At least four individuals from the Late Chalcolithic (LC) burial site of Arslantepe show ancestry typical of the population associated with the contemporaneous Maykop culture in the North Caucasus. They are ART018, ART020, ART027 and ART039 from the recent
Skourtanioti et al. paper. I've labeled them
TUR_Arslantepe_LC_Maykop in my qpAdm mixture model below:
TUR_Arslantepe_LC_Maykop
RUS_Maykop_Novosvobodnaya 0.318±0.041
TUR_Arslantepe_LC 0.682±0.041
chisq 9.969
tail prob 0.533159
Full output
Considering the tight statistical fit, I think it's even possible that some of these people harbor direct ancestry from Maykop Novosvobodnaya. Here's a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) showing why my qpAdm model works so well. It was produced with the data in the text file
here and the Vahaduo PCA tools
here.
Moreover, one of the Arslantepe males, ART038, belongs to Y-haplogroup R1b-V1636 (R1b1a2). This is clearly a marker of paternal steppe ancestry, because it's been reported in two Eneolithic samples from the southernmost part of the Pontic-Caspian steppe near the North Caucasus foothills (see
here). These individuals are dated to ~4,200 calBCE, so they lived about a thousand years earlier than ART038.
ART038 probably lacks steppe and Maykop-related ancestries on his autosomes. Nevertheless, my point about his Y-haplogroup stands, because autosomal admixture can be bred out and disappear completely within a couple hundred years, or about 6 to 8 generations.
Interestingly, Skourtanioti et al. argued against the possibility of significant steppe and Maykop-related ancestries in the Arslantepe LC samples. They also didn't see R1b-V1636 as an obvious signal of paternal steppe ancestry. I find this very puzzling indeed, because to me it seems way off the mark. From the paper:
However, R1b-V1636 and R1b-Z2103 lineages split long before (~17 kya) and therefore there is no direct evidence for an early incursion from the Pontic steppe during the main era of Arslantepe. Lineage L2-L595 found in ALA084 (Alalakh) has previously been reported in one individual from Chalcolithic Northern Iran (Narasimhan et al., 2019) and in three males from the Late Maykop phase in the North Caucasus (Wang et al., 2019). These three share ancestry from the common Anatolian/Iranian ancestry cline described here, which indicates a widespread distribution that also reached the southern margins of the steppe zone north of the Caucasus mountain range.
See also...
Perhaps a hint of things to come
An early Mitanni?
How relevant is Arslantepe to the PIE homeland debate?
188 comments:
Kristiansen recently proposed a theory that proto Anatolians are from Maykop. So if such a migration occurred can we link them with Anatolians?
@Aram
Didn't Kristiansen suggest that it was the Maykop who Indo-Europeanized the steppe herders or am I misremembering that?
The Kura-Araxes are very likely to have been a multi-ethnic cultural horizon right? Given their range and various economies. I know it has been suggested that Anatolian and Hurrian had a sprachsbund and perhaps that ocurred via Anatolians migrating from the steppes through the Caucasus, although we shouldn't disregard the western migration route as well because there are some hints of Luwian in pre-Greek toponyms iirc.
Yes, of course, this is a possibility, even though as I pointed out in 2018:
Indo-Europeans certainly arrived at Arslantepe during the Late Bronze Age, with the expansion of the Hittite Empire into the region.
How relevant is Arslantepe to the PIE homeland debate?
So we would have to assume that the proto-Anatolians arrived at Arslantepe from the east, and then their Hittite speaking descendants got there from the west during the LBA.
I guess the presence of Maykop and steppe ancestry at Arslantepe during the Late Chalcolithic sort of fits this narrative:
Anatolians on the move: from Kurgans to Kanesh
This influence should be linked to the spread of wagons (proto-Kaski/Kassites??), not to the spread of the Hittites-Luvians.
Very high tailprob, so a highly likely model.
Typo in ancestry proportions, might want to edit.
I see tyumen missing in right pops, please add it. Sarazm also, if possible
The said paper emphasise too much continuity, therefore missing important details about the transitions which occurred in Anatolia after the Neolithic
@vAsiSTha
Model updated.
Hittite is the earliest-attested of the Indo-European languages and this is the reason why so many linguists were interested in it and so many theories were proposed in the past. But it is all obsolete now.
After Narasimhan et al. 2019 we know that the ancestors of Indo-Iranians came from Eastern Europe.
Y-DNA, aDNA, archeology, linguistics show that Balto-Slavs and Indo-Iranians separated around 3000 BC.
From the Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian cultures, religions, and languages, we can reconstruct most of the IE culture, religion, and language that existed long before 3000 BC.
That Indo-Slavic language, culture, religion existed 2000-1500 years earlier than then Hittite language was attested. Hittite culture, religion, was not IE, their language was very mixed with many not-IE elements. So what do we need Hittite for? All that interest in Maykop and Hittite looks like some sort of politics and not a genuine interest in IE history and origin.
@ Aram
“ So if such a migration occurred can we link them with Anatolians?”
If anything, Majkop is from east anatolia and nearby areas
Is Maykop Novosvobodnaya preferred over Kura-Araxes Kaps?
Question to Davidsky, are there any rumors about testing the Hittites, the Hittites kingdom?
Makes me think of this:
"The wealth of the metals - arsenical copper/bronzes and silver and gold artifacts - found in the Maikop "royal" kurgans is truly extraordinary, leading Chernykh (1992) to reflect on the "problem of gold" at this time. Indeed if we trace the occurrence of gold in the area of our concern, we see a conspicuous shift from north to south that continues through Middle Bronze times: the early Chalcolithic florescence of gold consumption in the Balkans, particularly in the Varna cemetery; the abundance of gold (and silver) objects in the Maikop kurgans of the northwestern Caucasus during the Early Bronze period; and the spectacular discoveries of precious gold and, to a lesser extent, silver objects in the monumental early kurgans of Transcausia and the famous hoards of Anatolia during the Late Early and Middle Bronze periods. Although accidents of discovery undoubtedly play a part here, the trend is unmistakable and must reflect underlying historical processes. For example, Avilova, Antonova, and Teneishvili (1999) calculate that approximately 7400 gold and 1000 silver artifacts have been found in Maikop-related kurgans in the northwestern Caucasus. These practically disappear in this area towards the middle of the third millenium, while at the same time the number of gold and silver artifacts in Anatolia and Transcaucasia (and, not incidentally, in Mesopotamia, such as at the Royal Cemetery at Ur) sharply rises (calculated at around 32,000 objects, ibid.). This shift reflects not only changes in the production and supply of precious metals, but also the movements of peoples with their leaders or chiefs south - across or around the Great Caucasus range.”
‘The Making of Bronze Age Eurasia’ (Kohl 2007):
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=pA1-3KfkpuwC&pg=PA78&lpg=PA78&dq=maikop+varna&source=bl&ots=hUBYkWOLd4&sig=ACfU3U3kQSSQCSapPiZ0dzP7irMhwRVjWA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjFouC3hsfnAhU1QRUIHUAsCeYQ6AEwBXoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
Or just Western or Central Anatolia 2000-1000BC?
@A "These practically disappear in this area towards the middle of the third millenium, while at the same time the number of gold and silver artifacts in Anatolia and Transcaucasia sharply rises "
ART018, ART020, ART027 3370-3100 cal BCE
I think ART039 3702-3658 cal BCE is in this group by accident. You should see what happens without him.
@A
Maykop received its gold from KAC, most likely from the Sakdrisi site. You think the sharp rise in Mesopotamia and Anatolia is connected with KAC now entirely directing its gold and maybe also silver export towards those regions?
On a related note I read somewhere there were a few Caucasus like people in Central Asia from that big paper on Central and South Asia from a while back.
What were their uniparental markers and how did they get there?
@EastPole "Hittite is the earliest-attested of the Indo-European languages and this is the reason why so many linguists were interested in it and so many theories were proposed in the past."
Not sure that this is the reason. The Anatolian languages are the most linguistically diverged from the other IE languages, and the source of the European Neolithic revolution is clearly Anatolian farmers. I think those are the reasons for the theories proposed in the past.
