of Chadic and Nilo-Saharan speakers whom modern Arabic speakers such as the Baggara descend from. [8] This even appears to show itself in the ancestral make up of the Baggara:

(see notes section for details on chart)

I myself, as a layman, have also noticed Cushitic roots in their material culture and would not be shocked if trained anthropologists with more time and resources noticed far more. Like many nomadic macro-cultures, Cushitic nomads have their own characteristic tents the way the nomads of the MENA region use poled goat-hair tents ("Bayt al-sha'ar" in Arabic which means "House of Hair") and the nomads of the Eurasian steppe use Yurts/Gers. Cushites' mobile dwelling of choice was and is the domed mat-tent ("Aqal Soomaali" in the Somali language):

Bejas

Afars in Ethiopia

Somalis

Something the Baggara share in with Coastal Cushitic Pastoralists such as Bejas, Sahos, Afars and Somalis:

The mat-tent is a core part of Cushitic nomads' culture and was probably left behind by the ancient Cushitic speaking inhabitants of Chad after they were absorbed by the ancestors of now Arabic speakers like the Baggara as well as Nilo-Saharan speaking camel pastoralists like the Tobou:

From a linguistic point of view [8], Cushitic pastoralists also appear to have most likely been the earliest known source of pastoralism among these groups given that many of the words they left behind in the surrounding Chadic and Nilo-Saharan languages have to do with livestock such as cattle and the general pastoral way of life. 

So, the earliest known people the Baggara may trace their herding of cattle to would have been Cushitic speakers like those of the Somali Peninsula and here they are, to this day, living in the same sorts of tents those Cushitic speakers would have and seemingly tracing significant ancestry to them whilst probably displaying many other cultural influences I lack the time, resources and skills to notice. Who is to say their cattle riding is not one of them?

You probably understandably think I'm getting ahead of myself. But, there is another group of Cushitic influenced people whom we know got their pastoralist way of life entirely from Cushites and they too were known for the same peculiar practice:

Long before horses became the premier riding animals, oxen had filled this need. At least 150 years previously there were Khoikhoi riders on cattle on the south coast, and on the lower Orange River by 1661. From them, the Xhosa had acquired riding skills by 1686. [10]

As shown in the depiction above and supported by the quote, the Khoekhoe of South Africa displayed cattle riding long before the introduction of horses. This is important because we know that they got got their pastoral way of life from South-Cushitic pastoralists. These South-Cushitic pastoralists are known to have appeared in Kenya and Tanzania around 4,000 to 3,000 years ago where they are believed to have made contact with the Khoekhoe's ancestors and influenced them [11], after prior arriving in the Horn possibly as early 5,500 years ago [12][13].

In Khoekhoe's case we have known for about a decade through peer-reviewed population genetic studies that they trace ancestry to these ancient Cushitic speaking pastoralists. We furthermore have evidence of Cushitic linguistic and cultural influences noticed by anthropologists beyond just the pastoralism itself. [14] Right down to the mat-tent:

Due to all of this evidence, they are outright accepted by academics to have gotten their pastoralist way of life from Cushitic speaking pastoralists who expanded out of the Horn. And much like the Baggara seem to have, the Khoekhoe have also preserved the original cattle focused pastoralism of early Cushitic nomads; unlike Bejas, Sahos, Afars and Somalis whose ancestors shifted to camel focused pastoralism within the last 2,000 to 3,000 years seemingly due to influences from Arabia. [6] 

It might be a stretch but I think the pre-historic rock-art in Somalia is in fact depicting people riding cattle, particularly oxen as in the case of the Baggara and Khoekhoe, and that these two groups preserved this ancient practice the same way they preserved other elements of early Cushites' culture.

It weaves together quite nicely. We have pre-historic Cushites who appear in the Horn about 5,500 years ago depicting what is possibly cattle riding sometime between then and 3,000 years ago then we have two geographically distant groups—whose ancestors were influenced by them sometime between 3,000 and 4,000 years ago—showing the practice. While not completely open and shut, it seems plausible that pre-historic Cushites practiced cattle riding and possibly even mounted archery as shown in the cave paintings in Somalia:

One of the hunting scenes depicts two hunters together, one standing and another hunter sitting on an animal, perhaps a horse, and holding a bow and arrow in position to hit antelopes surrounding him Horses are still found/kept in Somaliland.[1]

If true, this is remarkable—as it means early Cushites practiced mounted archery before it emerged on the Eurasian Steppe during the Iron Age [15], making them the earliest known humans to do so. They may also have been the first to ride animals, as the evidence suggests they likely practiced cattle riding before 4,000 years ago, approaching 5,000 years ago, during their time in the Horn. This assumption being based on their migrations into Chad, Kenya, and Tanzania after the Horn* by 3,000 to 4,000 years ago, where they appear to have already carried this practice given the Baggara and Khoekhoe. 

If cattle riding originated earlier in Neolithic Sudan, before 5,500 years ago where the upper limit lies for their appearance in the Horn, they would predate the Botai culture as the first known humans to ride animals, and are at minimum their contemporaries if the range of cattle-riding's development falls within 4,000 to 5,500 years.

References

1. Mire S. The discovery of Dhambalin rock art site, Somaliland. African Archaeological Review. 2008. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/4080948/The_Discovery_of_Dhambalin_Rock_Art_Site_Somaliland

2. Librado P, Tressières G, Chauvey L, et al. Widespread horse-based mobility arose around 2200 BCE in Eurasia. Nature. 2024;631(819–25). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07597-5

3. Finneran N. The archaeology of Ethiopia. Routledge; 2007. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203821183/archaeology-ethiopia-niall-finneran?

