← Signals
Recordedyearscience

A second phylogeny puts the same family at roughly six thousand years

Zhang and colleagues published a phylogenetic analysis of Sino-Tibetan in the same year, likewise locating the origin in northern China but obtaining a root age of the order of six thousand years before present, roughly a millennium younger than the other study. The two results agree on geography and disagree on chronology by an interval longer than most of recorded history, on the same family, using nominally similar methods and different datasets and calibrations. The disagreement is recorded here as it stands rather than adjudicated.

Uncertain — sources disagree, or the dating is contested. Stated here, not resolved.

Subjects

Evidence

Partly verified — Core facts are sourced; some optional detail is deliberately absent.

Recorded on Sino-Tibetan

  1. A language tree is tested against a settlement chronology
  2. A Bayesian phylogeny dates Indo-European to the Anatolian Neolithic
  3. Phylogeography puts the Indo-European homeland in Anatolia
  4. A dated phylogeny puts Sino-Tibetan at roughly seven thousand years
  5. A second phylogeny puts the same family at roughly six thousand years
  6. A hybrid model is proposed for the Indo-European origin

Related

Related because they share a subject in the Atlas — never because the text looks similar.