A new preprint at
bioRxiv claims that some sort of large-scale population movement resulted in the spread of Sardinian-like ancestry into both the Armenian Highland and East Africa during or just after the Middle-Late Bronze Age. See Hovhannisyan et al.
here.
In all seriousness, my suggestion is that the authors should familiarize themselves with the scientific concept of the
sanity check and then try again.
For what it's worth, here's a brief outline of the population history of the Armenian Highland based on what I've learned about the topic from ancient DNA in recent years:
- overall, the Neolithic populations of the Armenian Highland were surely very similar to the Caucasus_lowlands_LN samples from what is now Azerbaijan from the recent Skourtanioti et al. paper (see here)
- Chalcolithic era migrations from the Pontic-Caspian steppe and/or the North Caucasus introduced steppe ancestry to the Armenian Highland, bringing at least some of its populations closer genetically to those of Eastern Europe (a somewhat outdated but still useful blog post about this subject is found here)
- population expansions during the Early Bronze Age associated with the Kura-Araxes cultural phenomenon, which may have originated in what is now Armenia, resulted in a resurgence of indigenous Caucasus hunter-gatherer (CHG) ancestry across the Caucasus, as well as its spread to many other parts of West Asia (see here)
- another significant pulse of Eastern European admixture affected the Armenian Highland during the Middle-Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age (see here)
- it's not yet completely clear what happened in the Armenian Highland during the Iron Age in terms of significant genetic shifts, due to the lack of ancient human samples from the region dating to this period, but it's still possible that the speakers of proto-Armenian arrived there from the Balkans at this time
- the present-day Armenian gene pool is the result of the processes described above, as well as later events, such as those associated with the Urartian and Ottoman Empires.
Indeed, it's probably not a coincidence that present-day Armenians cluster more or less between the prehistoric populations from the Armenian Highland and surrounds in the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) below.
To see a more detailed and interactive version of the plot, copy paste the data from the text file
here into the relevant field at the Vahaduo Globabl25 PCA Views
here.
Citation...
Hovhannisyan et al.,
AN ADMIXTURE SIGNAL IN ARMENIANS AROUND THE END OF THE BRONZE AGE REVEALS WIDESPREAD POPULATION MOVEMENT ACROSS THE MIDDLE EAST,
bioRxiv, Posted June 24, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.24.168781
See also...
Armenian confirmation bias
Perhaps a hint of things to come
Understanding the Eneolithic steppe
247 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 247 of 247Blogger Aram said...
" I2c2
What I know that he is not from Anatolia. He has clear evidence of contact with Lola culture."
Where'd you get that from?
CRM
No MBA is not Lchashen. I don't know why it is marked as MBA. MBA is Trialeti Vanadzor. We have 3 adna from MBA and non of them is from elite burial.
Lchashen Metsamor starts at 1500 bc and ends at 800 bc. After 800 bc starts the Urartu period in modern Armenia.
Also only the one sample from Lchashen has steppe Maykop. It is the male. The female do not have it.
@Luuk-"We know more or less where and how the Y-dna haplotypes E1b, G2, J1 and J2 originated in the Near East. Does anyone know where we can put the Neolithic origin of the Y-dna haplotypes G1, H2, L and T?"
@Jatt_Scythian-"I'd be interested in that too."
Does anyone have anything to comment on this subject? Can someone who has seen unpublished data from studies in the pipeline answer the above question?
@Archie
from the same work:
"Burial 4/21 Mezchkirpilsk I burial according to the results of radiocarbon analysis is accurately dated to the 28-29 centuries BC.other complexes of the considered Novotitarovskaya and early Catacombs cultures belong to this time. Ananaur mound No. 3 also belongs to the first half of the 24th century BC with a high degree of accuracy.finds from the UR necropolis belong to the early dynastic III period or the 25-24 centuries BC. Accordingly, at present, the earliest evidence of special and obviously prestigious forms of funeral rites, involving the use of two carts and a special seat-chair - "throne", come from the monuments of steppe pastoral cultures of the Northern part of the black sea region. The Hittites have a special cult of the throne, its deification and personification (Ardzinba, 1982 and 2015). The throne was used in the funeral ritual, it was on it that the remains of the deceased king were laid. The organic connection of the God-throne, throne and wheeled carts is shown in the" archaic " Hittite funeral (Royal) rituals, which included the use of two carts at the funeral, one of which delivered the body of the deceased to the cremation/burial site, and the other his image, placed on a Golden throne in a special funeral tent (Ivanov, Gamkrelidze, 1984, p.726)."