4. Munro-Hay S. Aksum: An African civilisation of late antiquity. Edinburgh University Press; 1991. Available from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2ARnUeK-Y8WSF9uVEo2OGpMSkk/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-fdIdGXk_s_aNdrcaZJLdAA

5. Soffer G. 6000+ Arabic - Somali Somali - Arabic vocabulary. Gilad Soffer; n.d. Available from: https://www.google.com/books/edition/6000+_Arabic_Somali_Somali_Arabic_Vocabu/CHelBQAAQBAJ?hl=en&kptab=morebyauthor&gbpv=1&bsq=faras

6. Banti G. Strata in Semitic loanwords in Northern Somali. 2013. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/5529034/2013_Strata_in_Semitic_loanwords_in_Northern_Somali

7. Ehret C. History and the testimony of language. University of California Press; 2010. Available from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lZvvj7iJSOlnuytJV7-yWpjXqlyWxhf4/view?usp=sharing

8. Blench R. The westward wanderings of Cushitic pastoralists: Explorations in the prehistory of Central Africa. 2008. Available from: https://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/pleins_textes_7/divers2/010020136.pdf

10.  The Reins of Power: Equine Ecological Imperialism in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. In: Riding High. Cambridge University Press; 2019. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/riding-high/reins-of-power-equine-ecological-imperialism-in-the-seventeenth-and-eighteenth-centuries/F217FC987506E0C727F496DBFA9664EE

11. Blench R. Language, Archaeology and the African Past. Cambridge: Altamira Press; 2005. Available from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iHR5WP2KKaQMpJG3j9X_loFus9s1DWO9/view?usp=sharing

12. Negash A. Regional Variation of the Rock Art of Ethiopia: a Geological Perspective. 2018. Available from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12tObLKQiNK1gvXxRrYOQV9WE4DtIRYzx/view?usp=sharing

13. Richardin P. The decorated shelters of Laas Geel and the rock art of Somaliland. 2011. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/1471836/The_decorated_shelters_of_Laas_Geel_and_the_rock_art_of_Somaliland

14. Blench R. Was there an interchange between Cushitic pastoralists and Khoisan speakers in the prehistory of Southern Africa and how can this be detected? Presented at Königswinter, March 28-30, 2007. Cambridge: Kay Williamson Educational Foundation; 2008. Available from: http://www.rogerblench.info/Archaeology/Africa/Konigswinter%202007/Konigswinter%20paper.pdf

15. Holmes R. Horse Archers: The Feared Unit of Ancient and Medieval Warfare. The Collector. 2023 Sep 4. Available from: https://www.thecollector.com/horse-archers/

References for all unlinked images in the order they appear

1. Haaland G. Amballa, Lower Wadi Azum, Darfur Before. 1965. Available from: https://ubdarfur.w.uib.no/2013/01/27/photo-84-ubb-haa-33/

2. Haaland G. Western foothills of Jebel Marra, Western Darfur, Darfur Before. 1965. Available from: https://ubdarfur.w.uib.no/2013/01/27/photo-83-ubb-haa-70/

3. Haaland G. Lower Wadi Azum, Western Darfur, Darfur Before. 1965. Available from: https://ubdarfur.w.uib.no/2013/01/27/photo-80-ubb-haa-283/

4. Hemis. Chad Southern Sahara desert Ennedi massif Archei Toubou nomad camp, Alamy Stock Photo. 2011. Available from: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-chad-southern-sahara-desert-ennedi-massif-archei-toubou-nomad-camp-70372606.html

5. Hemis. Chad Southern Sahara desert Ennedi massif Archei Toubou nomad camp, Alamy Stock Photo. 2011. Available from: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-chad-southern-sahara-desert-ennedi-massif-archei-toubou-nomad-camp-70372630.html

6. Johnston K. Khoisan Natives Riding Pack Oxen In Africa In The 19th Century. From Africa. 1884. Available from: https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/khoisan-natives-riding-pack-oxen-in-africa-in-the-19th-news-photo/188005112

7. Daniell S. Khoikhoi of South Africa dismantling their huts, preparing to move to new pastures—aquatint. 1805. Available from: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ritual-cemeteries-cows-humans-pastoralist-expansion-across-africa-180970683/

8. Ratzel F. Khoikhoi People Building Huts, Southern Africa, Illustration from "Volkerkunde," Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig. 1885. Available from: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-khoikhoi-people-building-huts-southern-africa-illustration-from-the-133334548.html

Notes

The chart results are from using samples from the Eurogenes G25 datasets and the Vahaduo tool as explained over Eurogenes. I then plugged the numbers into a google sheet and made my chart. The Eurogenes samples in turn come from studies featuring Baggara Arabs, a Savanna Pastoral Neolithic sample from Hyrax Hill in Kenya 2,300 years ago (Cushitic Pastoralist), Naqab Bedouin B samples (Peninsular Arab), Dinkas (Nilotic), Yorubas (West-African) and Third Intermediate Period Egyptians (Iron-Age Egyptian) all to be found in the various studies the Eurogenes dataset draws its samples from (see Eurogenes blog post linked).

* They appear in the Horn before they seem to have been in Chad, Kenya and Tanzania but it's important to point out that Blench, probably correctly, assumes the migration into Chad was from Sudan rather than from the Horn. 

800 CE Po-pa-li is not Somalia but 1100 CE Pi-pa-lo is?

Over a year ago, in a post, I delved into a Chinese account by an author named Duan Chengshi (died around circa. 863 CE) where he mentioned a region called Po-pa-li which is often assumed, by various authors, to be a predecessor to Berbera or to be talking about North-Central Somalia as a whole:

It seems the author the above text comes from believes this to correspond with the Greek's more southerly "Barbaroi" region (North-Central Somalia) rather than, like some authors, tying it simply to the settlement of Berbera in particular. And honestly, after giving this a good read, it does not seem to be to be a description of people from North-Central Somalia during the 700-800s CE for the following reasons:

• Main exports: This country of Po-pa-li seems to mainly export Elephant's teeth (ivory) and ambergris, as these are the only products mentioned as exports by Duan Chengshi. However, both products are mentioned by earlier Greco-Roman sources to be minor exports when dealing with North-Central Somalia. Ivory being exported in abundance, for example, would fit more with Southern Somalia (or areas more south of it) so it would make no sense for this to be Berbera or North-Central Somalia based on these seemingly being the main exports. Where's the Frankincense and Myrrh?

• Etymology: The author seems to be connecting Po-pa-li to "Barbaroi/Barbara/Barbar" via "Put-Pat-lik" in what appears to be Cantonese and proposes that this corresponds with "Barbaric". This makes no sense at all. "Barbaric", despite ultimately coming from the Greek word "Barbaroi", was not a word used in that English form at that time & place at all so the Chinese couldn't have derived "Put-pat-lik" from that. I'm actually wondering if I'm reading them wrong because it's odd that they'd make such an argument.

