Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

About the direction of the migration...

Posted by MARECHAL on 13 Nov 2010 at 17:16 GMT

I am only historian and archaeologist and for me the near-eastern origin of agriculture is not at all certain, but only presumed and traditional. So, if you assume that the genetic signatures are the same between germanic people and near-eastern one at tis period, and I can believe you, therefore the direction of the neolithical agricultural migration is noway demonstrated: so it could have been in the opposite one, that is from northern Europe to south-western Asia... Generally and in brief, for common climatical and geographical reasons, people migrate from the north to the south and it is also more practical to go down a river (Danube) that to go up... If you are interested, I can send you a paper about the european origin of Agriculture (just I am finishing it!)... Please, without a-priori, do you objectively accept that you cannot proove the way of this migration by your very interesting work and so must scientifically you not assume that this direction is this you wrote and the good one?
Best regards, Jean MARECHAL.

No competing interests declared.

RE: About the direction of the migration...

ClydeWinters replied to MARECHAL on 14 Nov 2010 at 03:10 GMT

Your paper sounds interesting. Why don't you send a copy to Dr. Florian Farkas editor: Journal of Eurasian Studies. Her email address is

As you said we need to consider many other paths of migration.

No competing interests declared.

RE: RE: About the direction of the migration...

MARECHAL replied to ClydeWinters on 14 Nov 2010 at 22:33 GMT

Dear Clyde, many thanks for your kind attention! I will contact Dr Florian Farkas, but my new paper on the european origin of south western asiatic neolithic agriculture (Chineese agriculture and american one were independant) is in french and, if he is interested by my theory, I must translate it in english... My best regards to you!

No competing interests declared.