Relatively early attestation of Hittite is simply a product of a very durable writing medium (clay cuneiform tablets) and of proximity to some of the first cultures to have developed written languages.
I can't recall seeing any linguists openly argue that its early written attestation (ca. 1750 BCE) itself, argued for it being the oldest of the IE languages.
@Jatt
One of these was one of the Dzharkutan_2, a woman who clusters closest to modern North-West Caucasians and was definiteely from that region. No one knows how she got there, probably a slave, BMAC must have loved slaves.
@andrew
“The Anatolian languages are the most linguistically diverged from the other IE languages, and the source of the European Neolithic revolution is clearly Anatolian farmers. I think those are the reasons for the theories proposed in the past.”
Yes, but as I said those reasons are obsolete now. Anatolian PIE homeland theory is not widely supported anymore, and even Colin Renfrew admitted that it lost with steppe theory. The linguistic divergence of Anatolian languages can be explained by mixing with not IE substratum and Hittites when tested will be probably very different from IE steppe populations. So there is nothing special about Hittites except early attestation. Of course, there are many linguistic theories about Anatolian languages, but linguists have various opinions on them and cannot agree in general. They cannot be proved wrong or right and I don’t find them especially interesting and useful.
@Archi
"You should see what happens without him."
Sorry, could you explain, what happens without him?
@EastPole If it weren't for Hittite, the laryngeal "theory" would still just be a thought-provoking but ultimately speculative theory. The Anatolian languages also raised new questions about how complex the ancestral PIE verbal paradigm really was.
@ Targamos the Based, son of Kavkasos son of CHG son of Hercules, son of Conan
"You think the sharp rise in Mesopotamia and Anatolia is connected with KAC now entirely directing its gold and maybe also silver export towards those regions?"
I don't know, sorry.
@My Username Is Inigo Montoya
“If it weren't for Hittite, the laryngeal "theory" would still just be a thought-provoking but ultimately speculative theory.”
Laryngeal "theory" is still just a set of beliefs, nothing proven.
“The set of such beliefs, which had begun to develop long before the decipherment of Hittite, is known as the Laryngeal Theory.
At the same time, the frequently advanced claim that Hittite data provided a definite confirmation to the validity of the Laryngeal Theory is inaccurate, because the number and distribution of “laryngeals” in Hittite is different from what is typically reconstructed for Proto‐Indo‐European. In fact, the precise pattern of correspondence between the reconstructed Indo‐European and Anatolian “laryngeals” represents one of the most controversial aspects of Anatolian historical phonology.”
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781119193814.ch12
I think it's a big stretch to assume R1b1a2 is a steppe marker when V88 and related haplogroups are widely dispersed with hunter-gatherers and the Neolithic. For all we know the same migration that brought R1b to Italy with Villabruna brought it to the Near East too.
In fact I think an early entry of R1b into the Near East (ie early in or prior to the Neolithic) is the only thing that explains R1b's distribution in Africa.
Or do you think Sudanese and Chadic peoples are secret Indo-Europeans?
It’s really quite simple why PA doesn’t share some features of nuclear IE (with ref to the video David linked of prof Goedegebuure)
Proto-Anatolian is from NW Black Sea area (I2a -rich); nuclear IE is from R1- rich Dnieper -Don area
So they needn’t have split (physically) by 4500 BC; only phylogenetically
@Ryan
R1b-V88: out of the Balkans and into Africa?
Global distributions of lactase persistence alleles
@CrM
Is Maykop Novosvobodnaya preferred over Kura-Araxes Kaps?
No, it depends which outgroups you use. But I ran different tests on each of the Arslantepe LC samples, and Maykop comes up ahead of Kura-Araxes for at least one of them.
Fitting by manipulating outgroups is very unreliable. You need to look at everything only in the context of competing populations, when all the checked populations are included in the sources.
qpAdm isn't the only method to check these sorts of things.
Rob "Proto-Anatolian is from NW Black Sea area (I2a -rich); nuclear IE is from R1- rich Dnieper -Don area
So they needn’t have split (physically) by 4500 BC; only phylogenetically"
LOL in 4500 BC the Hittito-Luvian languages have not yet separated from the PIE. Not a single Hittite has been tested, why on earth would they attribute haplogroup I2a completely incomprehensible.
@David - Neither of those posts suggest that R1b-V88 is steppe-linked though. The Balkans may not be the Near East (and I'm open to that as the route for V88) but it's definitely not the steppe.
@Ryan
I never said that R1b-V88 was from the steppe. I said it was from the Balkans, and that it entered Africa via Iberia.
I did say that R1b-V1636 was from the steppe, which is very difficult to argue against, considering that it appears in the Near East during the late Copper Age, and in a population that also shows genome-wide signals of ancestry from the Caucasus.
@ Archie
I realise English isn't your forte- I precisely said that PA had not yet pysically separated by 4500
As for I2a2a1b; the evidence is in support. This might be at odds with yours & EastPoles chauvinist “models” (of R1a subclades doodled over the IE tree); but that's quite irrelevant to me
@David - "I did say that R1b-V1636 was from the steppe, which is very difficult to argue against, considering that it appears in the Near East during the late Copper Age, and in a population that also shows genome-wide signals of ancestry from the Caucasus."
What's the modern distribution of V1636? Genuinely curious.
I thought your post said it was found both in individuals with steppe ancestry and without. And you argue the steppe ancestry is just too low to detect.
Hardly a smoking gun. Compared that to R1b with the Bell Beakers in Europe. Now THAT'S a smoking gun.
Rob said
"I precisely said that PA had not yet pysically separated by 4500"
"So they needn’t have split (physically) by 4500 BC; only phylogenetically"
It's a pointless statement based on nothing. Words physically and phylogenetically are completely meaningless and completely incomprehensible. Where's the evidence that they were divided phylogenetically in 4500 BC?
"As for I2a2a1b; the evidence is in support."
Where? Show us where you brought this evidence that the Hittites were I2a2a1b in 4500 BC.
@Ryan
R1b-V1636 is first attested on the steppe, which, unlike the Near East, is rich in R1b since the Mesolithic.
These steppe samples with R1b-V1636 show the classic genome-wide steppe profiles.
The R1b-V1636 sample from Arslantepe is a thousand years younger than these steppe samples, and it's the earliest sample with any sort of R1b in the Near East.
Moreover, Arslantepe was known to have ties with the kurgan cultures of the North Caucasus even before any ancient DNA from there was tested.
The Arslantepe Royal Tomb and the “Manipulation” of the Kurgan Ideology in Eastern Anatolia at the Beginning of the Third Millennium
So, do you still believe that R1b and R1b-V1636 are native to Anatolia?
What was the autosomal DNA of Ancient Gypt like? Saw some claims of African ancestry on anthrogenica.
@Davidiski
Discussion of possible Balkan origins of R1b-V88 in Africa. https://dispatchesfromturtleisland.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-source-of-proto-chadic-y-dna-r1b.html
@Jatt_Scythian Ancient Egypt had less sub-Saharan African admixture than it did later on.
"Egypt, located on the isthmus of Africa, is an ideal region to study historical population dynamics due to its geographic location and documented interactions with ancient civilizations in Africa, Asia, and Europe. Particularly, in the first millennium BCE Egypt endured foreign domination leading to growing numbers of foreigners living within its borders possibly contributing genetically to the local population. Here we [examine] mtDNA and nuclear DNA from mummified humans recovered from Middle Egypt that span around 1,300 years of ancient Egyptian history from the Third Intermediate to the Roman Period. Our analyses reveal that ancient Egyptians shared more Near Eastern ancestry than present-day Egyptians, who received additional Sub-Saharan admixture in more recent times. This analysis establishes ancient Egyptian mummies as a genetic source to study ancient human history and offers the perspective of deciphering Egypt’s past at a genome-wide level."
Krause et al., "Ancient Egyptian Mummy Genomes Suggest an Increase of Sub-Saharan African Ancestry in Post-Roman Periods" (Forthcoming Society for American Archaeology 2017 Conference Paper)
@ Archi
''completely meaningless and completely incomprehensible. ''
The only thing incomprehensible are your word-salads
''Where?''