• Arms & Armor: For the weapons present, the account says these people used ivory and oxen horns for bladed weaponry like halberd-type weapons whilst wearing armor (other translations write "armor" specifically as "cuirass") and utilizing bows and arrows seemingly in abundance. This implies that these people, even if they were familiar with metals, had ivory and oxen horns available in such abundance that they probably found them to be cheaper materials to use for making things like spear-heads. This does not sound like people who lived around modern Berbera or even North-Central Somalia who wouldn't have had such an abundance of Elephants in their general area.

• Presence of Slaving: In North-Central Somalia, we do have Greco-Roman sources such as the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea which stipulate that the exporting of slaves was present as a practice, albeit it was noted to be rare. But this indicates the state of such trade prior to the advent of Islam in the region by roughly the 7th to 10th centuries CE. Later on, around 11th-13th centuries, it's mentioned by Islamic/Arab sources that the people on the Somali coast did not trade themselves out as slaves because they were Muslims, unlike a good number of the people in Bilad al-Zanj to the south. Yet, this account by Duan Chengshi mentions that these pastoralists sell some of their countrymen whom they capture as prisoners. Now, it's possible that the 800s CE is rather early and Islamization had not fully taken root in various areas so some slaving was practiced by the locals but if Islam was present; this is rather odd as the Muslims present presumably wouldn't have sold fellow Muslims, at least not notably. 

• Type of Pastoralism: All we get from this description is that these people have cattle and practice what has been documented as a historic custom among Erythraeic (my preferred term for "Cushitic") speaking semi-nomadic pastoralists (the drinking of cattle blood with milk). There's no mention of sheep, goats or camels. Camel domestication would have been present around Berbera or North-Central Somalia at this point in history but this description sounds like it's one of a people who were mainly cattle-pastoralists, like the Maasai.

This is all makes me think "Po-pa-li" was a region farther south of the Horn of Africa or perhaps even far south into Southern Somalia rather than at all indicating that what we're reading about is a predecessor to modern Berbera or North-Central Somalia as a whole.

What's even more damning is that this same author shares a different Chinese account of later origins (1100s CE) owed to Zhao Rugua which speaks of a country on the East African coast called "Pi-pa-lo" (assumed to be the Somali coast) and it fits with not just one part of but being nearly the whole of the Somali coast much more than the "Po-pa-li" of the 800s CE:

Let's take into account all of the things this country has together all at once:

• Abundance of pastoralist livestock such as camels, goats, sheep and cattle.
• A people with a mainly pastoral diet which consists of meat and milk with "cakes" on top (perhaps their way of referring to something like Canjeero/Laxoox/Injera?).
• Presence of Rhinos, Elephants, Giraffes, Ostriches and what sound to possibly be Somali Wild Asses ("mule" with black, white and brown stripes on it).
• There is Myrrh and Ambergris in this country.
• Some semblance of pre-modern urbanism was to be found (four prominent cities/towns are mentioned by the Chinese source).
• The people "worship heaven" which, I suppose, would refer to a heavenly God which fits with the worship of Allah by Muslims and, oddly, even the worship of the Sky-God Waaq [3].

The Somali coast, or what Medieval Arab/Islamic sources knew as "Bilad al-Barbar" (Somali coast roughly from Zeila down to Mogadishu or areas somewhat south of Mogadishu like the mouth of the Jubba river) is perhaps the only place on the East African coast where all of these things can be found together. 

For example, the Eritrean coast once had some Rhinos present and, to this day, has several semi-nomadic pastoralist peoples who herd camels, sheep, goats and cattle present on its coast whilst having, to this day, a small Elephant population but it didn't have Giraffes. 

Also, Tanzania and Kenya might have had most of the animals mentioned but they didn't really have camels except for some areas of Kenya, I suppose. But also, these regions' coastal inhabitants did not practice a semi-nomadic pastoralist way of life or have that sort of diet so the description of the people's diet and the emphasis on their livestock conflicts with these being people on the Zanj/Swahili coast who would have mostly been sedentary farmers and fishermen.

Historical and 1987 range of Rhinos

The author is quite right, in my humble opinion, to tie this "Pi-pa-lo" region with the Berbera/Barbar/Somali coast. It mostly fits very well as a description of that region of East Africa although certainly not as a description of solely North-Central Somalia or the area where we now find the city of Berbera, given the mentioning of Giraffes, for example.

The etymology also makes somewhat more sense this time. "Pi-pa-lo", according to the author, comes from "Pat-pa-lo" in Cantonese which makes better sense as some sort of bastardization of "Barbara" or some such (he roughly picks up on this too).

Range of various Ostrich species

At any rate, I'm currently rather skeptical that "Po-pa-li" was actually a description of the Somali coast. I'm particularly sure it wasn't referring specifically to the area where modern Berbera now sits, or even North-Central Somalia. Perhaps it was referring to people somewhere along Southern Somalia given the Elephants, however? A people who had yet to become Muslims, hence the slaving? A people who possibly had not yet adopted camel domestication given the lack of camels in the description (they sound like they were mainly cattle-pastoralists)?

I don't know and can't be sure that this region wasn't really where authors traditionally think it was but that's just my personal view after reviewing the Chinese account again. However, the the "Pi-pa-lo" region described much later (1100s CE), sounds much more blatantly like it fits with what the medieval Islamic/Arab world knew as Bilad al-Barbar.

References

1. Early Chinese Notices of East African Territories, by Friedrich Hirth

2. The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, translated by Wilfred H. Schoff

3. Wagar, Fertility and Phallic Stelae: Cushitic Sky-God Belief and the Site of Saint Aw-Barkhadle, Somaliland by Sada Mire

Notes

1. This is actually an old post I 90% completed during early 2017. I got busy back then and it just sort of fell into the back-burner until I forgot about it. Noticed it again recently and just cleaned up a little for posting...

2. Feel free to point out any mistakes I may have made in the comments (or point out something I may have missed), this is an old subject I'm still a little intrigued by.