@Vladimir
As always, you read inattentively and cite irrelevant texts. Understand that all this has appeared much earlier and in a completely different region, here's a quote from the same place, which you ignore, and give a completely meaningless:
"In Ardzinba's work, many of the rituals and ceremonial actions with thrones and carriages are considered not to be Hittite proper, but are associated with the Hattian tradition, because when they were performed, a number of verbal formulas were pronounced in the Hattian language".
Gamkrelidze and Ivanov have always written only nonsense without understanding at all.
I emphasize once again, there are no thrones in the steppe tradition, it's a purely Ur tradition, which was extended to the Hattians long before the Hittites. The wagons appeared in the Middle East unequivocally before the emergence of the Catacomb and Trialeti cultures.
@Archie
"Accordingly, at the moment, the earliest evidence of special and obviously prestigious forms of funeral rites, involving the use of two carts and a special seat-chair - "throne", come from the monuments of steppe pastoral cultures of the Northern part of the black sea region."
Gey Alexander Nikolaevich
Head of the Department of bronze age archaeology, candidate of historical Sciences, Institute of archaeology, Russian Academy Of Sciences
@Rob
Influence of Anatolia at this stage could be characterized by simple contact and trade. Same goes for BB influence at whatever time, which is itself apparently "marginal" in Greece.
Again until there is relevant aDNA for the crucial periods in question there is not much point speculating further on movement of people within this brief time frame.
Lazaridis et al say:
"Two key questions remain to be addressed by future studies. First, when did the common ‘eastern’ (Caucasus related) ancestry of both Minoans and Mycenaeans arrive in the Aegean?"
So it is not a foregone conclusion. My guess is it is after 2200BC, and that steppe ancestry will not really be evident until 1600s for the Peloponnese at least. You are entitled to opposite opinion.
It is simply a matter of perspective, either they are of recent outside origin (male line) or not, both cannot be true. Drews as of 2017 thinks they are intrusive, but from southern Caucasus (though the reference burials there are basically contemporaneous to Mycenae). I suppose he is also arrogant for thinking this?
@Vladimir
There's no such dating, it's just their personal opinion without any confirmation.
Of course, this can have nothing to do with the Hittites, because the Hittite society is patriarchal, but thrones are female deities, these are alien Hittite traditions with which the Hittite king argues as a matriarchal tradition. Thrones have bonded with the queen.
@LGK
This ‘eastern’ (Caucasus related) ancestry is already present in GRC_Peloponnese_N:I3920, dated to 3933-3706 calBCE.
Put these coordinates into the relevant field at the link below.
GRC_Peloponnese_N:I2318,0.118376,0.180764,0.000377,-0.100776,0.048009,-0.050758,-0.00423,-0.008307,0.023725,0.07909,0.00682,0.014537,-0.029435,-0.00578,-0.043702,0.001591,0.035073,0.00038,0.010559,-0.014007,-0.021213,-0.005935,-0.003944,-0.014701,-0.010059
GRC_Peloponnese_N:I2937,0.118376,0.178733,0,-0.102714,0.053548,-0.044623,0.000705,-0.000462,0.031088,0.0831,0.010718,0.013638,-0.018731,0.002615,-0.034202,-0.022275,0.00013,0.003167,0.021871,-0.019009,-0.019965,0.000989,-0.008504,0.00241,-0.007305
GRC_Peloponnese_N:I3708,0.121791,0.175687,-0.00792,-0.097546,0.046778,-0.042949,-0.001645,-0.003,0.033133,0.077268,0.009256,0.010491,-0.025272,-0.003441,-0.03963,-0.005701,0.029206,-0.003421,0.006285,-0.014507,-0.01672,0.008161,-0.004067,0.006145,-0.002874
GRC_Peloponnese_N:I3709,0.118376,0.178733,-0.010936,-0.099484,0.033237,-0.032909,-0.00517,-0.010153,0.026588,0.065605,0.001461,0.012139,-0.026313,0.005367,-0.030266,-0.013789,0.017211,-0.000253,0.007542,-0.011881,-0.01984,-0.002102,-0.003081,0.002651,-0.003113
GRC_Peloponnese_N:I3920,0.119514,0.169593,-0.021873,-0.082042,0.023081,-0.037092,0.002115,-0.003692,0.012067,0.058316,0.005034,0.01169,-0.020961,-0.002615,-0.028773,-0.00305,0.011213,0.002787,0.005782,-0.00988,-0.013227,0.002473,-0.001849,0,-0.000479
https://vahaduo.github.io/g25views/#WestEurasia
@Vladimir
In general, it is necessary to read the originals, here is the same description of how the Hittite king gained power, he came from the sea opening a new country and sat on the throne which belonged to his local mother so he became king hen expels the throne from the country, depriving him of all rights:
"To me, king, from the sea, the throne brought power and the (king's) wagon. My mother's country was discovered and I was called a labarna king."