Throught Bronze Age bulgarian barrows and Balkan Yamnaya = the source of admixture into western /central Anatolia. You're pretty slow
@Andrew
That's what I thought. It seems to be a settled issue. Why is it still being discussed in 2020? They weren't a SSA population nor were they some sort of European population. They were a North African and West Asian type population which is exactly what you would expect from a civilization located at the crossroads between North Africa and West Asia.
@Jatt_Scythian The limitation of Krause, et al., is that it is based on ancient DNA from mummies who would have been elites able to afford the luxury of that kind of preservation, and not common people. Elites are often different, population genetically, from common people today and then.
There are a number of ancient Egyptian samples coming soon, from the Old Kingdom, the transition period from the Old to the Middle Kingdom, and the Middle Kingdom.
They all have less Sub-Saharan, or even East African, ancestry than modern Egyptians.
Wow, that'll definitely make big splash when it drops - any ETA on when? Sometime this month maybe?
No idea when the paper's coming, but I guess it should be soon.
Rob "Throught Bronze Age bulgarian barrows and Balkan Yamnaya = the source of admixture into western /central Anatolia." You're pretty slow
None of this is true. Yamnaya Bulgaria is 3000BC, not 4500BC, you know nothing as always. There's no evidence that it's the Hittites. And the fact that this admixture was found in West and Central Anatolia is just a complete fraud.
Is it possible to know the blood groups of suspected steppe samples? More B and rh negative would mean more steppe related
Blood groups aren't a reliable way to track ancestry, because they're susceptible to founder effects and even selection due to diseases, like malaria.
"Fitting by manipulating outgroups is very unreliable"
first off, they are called right populations.
2nd, adding right pops (upto a reasonable limit, which is discussed in harney et al) makes the model more reliable, not less.
@ Archi
“ Yamnaya Bulgaria is 3000BC, not 4500BC, “
Yes I’m quite aware of that. You really shouldn’t argue when you can’t comprehend the language being spoken
How much SSA do modern Egyptians have?
@CrM
In G25 nMontes Maykop Novosvobodnaya is somewhat better fit than Kura Araxes and the test picks more Maykop when both are included as references. Except for ART020, where Kura-Araxes wins in both.
@Andrew
That's a fair point. Elites are different.
Gosh that paper sounds exciting though. Of course Afrocentrists and some Nordocentrists as well won't accept the conclusion regardless of how much evidence there is.
@Jatt_Scythian
David ran some G25s a while ago after the Iberomaurusian paper came out on Egyptians and other North Africans:
[1] distance%=2.7927 / distance=0.027927
Egyptian
Levant_BA 73
Iberia_BA 7.7
Ethiopia_4500BP 7.55
Yoruba 5.3
Iberomaurusian 4.45
Iberia_EN 2
Iberia_ChL 0
Iberia_MN 0
Iberia_Southwest_CA 0
Levant_N 0
Natufian 0
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-iberomaurusians.html
So it looks like modern Egyptians are maybe about 14% SSA (Ethiopia_4500BP+Yoruba), plus maybe an additional percent or two from whatever the non-West Eurasian side of Iberomaurusian turns out being.
I heard probably I year ago about a paper about Greece and the sea people, I guess it got scratched or something, or it became part on that paper on the Levant and they couldn't get anything from the Greek samples, it should have came out by now.
~15% so I'm assuming that ancients would be in the single digits so what are the people at anthrogenica even arguing about?
Also does anyone know what was in NW Russia, South Siberia, the Kazakh steppe and Tarim Basin before the migrations of Uralic and IE speaking peoples? I'm guessing EHG for NW Russia, WSHG for South Siberia and the Kazakh steppe and some combination of Iran_N, WSHG and ENA for the Tarim Basin? Is that accurate?
I gotta admit its pretty funny watching anthrogenica go full Egyptsearch.
Also I don't get the idea that Egyptians were brown skinned like Indians or such. I can't imagine if ancient Egyptians were >90% West Eurasian they would differ too much from Berbers and Levantines in pigmentation.
@David - "So, do you still believe that R1b and R1b-V1636 are native to Anatolia?"
I have never believed R1b was native to Anatolia. I'm just suggesting it could have arrived there before the Chalcolithic from a non-steppe intermediary.
Re: V1636 specifically, I'd like to know more about its modern distribution before making a judgement. I do not think our ancient sampling is good enough to say anything definitive yet about an origin, and I don't have access to this paper yet (if you're willing to email it to me that would be greatly appreciated).
I would note that V88 is present in the Levant though which I find unlikely to be due to Iberian back-migration. Most (albeit somewhat out of date) papers date V88's expansion to before the Neolithic.
@Ryan
OK, let me know if you ever spot an R1b in the pre-Neolithic or even Neolithic Near East or Africa.
My prediction is that you'll be waiting forever, like those strange people who are waiting to see R1a in pre-Bronze Age India.
@David - "My prediction is that you'll be waiting forever, like those strange people who are waiting to see R1a in pre-Bronze Age India."
I mean, it's not like we have even a single ancient sample from around Lake Chad, so I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume that there won't be any V88 there.
I would say if you found even a Bronze Age samples with R1a that lacked steppe ancestry that would be pretty surprising (as would an M269 sample in Western Europe that lacked steppe ancestry), but apparently you won't apply that standard here.
And thanks for the paper!
@Davidski, Slumbery
Yes, it would seem so. I checked it myself on G25.
The main difference between Maykop and KAC is that the former has more CHG and less Iran_N ancestry.
ART018 requires more CHG if you model it with Arslantepe_LC + KAC, hence why Maykop is preferred.
Target: TUR_Arslantepe_LC:ART018
Distance: 1.8917% / 0.01891714
52.6 TUR_Arslantepe_LC
46.6 RUS_Maykop_Novosvobodnaya
0.8 IRN_Wezmeh_N
0.0 GEO_CHG
Target: TUR_Arslantepe_LC:ART018
Distance: 1.8893% / 0.01889265
52.0 TUR_Arslantepe_LC
41.2 Kura-Araxes_Kaps-Talin
6.8 GEO_CHG
0.0 IRN_Wezmeh_N
@Ryan
R1b-V1636 has already been found in a Kura-Araxes sample, so if it arrived at Arslantepe via Kura-Araxes it'd be pretty hard to pick that up after a few generations.
R-V1636: Eneolithic steppe > Kura-Araxes?
So is it correct to say that Maykop was not a dead-end population after all?
@David - Could you clarify something for me? Maybe I'm seeing a contradiction between your Eneolithic steppe --> Kura Araxes post and this post and maybe not but...
The Eneolithic R-V1636 samples were part EHG and part CHG, correct? With 0 Anatolian ancestry?
But this paper says they are on the Anatolian-Iran Neolithic cline (with 0 EHG). So the Anatolian ancestry is non-zero.
Am I correct in seeing a direct and stark disagreement between your work on this paper? I don't believe I've seen a G25 run for those Enelothic Steppe R-V1636 samples. Can you confirm they have no Anatolian ancestry?
Even if that's the case though, I'd note that CHG is the common thread between the two sets of V1636 samples, not EHG or the steppe. For all we know R1b of various flavours was infiltrating West Asia at the same time as it was infiltrating southern Europe and R2 was infiltrating Iran.
@Ryan
The paper is saying that ancient populations from south of the Caucasus and also from Caucasus Maykop are on the Anatolian-Iran Neolithic cline. But this is bullshit anyway, because Maykop has a lot of Caucasus ancestry too that is clearly distinct from Iran Neolithic ancestry.
The authors completely ignore the R-V1636 steppe samples from the Progress-2 site north of the Caucasus, as if they never existed. This is somewhat amusing, since they were published in a paper authored by some of the authors on this paper.
R1b entered the Near East rather late. I'd even go so far as to say that the Arslantepe LC sample may have been one of the oldest bearers of R1b in Anatolia, because this is exactly the time when Anatolia starts showing close links with the North Caucasus.
You need to give up, because you can't win this. You'll see that I'm right when a heap of new Near Eastern samples are released, probably within a couple of months.
@David - "The authors completely ignore the R-V1636 steppe samples from the Progress-2 site north of the Caucasus, as if they never existed. This is somewhat amusing, since they were published in a paper authored by some of the authors on this paper."
