A woman buried in China in the Bronze Age era

L6106
Portrait reconstruction
Specimen Details
Sample ID:
L6106
Date:
2050 BCE - 1850 BCE
Biological Sex:
Female
mtDNA:
C4
Y-DNA:
Not applicable
Cultural Period:
Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China
Location
Country:
China
Locality:
Xinjiang. Xiaohe
Coordinates:
Map Location
Historical Timeline
Description

The Xiaohe culture, part of the broader prehistoric cultures in the region of Xinjiang, China, represents a fascinating and enigmatic aspect of the Bronze Age in this area. This culture, discovered primarily through archaeological excavations at the Xiaohe Cemetery, also known as the Small River Cemetery, offers intriguing insights into the lives, beliefs, and practices of a people who lived thousands of years ago in the harsh, arid expanses of the Tarim Basin.

Geographic and Environmental Context

The Xiaohe site is located in the Lop Nur region of the Tarim Basin in present-day Xinjiang, China, an area characterized by its arid desert environment with extreme temperature fluctuations. The site's remote location has contributed to its remarkable state of preservation, providing a wealth of material for archaeological study. During the Bronze Age, the area likely experienced slightly more favorable climatic conditions, though it remained a challenging environment for human habitation.

Cultural and Temporal Framework

The Xiaohe culture is primarily understood through its burial practices, as most of the archaeological evidence comes from the Xiaohe Cemetery. Radiocarbon dating suggests that the cemetery was in use approximately between 2000 BCE and 1450 BCE. This places the Xiaohe culture contemporaneously with other significant Bronze Age cultures in China, such as the Erlitou culture and the later Shang Dynasty, although it developed independently due to its geographic isolation.

Material Culture and Artifacts

The Xiaohe burials are renowned for their extraordinary preservation, offering unique artifacts that shed light on the culture:

  1. Burial Practices: The Xiaohe Cemetery features hundreds of tombs, constructed in a boat-shaped fashion and covered with a wooden structure. Burials were conducted with attention to ritual, and the cemetery itself is marked by large, vertically implanted phallic-shaped poles, which are thought to have religious symbolism.

  2. Mummification: Many of the interred individuals have been naturally mummified, allowing researchers to study their physical characteristics. The mummies often exhibit features that are atypical of the broader East Asian populations, hinting at diverse migratory influences, possibly from Western Eurasian populations.

  3. Textiles and Clothing: The mummies are often clothed in finely crafted textiles, including woolen garments and felt hats, highlighting advanced textile production skills. The presence of wool indicates sheep herding, while plant-based textiles suggest knowledge of local flora.

  4. Grave Goods: The burials contained a variety of grave goods, including wooden masks, pottery, carved figurines, and objects made from jade, suggesting a complex culture with rich symbolic and possibly religious life.

Social and Economic Life

The artifacts and burial practices provide glimpses of the Xiaohe social structure and economy:

  1. Agriculture and Animal Husbandry: Evidence of grains like wheat and millet found in the region indicates that the Xiaohe people practiced agriculture. The herding of animals, particularly sheep, is suggested by woolen textile remnants.

  2. Craftsmanship: The quality of the textiles and woodworking indicates specialized craftsmanship and knowledge of materials, with potential trade or cultural exchanges occurring with adjacent cultures.

  3. Religious and Ritualistic Practices: The burial practices and grave goods reflect a society with rich spiritual beliefs, possibly ancestor worship or a form of shamanism, given the ritualistic nature of the phallic symbols and carved figurines.

Connections and Interactions

Despite the geographic isolation, there is evidence suggesting some level of interaction between the Xiaohe culture and other regions. The presence of elements in the material culture that have parallels in Western and Central Asia indicates that the Silk Road network may have had precursors even in ancient times, facilitating cultural and possibly genetic exchanges.

Conclusion

The Xiaohe culture of the Bronze Age represents a complex, adaptive society residing at the crossroads of civilizations. While much remains to be understood, ongoing research in this area continues to illuminate the diverse tapestry of human history in ancient Xinjiang. The artifacts, burial practices, and environmental adaptation strategies offer invaluable insights into the cultural and social dynamics of this ancient community, highlighting the intricate interplay of isolation and interaction in shaping human societies.