"Now I, king, have come to you in the sea and called the Throne. as an ally. Aren't you (the Throne) my ally, king?"
"[Then the king] says to the throne: 'Come! We'll go (with you).
You go over the mountains! You will not become a man of my kind.
You will not be my kind. My ally, my friend, may you be my ally!
Come! We will go to the mountain. And I, king, will give you glass dishes. And from the glassware, we will eat. Inside the mountain, you guard!
For me, king, the gods - the sun god and the god of the thunderstorm - have given the country and my house. And I, king, protect my country and my house. You do not come into my house, and I will not come into your house!"
....
One thing I notice in the CHG/Iran N-related ancestry that spread in Anatolia and parts of Southern Europe beginning from the Late Neolithic is that, unlike the CHG/Iran N-related ancestry in the steppe, it is not heavily CHG-like, but clearly something between CHG and Iran N, so it is obviously more southern in origin.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1a5byEejcptHST6X2L6Exb60uGXnyI6tZYI7HWG-EkkE/edit#gid=0
@Davidski
Thanks, I assume this is what Rob was talking about earlier. Was this sample obtained post Lazaridis 2017? if not, then why question "when" Caucasus-related ancestry arrives in the Aegean.
Yep, I3920 is from Mathieson Nature 2018 (the southeast Europe paper).
I tried subtracting the Sintashta ancestry from Hajji Firuz Bronze Age, and the result is pretty interesting.
Target: IRN_Hajji_Firuz_BA
Distance: 0.1996% / 0.00199625
50.2 RUS_Sintashta_MLBA
49.8 HajjiFiruzBA_NoSintashta
Target: HajjiFiruzBA_NoSintashta
Distance: 4.8906% / 0.04890617
38.8 GEO_CHG
21.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
18.6 IRN_Wezmeh_N
11.2 Levant_PPNB
10.0 TUR_Barcin_N
Target: HajjiFiruzBA_NoSintashta
Distance: 4.2402% / 0.04240165
40.6 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kaps
20.8 RUS_Catacomb
14.4 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kalavan
13.6 IRN_Seh_Gabi_C
10.6 Kura-Araxes_RUS_Velikent
Distance to: HajjiFiruzBA_NoSintashta
0.05404967 Kura-Araxes_RUS_Velikent
0.05796478 RUS_Maykop_Novosvobodnaya
0.05922170 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kalavan
0.06285988 RUS_Maykop_Late
0.06329038 ARM_Lchashen_MBA
0.06344417 ARM_MBA
0.06436727 RUS_North_Caucasus_MBA
Distance to: HajjiFiruzBA_NoSintashta
0.06182419 Chechen
0.06291628 Ingushian
0.06325904 Kubachinian
0.06420434 Avar
0.06456863 Lak
0.06575703 Tabasaran
0.06706374 Ossetian
0.06879345 Kaitag
0.06907518 Darginian
Armenians also model quite well with that ghost, overall it seems like ARM_MBA but with an additional Iranian related source.
Target: Armenian
Distance: 1.7711% / 0.01771106
70.4 TUR_Arslantepe_EBA
29.6 HajjiFiruzBA_NoSintashta
I seem to recall that there was a culture in the Zagros which was connected to the Caucasian Trialeti culture, while Hajji Firuz BA itself is speculated by some to be a Gutian.