Fair enough. It is definitely worth commenting on.
"You need to give up, because you can't win this. You'll see that I'm right when a heap of new Near Eastern samples are released, probably within a couple of months."
Are you including V88 in this? How many Egyptian samples are you expecting? I expect we'd need about ~60 or so samples to find one V88 sample in northern Egypt.
Let me ask you this - if V88 in Africa post-dates the Neolithic, does that mean you think Chadic languages received and input from Europe during the Chalcolithic or later?
@Ryan
Let me ask you this - if V88 in Africa post-dates the Neolithic, does that mean you think Chadic languages received and input from Europe during the Chalcolithic or later?
I don't have any opinions about this.
But the onus is on you to prove that V88 was present in Africa as early as the Neolithic, and you can't do that with outdated methods and modern DNA, you have to do it with ancient DNA.
Clearly, V88 is a European paternal marker, because it's found in Balkan hunter-gatherers. So you have to start with that fact.
@David - "I don't have any opinions about this."
Well clearly you do if you don't think V88 will be found in Neolithic North Africa or the Near East.
"Clearly, V88 is a European paternal marker, because it's found in Balkan hunter-gatherers. So you have to start with that fact."
I agree with you there.
Despite Areni being L1a, they had significant Progress or related ancestry. How likely is it that first wave of R1b into Anatolia including Arslantepe came with an Areni-related population.
I don't know about Areni-related specifically, but it seems to me like the R1b-V1636 at Arslantepe arrived there via the Caucasus, and with a lot of Caucasus ancestry.
By the way, it seems more likely that the Caucasus ancestry arrived from KAC or something closer to KAC than to Maykop, as we have an R1b1 in Kalavan, but no R1 in Maykop.
Well, none of the samples that I marked as potentially Maykop-related belong to R1, and most of them prefer Maykop over Kura-Araxes in fine scale PCA tests.
@Ryan,
Originally, based on modern DNA it was believed R1b is from Near East, and that R1b V88 in Africa came from the Near East. But, ancient DNA has upended that.
"do you think Sudanese and Chadic peoples are secret Indo-Europeans?"
It is not just R1b V88. There's also plenty of European mtDNA in Northwest Africa. There's even some in Black Sahara destert tribes in Chad.
There's unique European mtDNA H1 and U5b1b1 subclades in Chad. The same country where R1b V88 is most common in Africa.
In G25 PCA, Fulani (who live in Chad amoung other countries) fit as 50% Berber/Morocco and 50% Yoruba/Nigeria.
Berbers themselves are of about 30% Neolithic Spanish origin, which makes Fulani in Chad 15% Neolithic European. So, yes there's European ancestry in some tribes in Chad.
As you know......
R1b V88 is in Mesolithic Sebria, Neolithic Spain, and Late Neolithic Sardinia. I believe the most basal form of R1b V88 is the Sardinian variety.
It's pretty much a closed case, R1b V88 in Africa is from Europe.
I don't know about R1b V88 in Levant. It is safe to say R1b V88 in Africa is from Europe. I doubt R1b V88 in levant, if it even has a serious presence there, is native to Near East. It could be from Anatolian farmers who had European hunter gatherer admix. But that sounds like a stretch. It is unlikely ANE brought R1b into Near East like it did to Europe.
The studies have shown that there was Iberia -> North Africa movement in Neolithic; as there was some vice versa during Copper age
So R1b-V88 could be in Africa via Iberia
@Rob
“This might be at odds with yours & EastPoles chauvinist “models” (of R1a subclades doodled over the IE tree); but that's quite irrelevant to me”
It is not chauvinism, it is logic. If you call everything that doesn’t fit your agenda, even most logical things, chauvinism, you will not get far.
@ east Pole
Its great youre so proud of slavs; but your proposals aren’t often tangible or realistic
And you obviously don’t know what logic is; your idiosyncratic pseudo-philology isn’t it
@eastpole
Your indo Iranians (if they indeed were Indo Iranian speakers), did not come from east Europe.
They came from altai/iamc with pops like zevakinskiy_lba or dali_mlba, which are in Asia bordering Mongolia and china.
You should appreciate the nuance that this info brings to your simplistic theories.
@vAsiSTha
And where were they before the Altai/IAMC? I'm asking because you'll soon see quite a bit of Bronze Age R1a-Z93 in the forests around what is now Moscow that appears to have moved rapidly to the Altai/IMAC and eventually to South Asia.
vAsiSTha said...
"Your indo Iranians (if they indeed were Indo Iranian speakers), did not come from east Europe.
They came from altai/iamc with pops like zevakinskiy_lba or dali_mlba, which are in Asia bordering Mongolia and china.
You should appreciate the nuance that this info brings to your simplistic theories."
Well, that's perfect nonsense. Is Sintashta in the Altai or the BMAC? Sintashta is also from CWC that moved from Central Europe to Eastern Europe. Believe me, your funny deceptions aren't fooling anyone. But you're not the only one, Rob is the same.
@vAsiSTha
„Your indo Iranians (if they indeed were Indo Iranian speakers), did not come from east Europe.
They came from altai/iamc with pops like zevakinskiy_lba or dali_mlba, which are in Asia bordering Mongolia and china.”
vAsiSTha, what is your story for KAZ_Dali_MLBA:I3448 and KAZ_Zevakinskiy_BA:I3770 shown here to cluster with CWC derived cultures which came from Eastern Europe:
https://i.postimg.cc/W411Tbqx/screenshot-87.png
@davidski
Meh, female mediated steppe migration. Even the alalakh outlier had a steppe mother.
Find L657 in ancient Moscow and we will talk.
vAsiSTha said...
"zevakinskiy_lba or dali_mlba, which are in Asia bordering Mongolia and china."
Don't be ridiculous , Zevakino is on the border between Russia and Kazakhstan, just recently it was the territory of Russia (RSFSR), close to Sintashta, the area of Sintashta-Petrovka. Dali is exactly between Sintashta and Zevakino, very very very far from bordering Mongolia and china.
@Archi You are way off. Zevakino is nowhere near Sintashta; Sintashta is Southern Ural, while Zevakino is in East Kazakhstan, close to borders of Russia, Mongolia and China. The distance between Sintashta and Zevakino is around 1800 km. You can check the map here: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14615
Dali is also not between Sintashta and Zevakino, it's close to Kazakh-Chinese border and much further south, you check the map here: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2019.1273
vAsiSTha said...
"Meh, female mediated steppe migration. Even the alalakh outlier had a steppe mother.
Find L657 in ancient Moscow and we will talk."
Women don't migrate without men. If an ancestral Y-haplogroup was found in one place to a later Y-haplogroup of descendants where it did not exist before, then there was a migration from this ancestral area to the area of descendants, and it was not brought by women. Turn your brain on.
@ rozenblatt "You are way off. Zevakino is nowhere near Sintashta; Sintashta is Southern Ural, while Zevakino is in East Kazakhstan, close to borders of Russia, Mongolia and China."
East Kazakhstan, but not on the border with Mongolia and China, Sintashta-Petrovka area is close there. Yes, I confused Dali, there are two of them in Kazakhstan.
@ Archi
“ Believe me, your funny deceptions aren't fooling anyone. But you're not the only one, Rob is the same.”
Strawmen are the lowest form of arguementation ; because I have not claimed that Zevalinski isn’t from Sintashta
But I do claim East Poles view that the ancient Greeks learnt pythagoras theorem from slavs absurd; and that your claims that anyone who’s not R1a was a slave . Clearly you both have inferiority complexes
@Rob
„But I do claim East Poles view that the ancient Greeks learnt pythagoras theorem from slavs absurd”
Don’t make a fool of yourself. I have never claimed that Greeks learnt Pythagoras theorem from Slavs.
What I am interested in are similarities between Orphico-Pythagorean, Vedic and Slavic religions and cultures, and legends about Hyperborean origin of Orphico-Pythagorean religion. I know it is something new and people who used to locate the origin of everything in Egypt or Judea may be shocked. But if you knew what I know you would be less disdainful. Moreover, genetics doesn’t seem to contradict such theories.