Southeast & Southern African Ancient DNA

Alright, this post is long overdue and I've hopefully got some interesting data to share based on these now relatively new samples from Skoglund et al. 2017.

First, I'd like to take the time to compare modern Horn-Africans to the Tanzanian-Pastoralist sample of most likely South-Erythraeic speaking origins and then I'll address this intriguing "East-South Hunter-Gatherer cline" then finally dig into what this says about South-Erythraeic speaker admixture in Southeast and Southern-Africa. (if you're confused by the word "Erythraeic" go here)

The Horn's later genomic tack-ons

One thing a person might catch right off the bat when reading the study is that it points out that modern Horn-Africans, Somalis included, based on formal-stats, seem to share drift with both Neolithic Levantines and Iranians whereas the Southeast African Pastoralist from 3,000 years ago only seems to share drift with Neolithic Levantines:

We found that the 3,100 BP individual (Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP), associated with a Savanna Pastoral Neolithic archeological tradition, could be modeled as having 38% ± 1% of her ancestry related to the nearly 10,000-year-old pre-pottery farmers of the Levant (Lazaridis et al.,2016), and we can exclude source populations related to early farmer populations in Iran and Anatolia. 

...

While these findings show that a Levant-Neolithic-related population made a critical contribution to the ancestry of present-day eastern Africans (Lazaridis et al., 2016), present-day Cushitic speakers such as the Somali cannot be fit simply as having Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP ancestry. The best fitting model for the Somali includes Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP ancestry, Dinka-related ancestry, and 16% ± 3% Iranian-Neolithic-related ancestry (p = 0.015). This suggests that ancestry related to the Iranian Neolithic appeared in eastern Africa after earlier gene flow related to Levant Neolithic populations, a scenario that is made more plausible by the genetic evidence of admixture of Iranian-Neolithic-related ancestry throughout the Levant by the time of the Bronze Age (Lazaridis et al., 2016) and in ancient Egypt by the Iron Age (Schuenemann et al., 2017)

Seems somewhat sensible but also surprising to me. I'd have expected, based on previous data (both formal-stats and ADMIXTURE based), that Somalis didn't have Iranian-Neolithic admixture which, based on my past opinions, would've possible come to the Horn with two-waves; a wave a little before 3,000ybp from Sudan tacked-onto Highlander Erythraeic speaking populations like Agaws and a wave around 2,500-3,000ybp owed to the Proto-Ethiosemitic speaking community. 

distance%=0.5261

         Somali

Dinka 54.1
Natufian 40.2
Iran-Chalcolithic 4.4
Mota 1.3

distance%=0.9658

         Tigray-Tigrinya

Natufian 46.7
Dinka 35.3
Mota 9.3
Iran-Chalcolithic 8.7 

 distance%=0.5303

         Tanzania-Luxmanda-3000ybp

Natufian 41
Mota 33.5
Dinka 25.5
Iran-Chalcolithic 0

But now, as you can see above, both formal-stat methods like those of this study and nMonte utilizing PCA positions (Global10 in the case above and all cases below) find that Somalis, Habeshas and Agaws have ancestry related to Neolithic Iranians and Caucasus Hunter-Gatherers (about 60-70% of the ancestry in Chalcolithic Iranians).

Albeit, I'd say these nMonte results are vastly more sensible than the study's findings. 16 ± 3% is frankly senseless for Somalis. It would require being so Bronze-Age Levantine-like in ancestry that there is simply no way past formal stat runs like those of Pickrell et al. 2013 or ADMIXTURE runs like those of Hodgson et al. 2014 wouldn't have significantly picked up on it nor would models like these fail so miserably with nMonte:

distance%=1.9356

         Somali

Dinka 57.8
Levant Bronze-Age 42.2
Mota 0

distance%=1.7632

         Somali

Dinka 55.6
Yemenite-Jew 44.4
Mota 0

There's also no way we wouldn't have an abundance of very recent looking Y-DNA and mtDNA ties with populations like Arabians and Levantines which we largely don't, as I've outlined in the past. So, I'd say something like 3-5% Chalcolithic-Iranian-like ancestry owed, most likely, to being about 8-10% derived from a likely ancient Arabian population- :

distance%=0.5402

         Somali

Dinka 53.7
Natufian 34.6
Yemenite-Jew 9.7
Mota 2

distance%=0.5415

         Somali

Dinka 53.6
Natufian 33.7
Saudi 10.4
Mota 2.3

-is much more sensible. I say likely ancient Arabian because I managed to send Davidski over at Eurogenes 3 Copts to average out then put into Global-10 PCA so that we could see how well they fit, in comparison to the Saudi and Yemenite-Jewish samples, for Horners like Somalis and Tigrinyas:

distance%=0.5863

         Somali

Dinka 52.7
Natufian 35.3
Egyptian-Copt 9.3
Mota 2.7

distance%=1.0551

         Tigray-Tigrinya

Natufian 36
Dinka 32.4
Egyptian-Copt 19.7
Mota 11.9

distance%=0.9257

         Tigray-Tigrinya

Dinka 34.5
Natufian 34.3
Yemenite-Jew 20.7
Mota 10.5

distance%=0.8991

         Tigray-Tigrinya

Dinka 34.5
Natufian 31.6
Saudi 23.1
Mota 10.8

The better fitting is only slightly in favor of the Arabian groups but is still there, and nMonte will consistently choose them over Egyptian-Copts if both are present. This has me wondering if my long-time friend and I were incorrect about the "earlier wave" I mentioned before and if Southwestern Arabians speaking Proto-Ethiosemitic are responsible for all of the later MENA admixture in the Horn.

As for how Somalis got it... I honestly can't say with any certainty. We need more ancient DNA from the Horn, Egypt, Sudan and Arabia. From the northern Ethiopian-Highlands, from the northerly areas of the Somali Peninsula, from Yemen, from Sudan, from Egypt... Only then can we be definitive about all of this.

More of this...

Nevertheless, I suppose it's possible, given the presence of Musnad inscriptions across northerly areas of the Somali Peninsula [5], that, despite not linguistically shifting, our ancestors too were affected by migrants from Southwestern Arabia or perhaps this is a sign of inter-mixing within the Horn itself? I doubt the latter more because we don't show all that much Mota-related ancestry.