Onur
This paper of Turkish archaeologist Veli Sevin is interesting.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3642931?seq=1
It links EIA period grooved ware with Mushkians.
Grooved ware was also a feature of Lchashen pottery.
@Aram
Red Glossy Pottery of the People of the Sea -
Philistimlyans:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-LPjbxcVRYy0/UiSZHxkX-SI/AAAAAAAAlOs/GM33QnQ6EIw/s800/IMG_1971.JPG
@Aram
This paper of Turkish archaeologist Veli Sevin is interesting.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3642931?seq=1
It links EIA period grooved ware with Mushkians.
Grooved ware was also a feature of Lchashen pottery.
Thanks for the paper. Finished reading it. I have never been a fan of the Phrygian origin theory of Armenian origins and am aware that archaeology does not back it. I would say that linguistics does not support it either, as the hypothesized Proto-Greco-Armenian language (which is likely also the ancestor of Phrygian and Albanian) was probably spoken in the 3rd millennium BC and Phrygian shares more features with Greek than with Armenian.
@Onur Dincer "the paper."
In fact, there is nothing in that text at all, no justification for their opinion. Absolutely empty text, except a few lines of superficial description of ceramics. Why on earth did it come from the east, he doesn't even make any assumptions there, because in the east at that time all ceramics were made on a high-speed pottery wheel, but in the west at that time all ceramics were stucco. That is, in the east it has no prototype at all, but in the west it has a prototype - it is red minyan ware barbarized molded by hand, without using a potter's wheel. The reliefs are also on minyan ware, but most likely it is a stylization of roller pottery.
Just stumbled upon this free new book from Routledge.
Slavs in the Making. History, Linguistics and Archaeology in Eastern Europe (ca. 500–ca. 700)
Florin Curta
https://www.academia.edu/43351673/Slavs_in_the_Making._History_Linguistics_and_Archaeology_in_Eastern_Europe_ca._500_ca._700_
Fig 2.1 page 24
https://www.academia.edu/43351673/Slavs_in_the_Making._History_Linguistics_and_Archaeology_in_Eastern_Europe_ca._500_ca._700_
"The sub-haplogroup R1a1a7 (mutation M458) is conspicuously more frequent in Poland than in any other part of Europe, and the presence of the haplogroup R1a in Croatia has been interpreted as a sign of migration to the Balkans.
However, that haplogroup appears not only in eastern Europe but also in India. The migration in question cannot possibly be that of the Slavs, but a much earlier one, most likely of a prehistoric date. In fact, the most recent results of research based on complete mitochondrial genome sequences seem to show a great degree of genetic continuity for several maternal lineages in Central Europe from the Bronze and Iron Ages. The conclusion drawn from that study is that there is no genetic evidence of a (massive) migration of the Slavs to (East)Central European territories, which they presumably occupied after they had been vacated by Germanic tribes."
@ LGK
“ Same goes for BB influence at whatever time, which is itself apparently "marginal" in Greece.”
There was no Fed-Ex in 2200Bc. Beaker products means beaker people
Which is why there’s M269 floating around in the agean and east Mediterranean.
Drew’s is entitled to his opinion Because his studied ong and hard about the matter even if he’s wrong.
You on the other hand don’t know much at all, so stop pontificating
@ Arame
Thanks I agree
Must be some contact between Central Europe and Caucasus, perhaps via steppe
@Mayuresh Madhav Kelkar
The quotes that you're posting don't make any sense. The author is clueless.
Both modern and ancient DNA data clearly show that there was a massive Slavic expansion during the Middle Ages.
@Rob
I can hardly keep up with your angry and frequently deleted posts.
Are you really insisting some wristguards, bone toggles, and a few pots can't be transported or traded without Bell Beaker people from Central Europe personally being there? Surely you understand find out that goods can pass hands through middlemen, or through visiting traders. Mind you the former are in Crete as well, do those also represent a meaningful presence?
The context in which R1b-M269 enters the Aegean remains to be clarified through further ancient samples from the relevant time period. Possibly the main bulk was through Italians/Central Europeans in the Mycenaean period, and then Sea Peoples context.
At this point we have just as much basis to point to:
Bulgaria_MLBA I2163, R1a1a1b2 mt-hg U5a2 1750-1625 calBCE
On the doorstep of the Aegean and probably within a generation or so of GCB at Mycenae.