@rozenblatt
Thank you for not making me waste my time with archi
@rob
Even I didn't claim that Dali or zevakinskiy didn't have Sintashta related ancestry.
Just that it doesn't automatically mean they had same language 1500kms apart😂
@Rob
"that your claims that anyone who’s not R1a was a slave . Clearly you both have inferiority complexes."
Strawmen this is your statement, but not mine. I wrote that you are no different from vAsiSTha. Clearly you both have inferiority complexes.
@ East Pole
What genetics supports your theory ? Lay it out
@vAsiSTha
"Even I didn't claim that Dali or zevakinskiy didn't have Sintashta related ancestry.
Just that it doesn't automatically mean they had same language 1500kms apart"
Sintashta, Dali, Zevakino are Andronovo. They spoke Indo-Iranian dialects/languages.
Zevakinskiy_lba has 50pc ancestry from Sintashta, for those wondering.
S" Dali, Zevakino are Andronovo. They spoke Indo-Iranian dialects/languages."
Surely you have a bronze age book authored by them to be so sure.
@Rob
“What genetics supports your theory ? Lay it out”
Genetics links between Eastern Europe and India, and between Eastern Europe and Greece suggest that some elements of language, religion, and culture could indeed migrate with people from Eastern Europe to India and Greece and be responsible for the similarity between Orphico-Pythagorean, Vedic and Slavic religions and cultures.
@vAsiSTha
"Surely you have a bronze age book authored by them to be so sure."
Absolutely sure, because further in these places lived only Iranians/Scythians, whose language is Iranian. Narasimhan (Hindu!) clearly showed you personally that the Indo-Aryans came from Andronovo by this way.
@Davidski
@And where were they before the Altai/IAMC? I'm asking because you'll soon see quite a bit of Bronze Age R1a-Z93 in the forests around what is now Moscow that appears to have moved rapidly to the Altai/IMAC and eventually to South Asia."
If Fatyanovo turns out to be Z93, it will be just a brain explosion for the Russian near-scientific public, such as Klesov :)
Yea the Indo-Iranian migration was mostly male mediated except for maybe places like Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Northern Pakistan where you do actually see things like mtdna U2e, U4 and U5.
Either way there's too much foolish ethnic pride in R1a (and R1b) especially since both ultimately derive from an ENA male anyways.
@Jatt scythian,
Those ENA ancestors of Y DNA R lived 50,000+ yeas ago. That is too long ago to matter. What matters is modern clades come from Proto-Indo Europeans which is why people are proud of them.
N"(Hindu!) clearly showed you personally that the Indo-Aryans came from Andronovo by this way."
Because narsimhan spoke with the bronze age steppe ladies personally to ascertain that? 😂
@Jatt_Scythian,
You have a point Y DNA R belongs to K2, which is clearly an ENA lineage not simply an ambiguous early Eurasian lineage. You sniffed that out.
ANE originally lived deep in North Asia not near the border with Europe. So, you're right Y DNA R has Upper Paloelithic Asian roots.
Yet, at the same time ANE ancestry and Y DNA R1 have existed in Europe since at least 15,000 years ago. It gives those European users here and at Anthrogenica deep roots for their Y DNA longbefore Proto-IE in Europe. This news comes, after hearing from modern Y DNA studies Y DNA R1 is a Neolithic import from the Near East. And that the vast majority of European mtDNA comes from Near East.
I think people are happy to hear that, as Eurocetntric as that might sound.
@Vladimir
Lots of Fatyanovo Z93 on the way.
@Davidski
"Lots of Fatyanovo Z93 on the way."
Z94?
If Z93 only then this is not Indo-Iranians yet.
Very funny.
Of course they're Z94, it's just that some have missing data.
Andronovo comes from Eastern Corded Ware near Moscow.
Bell Beaker comes from Western Corded Ware near Amsterdam.
They were 1,500 miles apart but genetically very similar. Interesting stuff.
No doubt Corded Ware was the main dispenser of IE languages. The area they coverage was huge. Then they also had two descendants who coverage large areas.
@Davidski.
“Very funny.
Of course they're Z94, it's just that some have missing data.”
I didn't doubt it. In this case, R1a-Z283 should be searched in Belarus, in Ukraine North of Kiev and in Russia in the area of Bryansk, Smolensk and Pskov That is, in the area of the so-called Middle Dnieper culture, in the period 3500-3000 BC
Jesus it didn't take long for the discussions to devolve into wether or not steppe ancestry in South Asia was female mediated.
I mean the haplogroups of modern Indians clearly show a better picture than the haplogroups of a few people of one site.
@Sam Andrews
"You have a point Y DNA R belongs to K2, which is clearly an ENA lineage not simply an ambiguous early Eurasian lineage. You sniffed that out."
Aren't both Ust-Ishm and Oase K2? Are they not also pretty ambiguously early Eurasian? I'm not really sure you can call K2 ENA just yet.
Interesting. Always though Fataynovo would have been Z280.
Also the Anthrogenica crowd still thinks K2 is West Eurasian. Everytime you post otherwise they come up with arguments like Malta didn't have shovel teeth or something.
@Samuel - "Originally, based on modern DNA it was believed R1b is from Near East, and that R1b V88 in Africa came from the Near East. But, ancient DNA has upended that."
Remember that I'm the one arguing that we will find V88 in Africa during the Neolithic. David is saying we won't. I'm well aware of the mtDNA (and U6 is definitely worth mentioning in this regard too).
"I don't know about R1b V88 in Levant. It is safe to say R1b V88 in Africa is from Europe. I doubt R1b V88 in levant, if it even has a serious presence there, is native to Near East. It could be from Anatolian farmers who had European hunter gatherer admix. But that sounds like a stretch."
That's pretty much the scenario I'm thinking.
Keep in mind I believe the scenarios showing Iberian Neolithic admixture in North Africa I don't believe checked for other European Neolithic sources. Cardial ware for example seems like a good candidate for more central parts of North Africa. I highly doubt it's actual Iberian admixture in Egypt, Sudan and Chad, but that doesn't exclude other European sources.
" It is unlikely ANE brought R1b into Near East like it did to Europe."
Why? The Balkans are rich in V88. Anatolia is directly adjacent and CHG is part ANE.
@Samuel Andrews Tbf Europeans don't have a lot of ANE ancestry.
@Davidski
“Lots of Fatyanovo Z93 on the way.
If Asko Parpola is right then not only R1a-Z283 was Balto-Slavic but R1a-Z93 too:
https://i.postimg.cc/mDQ77Q71/screenshot-89.png
https://books.google.pl/books?id=Ld3XCQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=pl#v=onepage&q=%22Fatyanovo-Balanovo%20people%20almost%20certainly%20spoke%20Proto-Balto-Slavic%22&f=false
@ EastPole
“ Genetics links between Eastern Europe and India, and between Eastern Europe and Greece suggest that some elements of language, religion, and culture could indeed migrate with people from Eastern Europe to India and Greece”
No shit; but wheres the evidence for yours & Archi’s crackpot models ? It doesn’t exist
@All
I'm banning discussions about deep Y-haplogroup origins.
No more debates about whether they're really East Asian, European, African, etc.
@Vladimir
"R1a-Z283 should be searched in Belarus, in Ukraine North of Kiev and in Russia in the area of Bryansk, Smolensk and Pskov That is,"
These are all assumptions that are not based on anything.
"in the area of the so-called Middle Dnieper culture, in the period 3500-3000 BC""
There are no such dates.
@ Rob
"No shit; but wheres the evidence for yours & Archi’s crackpot models ? It doesn’t exist"
There is no proof that you are writing. Your crackpot texts are always wrong.
@EastPole
"If Asko Parpola is right then not only R1a-Z283 was Balto-Slavic but R1a-Z93 too"
Asko Parpola is never right, his opinion is not based on scientific research, but only on personal assumptions.
@EastPole
The chances that Fatyanovo-Balanovo was Proto-Balto-Slavic are zero.
Balto-Slavic subclades of R1a are found much further west, around Slovakia.