But on that note, you maybe wondering why the 3,000ybp pastoralist has so much Mota ancestry and, in truth, I don't believe that is Mota-related ancestry from the Horn itself but more likely admixture from Hunter-Gatherers found in Southeast & Southern Africa:

distance%=0.893

         Tanzania-Luxmanda-3000ybp

Dinka 47
Natufian 44.9
South-Africa-2000ybp 8.1

distance%=0.8759

         Tanzania-Luxmanda-3000ybp

Dinka 44.4
Natufian 43.9
Malawi-Hora-Holocene 11.7

distance%=0.5303

         Tanzania-Luxmanda-3000ybp

Natufian 41
Mota 33.5
Dinka 25.5

For one, I think the sheer magnitude of Mota-like ancestry is a bit hard to sell, especially considering how much Natufian-like ancestry is still left over. nMonte probably just prefers Mota because he has far more Dinka-like ancestry than the Southeast and Southern African HGs. In reality, my bet, especially given the presence of mtDNA L0f (often found in groups like Southeast African HGs) even among modern South-Erythraeic speaker descended peoples, the scenario went something like this:

• South-Erythraeic speaking pastoralists made up of mostly Dinka-like ("East-African") and Natufian/LNF-related ancestry began migrating into Southeast Africa before 3,000ybp.

• Once they got to areas like Southeast and Southern Africa, they not only started contributing ancestry to some local Hunter-Gatherer populations but acquired admixture from them as well.

Thus explaining why the 3,000ybp pastoralist sample is about ~20% or so less Dinka-like than Somalis according to Skoglund et al. 2017 (~10% in nMonte runs). Time and more ancient DNA will either affirm or refute the above... And as for why ancestry owed to Southeast and Southern African HGs could be mistaken for Mota-like ancestry, that will be addressed in the next section of this post.

But, I'd conclude this section by pointing out that the story of the Horn's admixtures looks like this so far to my eyes:

• Most likely somewhere in the Egypt-Sudan area Dinka-like and Natufian-like people intermix over-time to form the peoples who, to this day, make-up the most significant portion of most Erythraeic and Ethiosemitic speaking Horn-Africans' ancestry. (I'd say this is what the Tanzanian Pastoralist is overwhelmingly descended from)

• These eventual people happen to be, in my humble opinion, a part of the Sudanese-Neolithic and begin moving into the Horn sometime around 5,000-7,000ybp. They eventually also acquire admixture from the earlier inhabitants of areas such as the Ethiopian Highlands (some of whom were most likely Omotic speakers) at levels of 1-25% over the last several millennia.

• Also, around 2,500-3,000ybp, the Horn begins to see some slight incursions from Southwestern Arabia bringing in new layers of Anatolian and Iranian Neolithic related ancestry into the region (as well as Ethiopian-Semitic). And, to my complete surprise, even Omotic speakers such as Aris were not spared eventually acquiring this sort of ancestry:

distance%=0.4581

         Ari-Blacksmith

Mota 62.8
Dinka 18.1
Natufian 10.8
Saudi 8.3

distance%=0.3949

         Ari-Cultivator

Mota 60.7
Dinka 19.9
Natufian 11.7
Saudi 7.7 

I'm still a little taken aback by this and for months was skeptical (still slightly am) but if various distinct analyses methods are finding these same sort of results on a base level which is that modern Horn-Africans (including Somalis and Aris) have post Chalcolithic influences from the Middle-East whilst the 3,000ybp pastoralist lacks these elements; it must indeed be the case.
 

The East-South Hunter-Gatherer cline

Now this concerns why the Malawi Hunter-Gatherer ("Hora-Holocene") from about 8,100 years ago can prove, to some extent, a stand-in for Mota. This is because the study has discovered something quite intriguing which is that there once existed a cline between Southern African HGs (a more "pure" version of the modern San) and East-African HGs (essentially the "East African" cluster I've always been on about):

The genetic cline correlates to geography, running along a north-south axis with ancient individuals from Ethiopia (~4,500 BP), Kenya (~400 BP), Tanzania (both ~1,400 BP), and Malawi (~8,100–2,500 BP), showing increasing affinity to southern Africans (both ancient individuals and present-day Khoe-San). The seven individuals from Malawi show no clear heterogeneity, indicating a long-standing and distinctive population in ancient Malawi that persisted for at least ~5,000 years (the minimum span of our radiocarbon dates) but which no longer exists today.

Some of the later individuals along this cline do seem to have Erythraeic speaker related admixture alongside the deeper layer of SA-HG and EA:

distance%=0.3755

         Tanzania-Zanzibar-1400ybp

South-Africa-2000ybp 46.5
Dinka 29.1
Tanzania-Luxmanda-3000ybp 18.2
Onge 6.2

With even later individuals acquiring admixture from the Bantu-Expansion such as the Kenya-500ybp and and Tanzania-Pemba-700ybp. But more on that with the next section... In this section what's most interesting for me to note is that it seems like, before the arrival of South-Erythraeic speakers and the eventual arrival of Bantu speakers; Southeast Africa was once a sort of nexus point between ancient peoples rich in ancestry related to East-African cluster and ancient people rich in South-African HG-related ancestry.

And before what was likely the Proto-Agäw-East-South Erythraeic speaking community swooped in, the Horn too, based on Mota and modern Omotic speakers like Aris, was probably also a part of this nexus point. I'm also reminded of longstanding reports and archaeology purporting that the indigenous population of Southern Somalia were "San-like" Hunter-Gatherers. [5]

What's interesting about this is that it implies, at least to me, that just north of the Horn, in areas such as Sudan (North & South) and the Chad, was likely a much more pristine "East-African" population given how you can find a more pristine South-African HG population once you go deep enough into Southern Africa's pre-history and, of course, given the presence of populations (Dinkas et al.) very rich in such ancestry in that general vicinity even today.

So, Southeast Africa and the Horn were probably once genetically sandwiched between these two clusters, one probably around Sudan and Chad and one mainly stationed around Southern Africa and it was the introduction of Natufian-like ancestry from North-Africa (discounting areas of Northeast Africa south of Egypt) and West-African related ancestry by the likes of Bantu and Nilotic speakers that broke up this zone's prior genomic diversity.