Heyd on Bell Beaker influence in the Aegean (http://aegeobalkanprehistory.net/index.php?p=article&id_art=10)
"...marginal Bell Beaker elements of the mid-third millennium BC have reached the Aegean... In no instance, though, could the phenomenon gain ground and trigger an independent Bell Beaker development. The incentives were too few, the ideology not persuasive enough, the distance to the nearest core too large and, in the case of Cetina, the arrival in southern Greece apparently ‘too late’."
Rahmstorf (2008) "The amount of evidence of direct contact between Bell Beaker Europe and the Aegean/east Mediterranean is rather small."
It is plain to anyone that my comments here simply reflect existing perspectives, I am not authoring any radical new theory. Drews' (2017)own perspective was of course following Penner, and others which directly implicate intrusive steppe and/or northern identities in the Mycenae GC shaft graves include:
Kristiansen and Larsson (2005) The rise of Bronze Age Society
Kuz'mina (2007) The origin of the Indo-Iranians
Makkay (2000) The early Mycenaean rulers and the contemporary Early Iranians of the Northeast [though its chronology is somewhat outdated]
Countless others note and emphasize the similarities but refrain from full interpretation of their meaning.
Şorodoc (2010) The Evolution of Power and Politics in the Mycenaean World and its Reflection in the Homeric Epic: the Iliad -
Suggests a more nuanced scenario, in which there is a direct link with the steppe polities and Mycenaean GCs, but the chariots are "imported" into the latter's existing power structure. The identity of their operators is not specified, but possibly steppe charioteers "married in" to the local elite, achieved military successes together, and were thus buried together.
Perhaps the GCB males' physical anthropology can comment on this further.
Thereafter the succeeding tholoi tombs are likely occupied by people descended from both (incidenally tholoi also feature in Sintashta).
This is an amateur forum, you don't need to produce an extensive list of your own personal original works to be allowed an opinion.
David, in a way, Curt is right. M458 was in Central Europe before medieval Slavic migration.
@ LGK
as I said - zero percent chance
@ LGK
''This is an amateur forum,''
which explains why you don;t have a clue what you're talking about
@ambron
“David, in a way, Curt is right. M458 was in Central Europe before medieval Slavic migration.”
No, Curta, Carlos and similar people do not have a clue. And the clue is the date of separation of Slavic and Indo-Iranian languages which Trubachov estimated as about 3000 BC, which very well agrees now with the date of R1a-Z283 and R1a-Z93 separation. As specialist in Indo-Iranian languages say the link was ancient before Indo-Iranians left Eastern Europe which was before 2000 BC. Z283 and M458 were Slavic markers because people who had these markers originally used a lot of Slavic words which is confirmed by the presence of similar words in Sanskrit and Avestan. Don’t waste time with weird people and their weird theories.
@EastPole
As specialist in Indo-Iranian languages say the link was ancient before Indo-Iranians left Eastern Europe which was before 2000 BC.
The Indo-Iranians have not really "left" Europe. Yes, many of them left Europe for Central Asia and later even expanded into South Asia and West Asia, but there was a constant presence of Indo-Iranians at least in parts of the Pontic-Caspian steppe for millennia (e.g., Srubanaya R1a is Z93) until the Turkic expansion and the Turkicization of the remaining Indo-Iranian groups during the Middle Ages.
Z283 and M458 were Slavic markers because people who had these markers originally used a lot of Slavic words which is confirmed by the presence of similar words in Sanskrit and Avestan.
You probably mean Balto-Slavic rather than just Slavic.
Archi
You can do D stat right? Do this.
Lchashen Metsamor, Armenia EBA, Steppe Maykop, Chimp
Lchashen Metsamor, Armenia EBA, Lola, Chimp
As for grooved ware I understand that You can't believe that archaeology is against but it is really.
Type in Google Iron Age East Anatolia Grooved ware where You will see various papers discussing it and NO one believes it is from West. No one.
@Aram
As for grooved ware I understand that You can't believe that archaeology is against but it is really.
Type in Google Iron Age East Anatolia Grooved ware where You will see various papers discussing it and NO one believes it is from West. No one.
It is very strange that there are still many who subscribe to Herodotus' theory of Armenian origins, especially after all the archaeological findings that contradict it.