The picture with R1a is clear. The first of them came to Ukraine in the Mesolithic YP4141. M459 and M198 probably lived between the Black and Caspian seas. M417 entered the process of eneolitization, at the same stage there is a metisization with chg carriers and a slow expansion North up the don begins. In the course of this process, apparently, a meeting with R1b-L51 takes place somewhere in the Upper don region. The westernmost tribe R1a-CTS4385 in the area of Northern Ukraine meets the remnants of The tripolska Sofievka culture and in the area of 3000 BC is the first to go West through Central Poland. R1a-Z645 remains in place, while R1a-Z93 occupies the Eastern range. This is Fatyanovo culture. Balanovo is a transitional culture from Fatyanovo to Abashevo. Voronezh culture is a transitional culture between Fatyanovo and Babino. R1a-Z283 occupies the Central area. This is an area North of the Pripyat river, Belarus, Western Russia. Here the R1a-M458 splits off and also goes West through southern Poland to Slovakia and Moravia. R1a-Y2395 goes North to the Baltic sea, where R1a-Z284 goes to Scandinavia, and R1a-Z280 remains on the southern shore of the Baltic sea, where it later becomes the Trzynecko-Komarovo culture.
@Vladimir
M417/L51 proto-Corded Ware is from eastern Ukraine/Lower Don, not the Upper Don.
Are you claiming Corded Ware came to Northern Europe from Eastern Ukraine not Western Ukraine?
I'm claiming that the population that became the Corded Ware people formed in eastern Ukraine.
It probably migrated west via western Ukraine, but the other option is that it moved west north of there.
So before you had the Corded Ware material culture, which material cultures or cultural horizons housed the Proto-Corded Ware? Repin?
Also Davidski thanks for putting a hold to that deep ancestry stuff, it really is not my cup of tea.
Another question, I was messing about in homeland.ku.dk and one if the early Iran_N samples on the map had R1 but that is not correct right? Don't think I saw that in the datasheets of the paper on central and south Asia.
Corded Ware ultimately derives from Sredny Stog, same as Yamnaya. I'm not sure yet what the intermediate cultures were. Maybe it was something like this?
Sredny Stog > Repin > Yamnaya > Corded Ware
Btw, none of the Neolithic samples from Iran belong to Y-haplogroup R1. That particular sample belongs to R2.
@Davidski
"M417/L51 proto-Corded Ware is from eastern Ukraine/Lower Don, not the Upper Don."
No, that's not a fact. The Lower Don is on the territory of Russia in general, as well as Khvalynsk, and in general, there is no argument that R1a did not start its spread from the Upper Don. There is no argument that its spread did not go through the Upper Don, the corded Dereivka culture is more northern than the Sredniy Stog.
Vladimir said...
"The picture with R1a is clear."
Nothing is clear.
"... R1a-Z283 occupies the Central area. This is an area North of the Pripyat river, Belarus, Western Russia. ..."
You're fantasizing against the data.
Copper Corded Ware / Baltic LN Estonia Kunila [Kunila 2 / MA973] 2580-2340 cal BCE M R1a1a1b1a Z283
Copper Corded Ware/Battle Axe Sweden Bergsgraven [ber1] 2620–2470 calBCE M R1a-Z283
Bronze Estonia Jõelähtme, Harju; Jõelähtme 34, cist? [0LS11 / AI 5306: kogum 1] 1060–850 cal BC (2815±33 BP, Hela-2361) M R1a1-Z283
Bronze Urnfield Germany Halberstadt [I0099 / HAL 36] 1193-979 calBCE (2889±30 BP, MAMS-21484) M R1a1a1b1a2 (Z280)
here was a obly movement from the west to the east, there was no movement from the east to the west, not even a purely archeological one.
Corded Ware/Fatyanovo>Balanovo>Abashevo>Sintashta>Andronovo
Wikipedia. Fatyanovo–Balanovo culture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatyanovo%E2%80%93Balanovo_culture
"The Fatyanovo culture has been described as a "genuine folk movement" from Central Europe in the Russian forests."
"Spreading eastward down the Volga the Fatyanovo people discovered the copper ores of the western Ural foothills,"
"The metallurgy-based Fatyanovo settlements in this area gave rise to the Balanovo culture around 2300 BC"
"The Balanovo culture became the metallurgical heartland of the wider Fatyanovo horizon"
"On its southeastern fringes, the Balanovo culture had contributed to the formation of the Abashevo culture. This culture would play an important role in the emergence of the Sintashta culture"
Samuel Andrews said...
"Corded Ware/Fatyanovo>Balanovo>Abashevo>Sintashta>Andronovo"
Balanovo is part of Fatyanovo.
The problem is that this chain is only a cultural chain, it can only mean borrowings. But |Fatyanovo| > > Babino is also established by anthropological affinity.
Do you guys reckon Babino is a dead end or linked to the Greeks? Kinda seems like the place for a Greaco-Aryan connection to me.
@Davidski
"Sredny Stog > Repin > Yamnaya > Corded Ware"
This seems to make sense. Or even Yamnaya, Proto-CW and Afasanievo out of Repin but there is still a little time gap there. There is that one Afasanievo sample which had L51 and we've seen it early Corded Ware now as well.
"Btw, none of the Neolithic samples from Iran belong to Y-haplogroup R1. That particular sample belongs to R2"
Thanks, this is what I figured as well. I just checked the sheets and unless if I looked wrong that particular sample didnt even have an y-dna assigned, the others were R2.
Copper Axe
"Kinda seems like the place for a Greaco-Aryan connection to me."
This is a huge amount of evidence and it proves long ago.
"Yamnaya > Corded Ware
This seems to make sense."
Archaeologists are against it. Genetics doesn't confirm it.
Babino (or Multi-Cordoned Ware) might be an adstrate in proto-Thracians.
Legends link the Greeks more toward central Europe, Pannonia, West Balkans, maybe even northern Europe. (e.g. amber in Shaft Graves).
Wikipedia has a pretty good summary
''During the end of the 3rd millennium BC (circa 2200 BC), the indigenous inhabitants of mainland Greece underwent a cultural transformation attributed to climate change, local events and developments (i.e. destruction of the "House of the Tiles"), as well as to continuous contacts with various areas such as western Asia Minor, the Cyclades, Albania, and Dalmatia.[7] These Bronze Age people were equipped with horses, surrounded themselves with luxury goods, and constructed elaborate shaft graves.[8] The acropolis of Mycenae, one of the leading centers of Mycenaean culture, located in Argolis, northeast Peloponnese, was built on a defensive hill at an elevation of 128 m (420 ft) and covers an area of 30,000 m2 (320,000 sq ft).[1] The Shaft Graves found in Mycenae signified the elevation of a local Greek-speaking royal dynasty whose economic power depended on long-distance sea trade.[9] Grave Circles A and B, the latter found outside the walls of Mycenae, represents one of the significant characteristics of the early phase of the Mycenaean civilization.[2]'
Archaeology suggests that the contacts with West Asia were earlier, but then sort of 'disruptions' came along down the East Adriatic, into NW Greece c 2200 BC. The rise of Shaft Grave period a few hundred years later represents the crystliazing of one of ruling dynasties, e.g. the Perseids.
It's not a resume, it's just some scribbler on Wikipedia. It's worse than that.
Wikipedia has a better reference to archaeological research on Babino culture and Mycenae:
"The similarity can be seen in the arrangement of graves, funeral rites and inventory. In principle, large deep burial pits are close, sometimes with dulls along the edges. In KMK we know the stone lining of the walls of the burial pits, typical for Mycenaean tombs. It is similar to the way the logs or stone slabs cover the burial pits. In both cases the rite of trizna is very common - burial of animals, in particular horses. The position of buried animals on the back with hands on the pelvis, or on the side, with the hands of the face. Among the similar equipment, in addition to [discoid] horse jowl-latches, are flint arrows with a notch in the base, straighteners of arrow shafts, bronze tips of spears with a long unclosed bushing. A common feature is the technique of cladding [gold], common both in the KMK and in Mycenae". (S. S. Berezanskaya (1986: 38))
Тhe Thracians are not in main way connected with the Babino culture, they are rather connected with cultures like Noua < Sabatinovka < Srubnaya.
@Archi
Is the borondino hoard typically attributed to the Babino culture? Because there are similarities in those weapon styles and those of the Mycenaean era Greeks.
