Menu
Store
Blog
Portrait reconstruction of I1202
Ancient Individual

A man buried in Russia in the Iron Age era

I1202
997 BCE - 825 BCE
Male
Iron Age Yankovsky Culture, Russia
Russia
Scroll to begin
Chapter I

Identity

The biological and cultural markers that define this ancient individual

Sample ID

I1202

Date Range

997 BCE - 825 BCE

Biological Sex

Male

mtDNA Haplogroup

C5b

Y-DNA Haplogroup

N1a-F1206

Cultural Period

Iron Age Yankovsky Culture, Russia

Chapter II

Place

Where this individual was discovered

Country Russia
Locality Pospelovo 1. Primorsky Krai
Chapter III

Time

When this individual lived in the broader context of human history

I1202 997 BCE - 825 BCE
Chapter IV

Story

The narrative of this ancient life

The Iron Age Yankovsky Culture, primarily located in what is now the Russian Far East, particularly in the Primorsky Krai region, represents a fascinating and rich archaeological and cultural context. This culture thrived roughly from the late second millennium BCE to the first millennium BCE, with its zenith in the early Iron Age. The Yankovsky people were a significant cultural group within the larger context of late prehistoric Northeast Asia, and their civilization showcases a unique blend of local innovation and external influences.

Geography and Environment

The region inhabited by the Yankovsky Culture is characterized by its diverse geography, including coastal areas along the Sea of Japan, river valleys, and mountainous terrains. This geographical diversity facilitated a multifunctional subsistence strategy involving agriculture, fishing, hunting, and gathering. The climate is temperate, with distinct seasonal variations, which influenced the settlement patterns and economic practices of the Yankovsky people.

Settlements and Architecture

The Yankovsky settlements varied from large, fortified villages to smaller, open habitations. Archaeological evidence suggests that these fortified settlements were strategically located, possibly for defense against rival groups or as control points over resource-rich areas. Houses were typically semi-subterranean pit dwellings, constructed with wood and other locally available materials. These structures provided shelter against the harsh winter conditions and are often found in clusters that suggest a communal lifestyle.

Economy and Subsistence

The Yankovsky Culture had a mixed economy. They practiced agriculture, growing crops like millet, which was well-suited to the local climate. Archaeological finds, such as grinding stones and carbonized seeds, provide evidence of crop cultivation. In addition to agriculture, they engaged in fishing, taking advantage of their proximity to the coast and river systems. Artifacts like fishhooks and net weights indicate the importance of aquatic resources. Hunting supplemented their diet, with evidence of wild boar, deer, and other game animals found in the region.

Metallurgy and Craftsmanship

The Yankovsky Culture is particularly noted for its advances in metallurgy, which is a defining characteristic of the Iron Age. They mastered the production of iron tools and weapons, which facilitated not only agricultural efficiency but also crafting and warfare. The quality of their metalwork suggests a high degree of skill and knowledge. Additionally, pottery from this culture is marked by its unique designs and functional forms, indicating a well-developed artistic tradition.

Social Structure

While specific details about the social structure of the Yankovsky Culture remain limited, the presence of fortified settlements suggests a society with organized leadership and perhaps social stratification. The need for defense and resource management likely required coordinated leadership, possibly in the form of tribal chiefs or councils of elders.

Cultural and External Influences

The Yankovsky Culture was not isolated, and interactions with neighboring cultures are evident. Trade networks, both terrestrial and maritime, facilitated the exchange of goods and ideas with neighboring areas, including those in present-day Korea, China, and Japan. This flow of cultural exchange influenced Yankovsky art, technology, and possibly their social customs.

Religion and Burial Practices

Although specific religious beliefs of the Yankovsky Culture are not thoroughly documented, burial sites provide some insight. Excavations reveal that they practiced burial rituals, often with grave goods, which may indicate beliefs in an afterlife or the importance of ancestral veneration. The types and quality of goods suggest varying statuses among individuals in the society.

Legacy

The Yankovsky Culture contributed significantly to the cultural tapestry of ancient Siberia and Northeast Asia, laying foundations for subsequent cultural and historical developments in the region. Through their innovations in agriculture, metallurgy, and settlement organization, they influenced the trajectory of cultural evolution throughout the Iron Age in this part of the world. Their ability to adapt to and thrive in a challenging environment showcases their resilience and resourcefulness, leaving a lasting legacy for modern archaeologists and historians to explore.

Chapter V

Context

Other ancient individuals connected to this sample

Sources

References

Scientific publications and genetic data

Scientific Publication

Genomic insights into the formation of human populations in East Asia

Authors Wang CC, Yeh HY, Popov AN
Abstract

The deep population history of East Asia remains poorly understood owing to a lack of ancient DNA data and sparse sampling of present-day people1,2. Here we report genome-wide data from 166 East Asian individuals dating to between 6000 BC and AD 1000 and 46 present-day groups. Hunter-gatherers from Japan, the Amur River Basin, and people of Neolithic and Iron Age Taiwan and the Tibetan Plateau are linked by a deeply splitting lineage that probably reflects a coastal migration during the Late Pleistocene epoch. We also follow expansions during the subsequent Holocene epoch from four regions. First, hunter-gatherers from Mongolia and the Amur River Basin have ancestry shared by individuals who speak Mongolic and Tungusic languages, but do not carry ancestry characteristic of farmers from the West Liao River region (around 3000 BC), which contradicts theories that the expansion of these farmers spread the Mongolic and Tungusic proto-languages. Second, farmers from the Yellow River Basin (around 3000 BC) probably spread Sino-Tibetan languages, as their ancestry dispersed both to Tibet-where it forms approximately 84% of the gene pool in some groups-and to the Central Plain, where it has contributed around 59-84% to modern Han Chinese groups. Third, people from Taiwan from around 1300 BC to AD 800 derived approximately 75% of their ancestry from a lineage that is widespread in modern individuals who speak Austronesian, Tai-Kadai and Austroasiatic languages, and that we hypothesize derives from farmers of the Yangtze River Valley. Ancient people from Taiwan also derived about 25% of their ancestry from a northern lineage that is related to, but different from, farmers of the Yellow River Basin, which suggests an additional north-to-south expansion. Fourth, ancestry from Yamnaya Steppe pastoralists arrived in western Mongolia after around 3000 BC but was displaced by previously established lineages even while it persisted in western China, as would be expected if this ancestry was associated with the spread of proto-Tocharian Indo-European languages. Two later gene flows affected western Mongolia: migrants after around 2000 BC with Yamnaya and European farmer ancestry, and episodic influences of later groups with ancestry from Turan.

Use code for 40% off Expires Feb 26