But, if you're wondering about at the "Onge" the ancient Zanzibar sample is showing, it seems to also pop up in Mota as well as the Malawi HG from 8,100ybp:

 distance%=1.1744

         Mota

Dinka 58.2
South-Africa-2000ybp 24.9
Onge 9.5
Natufian 7.4

distance%=0.7838

         Malawi Hora-Holocene

South-Africa-2000ybp 68.5
Dinka 18.8
Natufian 5.4
Onge 5.3
Tianyuan 2

It's not real Eurasian admixture as these individuals would seem unadmixed if analyzed using formal-stat methods like qpAdm (plus, it's way too broad to be real. I mean, Natufian, Onge and Tianyuan?!). It just seems to me that the Global10 PCA is probably picking up on how the ancient East-African cluster related ancestry in them has some mild sort of affinity for Eurasians. What to actually focus on are the Dinka-like and South-Africa HG-like elements.

South-Erythraeic speaker admixture in Southeast and Southern Africa

As some readers may know, I've pointed out several times in the past, based on modern DNA, that there was Horn-African related admixture in Southeast Africa (admixture similar to most of the ancestry in ethnic groups like Somalis and Oromos), something past academics have also argued using modern DNA and even linguistics as well as cultural anthropology.

And it's now quite nice to get to say that ancient DNA backs this up. The Savanna Pastoral Neolithic brought pastoralism to Southeast and Southern Africa as well as certain cultural elements (i.e. mat-tents as mentioned here) and, intriguingly, some admixture as well. 

The Tanzania-Luxmanda sample unfortunately has significant Southern-Africa HG related ancestry so she may not prove a pristine enough example of the early population that moved in Southeast Africa from the Horn and eventually contributed to groups such as the Maasai, Tutsis, Datoogas and so on but she'll have to do for now:

distance%=0.3799

         Masai-Kinyawa

Tanzania-Luxmanda-3000ybp 50.8
Dinka 48.9

distance%=0.7887

         Ju-hoan-North

South-Africa-2000ybp 89.3
Tanzania-Luxmanda-3000ybp 10.7

distance%=0.9106

         Hadza

Dinka 46.4
South-Africa-2000ybp 25.2
Tanzania-Luxmanda-3000ybp 22.7
Onge 5.7

And it seems like the Hadza are, similar to Aris, a modern relic of the old East-South cline, albeit with some admixture from Erythraeic speaking people from the Horn similar to much of the ancestry in Somalis and the Tanzanian-Luxmanda sample. So, in the end, Southeast Africa is quite the demographically interesting place, having been contributed to by the East-South cline, later Erythraeic, Nilotic and Bantu speaking migrants, some minor post Iron-Age MENA elements in groups such as coastal Swahilis and, on top of this, we're probably underestimating the effect Mambuti (Mbuti) related Hunter-Gatherers had over-time as well as I personally wasn't able to even put them in my runs given that they aren't present in the Global10 datasheet.

But at any rate, I think I'll leave it at that for now regarding this paper's myriad of intriguing findings. Hope this was interesting for anybody reading. 

References

1. Reconstructing Prehistoric African Population Structure, Skoglund et al.

2. Ancient west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa, Pickrell et al.

3. Early Back-to-Africa Migration into the Horn of Africa, Hodgson et al. 2014

4. Mapping the Archaeology of Somaliland: Religion, Art, Script, Time, Urbanism, Trade and Empire by Sada Mire 

5. Culture and Customs of Somalia by Mohammed Diriye Abdullahi 

Note:

1. This is a rather old post I just touched up and decided to post today. There's honestly a bit more (and maybe even conflicting) data on this now and I'll try to touch on that later.

3,000ybp Pastoralist proves an old point

Well, a while ago now I pointed out that, simply using modern DNA, various Southeast Africans clearly looked partly descended from peoples closely related to modern Somalis and other Horn-Africans of Erythraeic and Ethiosemitic speaking origins (see here and here) and it seems ancient DNA is now backing this up:

[1] "distance%=0.3802 / distance=0.003802"

Masai_Kinyawa

Tanzania_Luxmanda_3000BP 50.7
Dinka 49.3


That's an nMonte model above utilizing a new 3,000 year old pastoralist sample from Tanzania belonging to the Savanna Pastoral Neolithic culture strongly tied to South-Erythraeic speaking people who began leaving the Horn of Africa for Southeast Africa some 3,000-4,000 years ago. You can see the fit is decent, showing significant Savanna Pastoral Neolithic related ancestry in this average for the Maasai Kinyawa samples in the Global-10 PCA.

We owe this new sample to a study headed up by Pontus Skoglund and it comes with a lot more details I'll be poring over to some extent quite soon but for now; I'm just putting this paper out there and sharing that we finally have some aDNA backing for what modern DNA, archaeology and linguistics have been positing for quite a while now regarding South-Erythraeic speakers and their influencing of Southern and Southeastern Africa.

Do read the study in the meantime, though.


References:


Reconstructing Prehistoric African Population Structure, Skoglund et al.

Kostenki-14's Craniofacial Morphology

Saw this post over at Eurogenes and felt I had to read the study being shared. The study Eurogenes' author shared makes two main claims:

• That Kostenki-14, a 36,200-38,700 year old European, does not look like Papuans and Melanesians (Australo-Melanesians) as previously claimed by authors such as M.M Gerasimov and G.F. Gebets.

• That Kostenki-14 supposedly fits with what they call the "Caucasian complex".

The first statement would make some sense and, as far as I recall, craniometric data on other Upper-Paleolithic Europeans didn't tend to imply a strong similarity to Papuans or Melanesians or the like.  So, it would be rather odd if Kostenki-14 looked a lot like those populations. He'd be something of a strange outlier, I believe. Gerasimov and company seem to have just exaggerated the affinities based on certain traits Kostenki-14 has like marked alveolar prognathy which this new paper, for the record, finds he does actually have going.

M.M. Gerasimov (left) and A.N. Rogachev during work at Kostenki 14 site (Markina Gora), 1954.