@Onur Dincer
“You probably mean Balto-Slavic rather than just Slavic.”
Please don’t start that BS again. What is the Balto-Slavic language? Show me the dictionary of Balto-Slavic language, one sentence written in the Balto-Slavic language. You cannot because it is not a real language. It has never been reconstructed. Scientists can’ t agree on its reconstruction. Dictionaries do not exist. It is a linguistic hypothesis. Assume that you can write a sentence in Balto-Slavic language and what if I can understand this sentence, what do you say then?
Trubachev was writing about Slavic languages and I am talking about some Slavic words that exist in Sanskrit and Avestan and do not exist in Baltic languages.
“Srubanaya R1a is Z93”
What was the Srubnaya language? What evidence do you have? Surely you don’t link Srubnaya with Ossetians because they lack Ra1 completely.
@Aram
"You can do D stat right? Do this.
Lchashen Metsamor, Armenia EBA, Steppe Maykop, Chimp
Lchashen Metsamor, Armenia EBA, Lola, Chimp
"
What does it have to do with statistics D and the haplogroup I2c2? What does the haplogroup I2c2 and Lola culture have to do with it? Your set D statistic will not show anything.
"As for grooved ware I understand that You can't believe that archaeology is against but it is really.
Type in Google Iron Age East Anatolia Grooved ware where You will see various papers discussing it and NO one believes it is from West. No one."
I don't care what those who I don't know or respect believe. I can see it's a typical Aegean Barbarian ware, a typical subclass the handmade and Burnished pottery like Barbarian Troy
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ernst_Pernicka/publication/285784740/figure/fig1/AS:391419974963202@1470333202849/Pottery-assemblages-from-House-768-in-Troia-Shape-A106-executed-in-Grey-Minyan-ware-is-a.png
Grooved is subtype Barbarian ware roller pottery, you can see it in Troy and Peloponnese.
@ Onur Dincer
"It is very strange that there are still many who subscribe to Herodotus' theory of Armenian origins, especially after all the archaeological findings that contradict it."
There are no contradictions with archeology, do not imagine. Some jerk and a fantasist wrote some lame article at the end of which he expressed an idiotic opinion without a single proof. It's a shameful unscientific style of deception used by Armenian autochthonists. He purposely attributed the unscientific nonsense to deceive you personally, a man who knows nothing and doesn't understand anything, but believes all kinds of paper. This is an unscientific shame, not an article.
@EastPole
Please don’t start that BS again. What is the Balto-Slavic language?
The Balto-Slavic branch is recognized by all the experts, there is no doubt about its existence. Genetics favors it too, Baltic R1a is overwhelmingly Z283 like Slavic R1a.
What was the Srubnaya language? What evidence do you have? Surely you don’t link Srubnaya with Ossetians because they lack Ra1 completely.
The Ossetians are a typical Northern Caucasian population genetically, their genetics has little bearing on Indo-Iranian origins. The Srubnaya were R1a-Z93 overwhelmingly like all other early Indo-Iranian groups, archaeology also points to their Indo-Iranian origin.
@Archi
It's a shameful unscientific style of deception used by Armenian autochthonists. He purposely attributed the unscientific nonsense to deceive you personally, a man who knows nothing and doesn't understand anything, but believes all kinds of paper.
No one deceived me because I am already aware of the archaeological data disproving Herodotus' theory. I have been criticizing the unscientific extreme autochthonist ideas found in some Armenian academic circles (e.g., Yepiskoposyan) on this thread. Aram did not disagree with me on that.
@Onur Dincer
Once again, I do not like this style of deception, in the paper, the method of typical trolling: in the beginning, something is not intelligible is stated, and then the not from what not the following conclusion is presented as a scientific truth.
@Archi
Once again, I do not like this style of deception, in the paper, the method of typical trolling: in the beginning, something is not intelligible is stated, and then the not from what not the following conclusion is presented as a scientific truth.
It is just a small paper not going into detail for every conclusion. Yet it has sufficient footnotes used to verify all of its conclusions.
BTW, I have been criticizing Herodotus' theory for many years. It is not a new subject for me.
@Onur Dincer
"Yet it has sufficient footnotes used to verify all of its conclusions."