Regarding the Babino, isn't there a little time issue as it began in the 22nd century bc, which is about the same time as the Greeks are supposed to have entered Greece? And it lasted a bit longer too. But then again you could've had multiple migration waves and perhaps it began a bit earlier.
@Archi
"Archaeologists are against it. Genetics doesn't confirm it."
Which material culture or cultural horizon represents the Proto-CW according to you? Before we see the Corded Ware proper.
@Davidski But didn't you said the there was Proto-corded-Ware in the middle don?
Leo Klein wrote:
The burial of a couple of horses in Marathon, which were obviously intended for a cart, was also recorded, although in the grave they were without a cart - Smirnov collected a lot of such burials, all of them - in log, Andronovo and Babino cultures. Sacrifice of a horse was found in the Mycenaean burial ground of Adonia west of Mycenaean (Demakopoulou 1996: 24-25). The skeleton of a decapitated horse was found in a mine tomb, the skeleton of a horse was found in another tomb in a dromos and 14 horses had their jaws under it. This ritual practice of Makkay (Makkay 2000: 41) is compared with the rituals of Sintashta, where entire skeletons of sacrificial horses and individual bones and jaws are almost always lying in male graves (Gening et al. 1992: 380).
Berezanskaya indicates similarity with the burials of chariots of Sintashta and other monuments of the Urals (Petrovskaya culture, Novokumak horizon). She considers them to be earlier than Mycenae, and discoidal horse cheek-latches in the steppes are the source for the type, as the German researcher S. Penner agrees with her (Penner 1998: 23 - 108). This gives Berezanskaya (1986: 37) an opportunity to "distinguish a narrow (in one or two centuries) pre-Srubnaya horizon in a vast territory from the Dniester to the Urals, occupied by three quite separate, but at the same time culturally and possibly ethnically similar massifs - KMK, Abashevskaya and Sintashtinsky type monuments" (see also Mimokhod 2005).
And in the CMK culture itself the researcher establishes the presence of "rich burials of warriors-wheelers in large pits with wooden log cabins containing a large number of weapons, remains of chariots, horse cheek-latches and burials of horses (Bliznitsa, Ostraya Mogila, Volnaya Ukraina 1/5, Zavalovka, etc.)". These monuments "stretched a long chain from the Mycenaean tombs to the Sintashtinsk burial ground" (1986: 42). Berezanskaya speaks directly about migration and the invasion of Greece: "In this regard, it is important that
the recognition of the fact that the Mycenaean tombs themselves have no cultural origins in Greece and have been left by the descendants" (ibid.).
I would note two other striking similarities between the Mycenaean culture and Sintashta and Arkaim. Firstly, in Sintashta there is a ground burial ground CI with rectangular pits, enclosed in a ring of turf-lined walls with clay coating on the outside, the diameter of the ring is 24 m - the whole picture is extremely similar to the famous rings A and B with the Mycenae mine tombs. Subsequently, a low flat mound was erected on this circle in Sintashta, somewhat masking this similarity, but in the reconstruction it becomes clearer. The same burial mound was found in Arkaim - it is the Bolshekaragan burial mound - a ditch in a circle and the practical absence of the mound, the ditch has more than a dozen burial pits, mainly oriented meridionally, as in Mycenae, in pits 28 or 29 skeletons.
Secondly, Sintashta also has real toloses - these are clearly the ancestors of the toloses of Mycenae Greece, who have no prototypes in previous Greek history (cf. Pelon 1976). It is true that this tolos is small in comparison with the Greek ones - 3.5 m - and is built from slabs of dried mud, but nevertheless there is everything that is needed - the dome, the grave, was also dromos (destroyed by robbers). Falsely vented domes made of clay blocks are also found in Arkaim.
We can also compare some graphic motifs. A ritual horn axe from Dudarkov in the Kiev region is connected with the culture of multicordoned ware ceramics. It shows a tree with a cogwheel above which the sun is shown, and under it seven animals graze - a horse, donkey or deer and whine. Berezanskaya, noting the lush crown with volute-like curls in the image of the tree, compares the tree with a palm tree and thinks that it testifies to distant southern motifs, though the plot itself (the place of the gods' meeting) is compared with the one described in Younger Edda (Berezanskaya et al. 1986: 40). Similar plants can be seen on Mycenaean images - for example, on an overlay of coloured paste from the Spata, Attica, on Mycenaean pottery from different times. The engraving from Dudarkov especially resembles the palm trees depicted on a sword from the Mycenae mine tomb, where they form the background for the scene of tormenting a lion.
"Iliad" mentions a helmet made of boar fangs, which at first was perceived as nonsense, although a detailed description was given there. However, boar fangs used as helmet records (around 2000 BC) were found in Mariupol in Ukraine. Many such helmets have been found in the Mycenaean culture (tombs #515 in Mycenae, Egin).
It seems like Areni aside from having Steppe ancestry also has some European farmer?
Target: ARM_Areni_C_scaled
Distance: 1.6913% / 0.01691259
60.6 AZE_Caucasus_lowlands_LN
26.4 RUS_Progress_En-Vonyuchka_En
13.0 UKR_N_o
0.0 TUR_Barcin_N
Target: ARM_Areni_C_scaled
Distance: 1.8070% / 0.01806979
73.4 AZE_Caucasus_lowlands_LN
26.6 Corded_Ware_DEU
Did both Steppe and EEF come in one batch into Chalcolithic Armenia? If so then a CWC-like population rich could have existed as early as 4100BC.
https://i.imgur.com/iWMowy3.png
@Mike
I'm a bit fuzzy on where the Lower Don becomes the Middle Don, but the general area in question is east of the Dnieper and west of the Volga.
@Copper Axe
"Which material culture or cultural horizon represents the Proto-CW according to you? Before we see the Corded Ware proper."
In the southern part of Eastern Europe, the cultures of corded ware pottery and battle axes begin with the Dereivka culture (4250-3750BC), which contained their features. Further transition to the Corded Ware Culture is not clear, there are many small cultures, each of which can claim directly ancestral.
It is like with the Slavs and Balts, it has always been clear that the Fatyanov culture is not their ancestor, only the eastern Fatyanovites could be the ancestors of the eastern Balts, but not the Slavs, as Denisova believed. It is clear that the Balto-Slavic community was the Trzciniec community, which came from the West, but which also does not come from one CWC culture, but from several. At the end of the Trzciniec community, the Lusatian culture emerged, apparently already purely Proto-Slavic, and to the east of it already lived proto-Balts and probably some inseparable Balto-Slavs.
"Regarding the Babino, isn't there a little time issue as it began in the 22nd century bc, which is about the same time as the Greeks are supposed to have entered Greece?"
This mistake was made by amateurs, the Greeks came to Greece not earlier than the 17(18)th century BC, they created the Mycenaean civilization, before that time the Greeks were not there, as well as the Mycenaean civilization.
Of course, the Greeks mythes have nothing Panonic, especially the Balkans.
Where did the Indo-Aryans come from (Kuzmina) (1994)
"researchers of the Mycenaean civilization suggest that the Mycenaean dynasties
have come to Greece from the North and are looking for the origin of a number of Mycenae material culture traits. Especially important is the mythologeme of swans horses dragging the chariot of the solar god across the sky [Ivanov, 1969, p. 54], the possibility of the following whose Mediterranean origin is excluded and which could only occur in Northern Eurasia, where the arrival of swans symbolizes the advent of spring. In Greek myth, the chariot of Apollo, harnessed by swans, arrives from the Riphean mountains - the Urals."
"A specimen from Potapovka is decorated with Mycenaean ornaments of opposite triangles forming a zigzag along the edge of the disk, a wave with a sunken background along the plank and festoons around the hole. On the psalia from the Utevka along the edge of the shield there is a three-row chess ornament, along the bar-a running wave with a sunken triangular base. On kondrashkina psalis - around the hole and on the strip — blade and zigzag on the strap, similar to potapovskiy. Pichaevsky's copy is decorated with a chain of rhombuses and a zigzag along the edge, V-shaped figures along the bar, they form a rosette around the hole; on one spike — a cross, on two-a four-pointed solar sign.