The second statement, however, is what's suspect. Firstly, if we're talking about a so-called "Caucasian complex" where Kostenki-14 seems overall more similar to various pre-historic Europeans than to Southeast Asians, Ryukuans, Papuans and Melanesians then it seems clear that he would fit within such a complex and prove to, overall, share more craniofacial similarities with fellow pre-historic (and probably even modern) Europeans but it's otherwise clear that he does not actually fit into the more modern definition of what constitutes being "Caucasoid" in cranioform:

The position of the Kostenki 14 man in the CV I–II space is illustrated by a graph (see Fig. 1a): this individual, by the sum of craniometric indicators, is unambiguously characterized by the European complex of characters and shows no noticeable deviation toward tropical groups. Note that we are not speaking about its full similarity to any individual ancient European series. On the contrary, the results of our analysis show a sufficiently noticeable anthropological distinctness, which CV IV demonstrates (see Table 1). It separates the Kostenki 14 individual from all the series included in the analysis (see Fig. 1b). The size of differences is very great, amounting to 43% of the total variability range according to CV IV. This vector practically fully depends on one character, namely, the nose height, which is extremely small in the Kostenki 14 individual. Interestingly, the face height in this case is of little significance.

As someone who was once quite interested in craniometrics (and still somewhat am); I'd seen Kostenki-14's skull years ago and how low his nose height in particular seemed even at face-value was never lost on me:

Simply compare that to this archetypal example of a modern male "Caucasoid" skull of European origin from Bone Clones Inc., Osteological Reproductions:

Just so some are following, having just this much of an outlier nose height would would disqualify him from being an actual "Caucasoid" in the more traditional and modern craniofacial sense of the term, and this without even going into other ways in which he looks distinct such as his marked alveolar prognathism and likely rather paleolithic robusticity.

Kostenki-14 reconstruction by M.M. Gersasimov

Now, finally, there's one other statement that really stuck-out to me in the Eurogenes post and that's that Mikhail Mikhaylovich Gerasimov's reconstruction of Kostenki-14 is wrong. This is not true, as far as I know. The Russian paper doesn't even touch upon the reconstruction's validity (they actually display it without any sort of refutation against it in their study); all they seem to refute about Gerasimov's previous work on Kostenki-14 is the morphological affinity Gerasimov and company noted toward groups such as Australo-Melanesians.

The types of reconstructive techniques Gerasimov employed have been reportedly rather accurate. And reconstruction itself, when done right, can definitely be more of a science than an art.

Kostenki 14's location on map

But also, reconstruction is a different matter entirely from the sorts of craniometric measurements conducted in this new paper or that were once put together by Gerasimov and others. Their measurements or findings in that respect being off and overstating an affinity toward Australo-Melanesians does not actually play into how accurately they reconstructed Kostenki-14's looks. Though I would be interested to see other anthropologists take a crack at reconstructing Kostenki 14 in the future.

But all in all, he wasn't "Caucasoid" in the traditional sense and yes; that reconstruction, as far as we know, was roughly what he looked like in terms of facial features.

References:

1. The Upper Paleolithic Man from Markina Gora: Morphology vs. Genetics?, Khartanovich and Zubova 2017

2. Facial reconstruction – anatomical art or artistic anatomy?, Wilkson 2010

3. Facial Reconstruction, Jenny Omstead 2011

Lowdown on the recent Minoan and Mycenaean samples

I've had some ask me questions on how things seem regarding the new Minoan and Mycenaean samples and since I've slowly been getting back in the game lately, I figured I'd wade into things simply and swiftly.

I often tend to think PCAs (principal component analyses based on autosomal SNPs) are more straight-forwardly telling and useful for getting a point across and the one above really helps summarize how these new samples generally look.

The Minoan samples

In the PCA, the Minoans nearly join what I'd dub the EEF/ANF/LNF/LHG continuum. A continuum formed by populations seemingly rich in VHG-related ancestry and Basal Eurasian ancestry with Natufians (LHGs/Levantine Hunter-Gatherers) so far proving the most Basal Eurasian and Early-European-Farmers (EEFs), descended from a mixture between Anatolian Neolithic Farmers (ANF) and European Hunter-Gatherers of the so-called Villabruna-cluster, proving the most VHG-related.

This continuum's source is ultimately West-Asia with its most VHG-related end (various EEFs) acquiring more VHG-related ancestry in Europe after their ancestors migrated to the region from Anatolia, bringing agriculture along with them to the formerly Hunter-Gatherer dominated region.

The Minoan samples from Lasithi and Odigritia practically do fall within this continuum and would seemingly sit right in-between Anatolian-Neolithic-Farmers and Levantine-Neolithic-Farmers (LNF) if not for a clear eastern-pull being present within them which implies ancestry outside of this continuum giving them an elevated Ancient North Eurasian-related affinity and the study does address that in its abstract alone:

"Here we show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean and most of the remainder from ancient populations related to those of the Caucasus and Iran."

Basically, they've found that the Minoans have ancestry from what I'd call the aforementioned continuum's opposite continuum: a continuum of sorts between Caucasian Hunter-Gatherers, Iranian Neolithic Farmers (INF) and a Hunter-Gatherer sample from the Hotu cave in Iran. These particular pre-historics seem to be largely composed of Ancient North Eurasian-related ancestry and Basal Eurasian ancestry as well as perhaps some Villabruna-related ancestry as in the case of CHGs.

And the paper shares some formal-stat based models in its supplementary information to back what its abstract says up:

The models above basically show that the Minoans can be modeled as part something related to Neolithic Anatolians and part something related to Neolithic Iranians and Caucasian Hunter-Gatherers with those models, as you can see with the second set, showing the lowest standard errors/fitting the best. The paper basically summarizes the nature of the Minoan samples in the researchers' opinions with this bit in the supplementary information pdf:

"The Minoans themselves could be modelled as a mixture of Neolithic Anatolians and Caucasus hunter-gatherers, but they could not be successfully modelled as mixtures of later populations."