There is nothing there about the problem of origin of this pottery, there is just an information noise of references not related to this issue. The only reference to this question confirms what I'm saying:
"Dark-faced and hand-made pottery from the earliest level at Gordion immediately overlay the Hittite which dated late twelfth to early eleventh century B.C. see K. DeVries,Anatolian Iron Age, ed. A. Cilingiroglu, 1987, 6 f., pi. 1/1-2; G. K. Sams, Source VII/3-4,1988, 9, fig. 1."
There is not even a list of literature in this paper, it speaks about its low quality, but just unscientific.
EastPole, but all this does not change the fact that M458 was in Central Europe before medieval Slavic migration.
@ambron
„EastPole, but all this does not change the fact that M458 was in Central Europe before medieval Slavic migration.”
M458 probably originated in Central Europe and probably expanded from Central Europe with Slavic migrations out of Central Europe. It looks like the West Slavic marker. So what is strange in M458 presence in Central Europe before its migration out of Central Europe?
https://i.postimg.cc/4y0H4qLC/CWC-metallurgy.jpg
There was no spread of TC metallurgy in Usatovo and in CWC, because TC by that time was already practically dead, and by that time had screwed up the backward metallurgy so these speculations are just nonsense. At that time, TC did not affect anyone, but was an extremely backward culture dying in the agony of more advanced surrounding cultures.
The CWC was spread over vast territories, and Fatyanovo is part of the CWC.
I searched for opinions about the origin of Grooved ware, so there are none at all. There is no research in this regard, only a statement of the fact that it did not appear before 1200BC and came from the west to the area of Lake Van where Mushki will continue to live. It is definitely connected to the Barbaric grooved Trojan pottery.
https://www.dartmouth.edu/~prehistory/aegean/?page_id=630
https://books.google.nl/books?id=6ElHDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA106&lpg=PA106&dq=Grooved+ware+Troy#v=onepage&q=Grooved ware Troy
And what some clueless author has said is his own personal fart's opinion.
@Rob
Not sure why this is so controversial to you.
For those who actually care to consider further, the clearest breakdown of the bigger picture is given by Kristiansen and Larsson, in "The Rise of Bronze Age Society", p.185:
"As the textual evidence of the Near East and Egypt describes conquest migrations and the influx of specialists, warriors and rulers of Aryan origin, it may seem justified to reassess some earlier interpretations of the shaft grave
kings."
The authors present a minimal hypothesis, considered verified:
"It represents a systematic and institutionalised transmission of chariotry from the steppe region, originating in the highly developed fortified settlements such as Sintashta, which formed an archaic state or chiefdom during the earlier second millennium BC in the Urals. From here they controlled mining operations in the Urals, and the north-south trade to the Black Sea and further on to the Shaft Grave kings."
A maximal (and not mutually exclusive) hypothesis is also presented, suggested as possible but requiring specific further attention.
It cites as evidence burial forms, the males of GCB's physical anthropology, their weapon types, as having slightly earlier precedents most specifically in the steppe.
The result?
"This additional evidence suggests we are dealing with a conquest migration in the Aegean penetrating further into the east Mediterranean to Crete (the end of the Old Palace period)." [note that the OPP is ended by an earthquake destruction, after which the Mycenaeans start supplying metal/weapons to Crete, but their physical presence is dubious until Knossos burns once more].
Whichever way we slice it the chariots and horses of steppe origin (and all the associated paraphernalia) did not drive themselves to Greece, there had to be individuals of presumably related origin involved.
We can choose to believe such people simply sold the horses/chariots/paraphernalia to Helladic elites and instructed in their use, or were otherwise hired, as a Greek Kikkuli. And maybe they did so some stage, but the simpler explanation is that the people buried in the GC shaft graves, especially later B and in A, were the original operators of said chariots. In which case they have inserted themselves into local elite status. Whether by force or local acceptance can be speculated,
They are likely not people born on the PC steppe, but probably are not too many generations removed, so there may be a mix of R1b, R1a, and various male lines from whatever is in the 2000-1800BC Carpathians-Balkans pathway represented. It also doesn't entirely preclude Middle Helladic local elites from partaking in this phenomenon, but nonetheless it denotes a meaningful development from the prior MH social organization directly driven by foreign arrivals.
EastPole, this is not strange to me, but some still think that M458 came to Central Europe in the Middle Ages from Pripyat.
Post a Comment