Related Samples
Sample ID Culture/Period Date Location Action
XHM100 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1882 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
XHM110 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
XHM135 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1918 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
XHM75 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
AYIM22BY Bronze Age Afanasievo Culture Ayituohan, Xinjiang, China 2844 BCE Xinjiang. Ayituohan, China View
AYIM22BN Bronze Age Afanasievo Culture Ayituohan, Xinjiang, China 2850 BCE Xinjiang. Ayituohan, China View
SSGM16 Xinjiang Bronze Age 2864 BCE Xinjiang. Songshugou, China View
G218M5-2 Bronze Age Afanasievo Culture Nileke, Xinjiang, China 2910 BCE Xinjiang. Nileke, China View
G218M5-3N Bronze Age Afanasievo Culture Nileke, Xinjiang, China 3008 BCE Xinjiang. Nileke, China View
GMGM1 Bronze Age Beifang Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2129 BCE Xinjiang. Beifang, China View
11KBM1 Bronze Age Beifang Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1874 BCE Xinjiang. Beifang, China View
L5209 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L5213 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L4964 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L6101 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1767 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L6103 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1785 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L6105 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L6106 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
Sample ID Culture/Period Date Location Action
XHM100 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1882 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
XHM110 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
XHM135 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1918 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
XHM75 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L5209 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L5213 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L4964 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L6101 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1767 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L6103 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 1785 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L6105 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
L6106 Bronze Age Xiaohe, Xinjiang, China 2050 BCE Xinjiang. Xiaohe, China View
Ancient Genetic Admixture

Ancient genetic admixture analysis compares the DNA profile of this individual (L6106) with present-day reference populations. These results show what percentage of the individual's genetic makeup resembles ancient populations from different geographic regions.

Western Steppe Pastoralists 48%
Ancient Asians 34%
Ancient Native Americans 11%
Neolithic Farmers 7%
Modern Genetic Admixture

Modern genetic admixture analysis compares the DNA profile of this individual (L6106) with present-day reference populations. These results show what percentage of the individual's genetic makeup resembles modern populations from different geographic regions.

These results complement the ancient ancestry components shown in the previous section, offering a different perspective on the individual's genetic profile by comparing it with modern reference populations rather than prehistoric ancestral groups.

Asia 52%
Central Asian, Northern Indian & Pakistani 33%
Pakistan 17.0%
Indian 16.0%
Northern Asian 19%
Siberian 19.1%
Europe 27%
Northwestern European 20%
Finnish 20.4%
Eastern European 6%
Eastern European 6.3%
America 21%
America 21%
Native American 21.3%
G25 Coordinates

The G25 coordinates for the sample L6106 are as follows. You can analyze its admixture using G25 Studio.

L6106,0.08428452,-0.1070194,0.04374194,0.08192552,-0.04877768,0.01158306,-0.0514052,-0.05701178,0.0045794,-0.01946146,0.01584964,-0.0089479,0.01808106,-0.0124973,-0.02110948,-0.01926186,-0.00671994,-0.00450112,-0.02104176,-0.01623858,0.00666042,0.00704464,-0.02258898,0.00321356,-0.00674823
Analyze it in G25 Studio
Scientific Papers References
The genomic origins of the Bronze Age Tarim Basin mummies
Authors:
Zhang F, Ning C, Scott A
Abstract:

The identity of the earliest inhabitants of Xinjiang, in the heart of Inner Asia, and the languages that they spoke have long been debated and remain contentious1. Here we present genomic data from 5 individuals dating to around 3000-2800 BC from the Dzungarian Basin and 13 individuals dating to around 2100-1700 BC from the Tarim Basin, representing the earliest yet discovered human remains from North and South Xinjiang, respectively. We find that the Early Bronze Age Dzungarian individuals exhibit a predominantly Afanasievo ancestry with an additional local contribution, and the Early-Middle Bronze Age Tarim individuals contain only a local ancestry. The Tarim individuals from the site of Xiaohe further exhibit strong evidence of milk proteins in their dental calculus, indicating a reliance on dairy pastoralism at the site since its founding. Our results do not support previous hypotheses for the origin of the Tarim mummies, who were argued to be Proto-Tocharian-speaking pastoralists descended from the Afanasievo1,2 or to have originated among the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex3 or Inner Asian Mountain Corridor cultures4. Instead, although Tocharian may have been plausibly introduced to the Dzungarian Basin by Afanasievo migrants during the Early Bronze Age, we find that the earliest Tarim Basin cultures appear to have arisen from a genetically isolated local population that adopted neighbouring pastoralist and agriculturalist practices, which allowed them to settle and thrive along the shifting riverine oases of the Taklamakan Desert.

Save 85% coupon: DISCOUNT85

Valid until July 26 2025