The emboldened bit is somewhat interesting as I doubt, for obvious reasons, that these Minoans are really a direct intermixture between Neolithic Anatolians and Caucasian Hunter-Gatherers or Neolithic Anatolians and Iranian Neolithic Farmers. It's obviously much more likely that they got such ancestries and affinities by way of proxy from later populations. I.e. from neighboring populations in Anatolia carrying something like Chalcolithic Iranian-related ancestry:


[1] "distance%=0.5658 / distance=0.005658"

         Minoan_Lasithi:I0070
                   
Greece_N:Klei10   68.8
Anatolia_BA:I2683 31.1

In the above nMonte model using Global-10 PCA positions, a population akin to Bronze Age Anatolians that intermixed with the earlier ANF/GNF type inhabitants of Crete would have been responsible for the more eastern-pull carrying CHG/INF/IHG related ancestry. And I'd say it's more sensible to assume this sort of way is how the admixture made its way to the area (by way of proxy) but I'm of course not at all detracting from the authors' findings which is that these Minoans look to carry ancestry related to the CHG/INF/IHG continuum. [Important Note]

That being said, I'd also say the lowdown is that these Minoans are visibly distinct from modern Cretans and neighboring mainland Greeks. They're notably more ANF/GNF-related and seem to lack the steppe-related influences in later inhabitants which makes good sense given that they are generally accepted by scholars to not have been Greek/Indo-European speakers and, as a result, seem to trace the majority of their ancestry back to pre-historic West Asia.

However, given that you can model even modern mainland Greeks as being close to a 60% Minoan population - :

[1] "distance%=0.0682 / distance=0.000682"

         Greek
                   
Minoan_Lasithi   48.25
Ukrainian_West   20.05
Yamnaya_Kalmykia 16.25
Minoan_Odigitria 13.90
Polish            1.55

[1] "distance%=0.0499 / distance=0.000499"

         Greek
                   
Minoan_Lasithi   59.40
Srubnaya         30.75
Ukrainian_East    4.25
Minoan_Odigitria  3.65
Srubnaya_outlier  1.95

- we're not remotely talking population replacement here. We're just looking at a shift over-time toward Europe caused by various migrations (like that of early Greek speakers and medieval Slavic speakers) bringing in elements such as ancestry from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe.

The Mycenaean Samples

As both the PCA and the study impart, there's not a huge difference at all between the Minoan and Mycenaean samples but there is a difference.

The Mycenaeans come quite close to entering yet another continuum of sorts. This continuum, however, is much more modern. It's been dubbed by some, including myself, as the Eastern Mediterranean continuum and is essentially a cluster inhabited by Sicilians, the Maltese, Western Jews, various Greek islander populations such as modern Cretans, and, finally, Cypriots. 

This is essentially a continuum for populations that serve as a sort of bridge between mainland Southern Europe and the Levant with Cypriots being the most Levantine shifted population:

[1] "distance%=0.4026 / distance=0.004026"

         Cypriot
                     
Lebanese_Christian 71.2
Greek              28.8

And Sicilians being the most mainland Southern Europe shifted population:

[1] "distance%=0.5027 / distance=0.005027"

         Italian_CentralSicilian
                     
Italian_Tuscan     65.7
Lebanese_Christian 34.4

[Note]

These Mycenaeans look to lie somewhere in-between the two and have, as the PCA implies, something of a lower eastern-pull than usual, bringing them just a smidgen closer to the EEF/ANF/LNF/LHG continuum. The study itself imparts the following:

"We have successfully modelled Mycenaeans as a mix of (i) Neolithic populations of Anatolia, Neolithic Iran or Caucasus hunter-gatherers, and eastern European huntergatherers or Upper Paleolithic Siberians, (ii) Neolithic Anatolians and Chalcolithic-to-Bronze Age people from Armenia, or (iii) Minoans and Bronze Age people from the Eurasian steppe (or from mainland Europe after the arrival of steppe ancestry there)..."

This is indeed quite easily noticeable via means such as nMonte when a non-academic like myself takes a look:

[1] "distance%=0.2597 / distance=0.002597"

         Mycenaean
                   
Minoan_Lasithi   85.0
Sintashta         8.4
Yamnaya_Kalmykia  6.6

[1] "distance%=0.2985 / distance=0.002985"

         Mycenaean
                     
Minoan_Lasithi      84.1
Srubnaya            15.9

The general picture just seems like they're basically close to a majority Minoan-like population that just had some steppe admixture (~10-15%) tacked onto it. This makes sense given that the Mycenaeans were Greek speakers, they were in fact the first known culture to have written Greek down, and the Indo-European language they were speaking would have most likely been brought to Greece by people substantively descended from Bronze Age Steppe pastoralists very similar in ancestry to the pre-historic peoples of the Yamnaya, Srubnaya and Sintashta cultures.

Although, I wouldn't simply interpret this as "The Mycenaeans are descended from the Minoans and are just them + some steppe ancestry." I'd say it's more sound to assume there were Minoan-like peoples in the areas of mainland Greece that these Mycenaean samples are from and it was these people who acquired early Greek alongside steppe admixture intermixed with a complex cultural framework that was already present via being influenced by the likes of the Minoans to herald the first true pre-modern Greek civilization.

Now, there's more information to be had like the uniparental (Y-DNA and mtDNA) results of some of these new samples or some phenotypic data acquired via genomic analysis but this post was ultimately just concerned with summarizing the autosomal affinities shown by these Minoan and Mycenaean samples so I'll leave it at that for now. I also advise reading the full study + its supplementary materials if you wish to know more, of course.

References:

1. Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans, Lazaridis et al. 2017

Notes:

1. You can understand how nMonte works by going here. And my thanks go to the author of the Eurogenes genome blog for the PCAs used for nMonte and the one shared visually in this post.

2. I've noticed that some people are making a big deal about the lack of either R1a or R1b subclades found among the Mycenaeans given that they, unlike the Minoans, would have been Indo-European speakers, and I'd just like to point out that the Y-DNA sample-size here is literally n=1. 1 sample that's J2a1, that's it. I'm sure once we have more samples some R1b and the like will pop-up given the obvious steppe ancestry these Mycenaeans carry.

3. This is a somewhat decent discussion on the study to check out, though it slightly goes off the rails at times later into the thread.

4. For those wondering why I haven't made a post on the recent African papers; this post was mostly done several weeks ago, I just made some minor edits today and posted it. I'm a little busy lately but will try to make posts on those African studies soon.