The Epiphany Psalms are ornamented along the edge of the plank with a running wave, and on three spikes - spirals forming a rosette. Psalis of Candesti decorated on edge with two rows of triangles forming a zigzag. On the Sarata-Monteoru psalia, the plank is ornamented with a zigzag and isosceles triangles with festoons hanging from the tops; the copy from Kyrlomanesti has a running wave with dots in the center, and teeth on the edge.
These ornaments belong to the Mycenaean type (Fig. 38), as already mentioned-
it was necessary to write [Smirnov, Kuzmina, 1977, p. 46-50, Fig. 12]. The Bogoyavlenskiy and Utevkian Psalis are ornamented with the classic Mycenaean running wave."
@Davidski
I'm a bit fuzzy on where the Lower Don becomes the Middle Don, but the general area in question is east of the Dnieper and west of the Volga.”
In the terminology of archeology, the Lower don is a steppe, the Middle don is a forest-steppe, and the Upper don is a forest.
@CrM
You are tricking yourself a bit with that set up I think. If you try to tear down Areni into deeper ancestry you will see that they have hardly any WHG ancestry. The reason why it takes Corded Ware as a source in that set-up is that AZE_Caucasus_lowlands_LN lacks any EHG or AG3-related ancestry, so it can only be sourced from the CWC reference pop. The fit remains OK (because CWC do not have that super lot WHG ancestry either), but I think it is a false friend.
@CrM
By the way, I could not replicate your first test in G25 nMontes (scaled, no penalty):
"sample": "Areni C:Average",
"distance": 1.5962,
"Caucasus_lowlands_LN": 58.5,
"Progress_En": 19.5,
"Barcin_N": 15,
"Vonyuchka_En": 7
"UKR_N_o": 0,
@Davidski If it's the Don we're talking about then the sites could be the ivanobugor and Dronisk burial grounds, which are large ones.
The problem is - there is no KMK in Balkans, no KMK in Armenia.
Sintishta -like features are going to be found in Europe & West Anatolia, which is due to the fact that Sintashta came from central Europe, not because there was an all-conquering Babino invasion.
Th R1a-Z93 individual in MBA Bulgaria was in a commoner burial, at the edge of an earlier EBA barrow
''This mistake was made by amateurs, the Greeks came to Greece not earlier than the 17(18)th century BC, ''
Aegeanists do not write about any 16th cenutry migration, this seems to be stated without much substantiation
Let's see what aDNA from Greece shows.
@Davidski
Sorry for diverting the discussion.
You mentioned the Egypt paper and Z93 from Fataynovo-Balanovo? Is there anything else interesting coming out soon? particularly North Eurasia and South Asia.
I also wonder if we will ever get any dna > 45000 years old.
Thanks.
@CPk
"Tbf Europeans don't have a lot of ANE ancestry."
Well, what do you define as a lot here? They seem to have quite a bit though I am not sure exactly how much. But just think that EHG and CHG had it and possibly was present in some WHG as well.
Also what accounts for the excess East Eurasian in Iran_n I've seen in some models .
@Jatt_Scythian
I know other people will disagree, and they may be right but I think that whatever it is, it is related to the ENA in ANE. My guess is the ENA-WE split happened around Iran-Central Asia so it is likely an early ENA branch, hence the Onge-like component showing up in some models.
@Jatt_Scythian
There's nothing really interesting or unexpected from Siberia and South Asia coming soon.
There are some new samples from India, including the IVC, but I've heard their quality is very low.
@rob
“ Sintashta came from central Europe, not because there was an all-conquering Babino invasion. ”
This outdated funny theory very much struck the brain of both Russian and non-Russian archaeologists. And although with each new study it is obvious that the steppe component with haplogroups R1a and R1b appears in Central Europe after 2800 BC, everyone continues to claim that it came to Fatyanovo, where it is found in 3100 BC, from Central Europe. Dogmas in archaeology are very strong. In fact, the CWC of Central Europe R1a-CTS4385 have never been to Fatyanovo, and R1a-Z93 Fatyanovo have never been to Central Europe. They separated when they were R1a-M417 in the forest-steppe between the Dnieper and the Don about 3500 BC. R1a-CTS4385 went from there to Europe and never came back. R1a-Z645 remained in place and moved slightly North to the northernmost part of Ukraine, South of Belarus, and generally to the area of the Pripyat river. And it was from there, and not from Central Europe, that R1a-Z93 moved to the Southeast forming Fatyanovo.
@Vladimir
Do you have any reliable sources showing Fatyanovo C14 dates as old as 3100 calBC?
@ Vladimir
Your speculations on R1a's ancient history are irrelevant here
By central Europe, i dont mean Saxony or Austria, but in sensu latu even western Ukraine is in the geographical centre of "Europe' (given that Europe stretches all the way to Urals). Maybe have a gander on google maps.
Now, the MNE admixture and sophisticated technology of Sintashta point to somewhere close to the Eastern Carpathian hinterland.
@Davidski
The dronikhi burial ground stays in the Tazovsky District and the ivanovobogor in the pavlovsky district, both in the middle don.The lower don ends in the volgograd oblast.
@Mike
The area I'm talking about lies roughly between Kharkiv, Voronezh, Rostov and Volgograd.
I don't think we'll see any sort of hard border between the Lower and Middle Don areas in terms of these burials.
I guess that these burials are elongated, which is typical for the middle neolithic in the north pontic steppe. Then it must belong to the Kvityana or Dereivka culture.
I don't know if these burials are elongated or which cultures they belong to specifically.
But they're on the steppe (south/southeast of the forest/forest steppe boundary) and date to 5,000-4,000 BCE.
Here is the newest work with chronological dates. The old ones from the settlement of ZBS 3030-2860 BC. It's in Russian, but the dates are clear
https://ras.jes.su/ra/s086960630004830-2-1
@rob
If Ukraine, then I agree.
Those dates seem to fall after 2800 BC; apart from one outlier with big CI
@Davidski
Are we finally going to see samples from proto-Corded Ware?
I don't think anyone really knows what proto-Corded Ware is exactly.
But you should soon see how the early Corded Ware/Yamnaya populations formed on the steppe between the Dnieper and Volga, with CHG-related ancestry diffusing from the south into hunter-gatherer populations up there rich in R1a and R1b.
We'll need hundreds of samples from the Eneolithic steppe to work out all of the details, and that might take years.
@Slumbery
"If you try to tear down Areni into deeper ancestry you will see that they have hardly any WHG ancestry."
I know, but I think this has to do with the complex structure of deeper ancestry. Something that I noticed a while back is that modern Caucasians hardly show any WHG ancestry, despite often preferring Yamnaya over Steppe_Maykop, Sintashta, Tyumen or other Steppe samples.
Here's an example. Theoretically this sample should show at least some WHG ancestry when doing a deep ancestry breakdown, but it doesn't.
https://i.imgur.com/VhBcNlc.png
You can also see that Areni wants some mix of EHG + ANE-rich Tyumen.
https://i.imgur.com/9efpk6E.png
"By the way, I could not replicate your first test in G25 nMontes (scaled, no penalty):"
I was using default Vahaduo with averaged and non averaged scaled AZE_LN samples clumped together.
@Slumbery
By the way, Areni have some WHG ancestry if you model them with AZE_LN, ANE and WHG.
https://i.imgur.com/ASuyxTk.png
«But they're on the steppe (south/southeast of the forest/forest steppe boundary) and date to 5,000-4,000 BCE.»
Yes. And from 4000 to 3000 BCE, these people were a little further North, Lipetsk, Bryansk, Chernihiv, Kiev, Zhytomyr, Gomel, Smolensk, Mogilev, Vitebsk, Minsk. Since they were displaced from more southern areas by Yamnaya R1b-Z2103. A large migration from the Don to the north of Ukraine can be clearly traced archaeologically. Archaeologists call this migration of the stroke-comb pottery culture. Russian archaeologist Stavitsky believes that stroke-comb pottery originated on the basis of stroke Neolithic pottery of the Middle Don. Those tribes that went South of Pripyat mixed with the EPI Trypillian and EPI Sredniy Stog population, for example, Volyn culture, Kiev Cherkassy culture. These are R1a-CTS4385, also R1a-L51, which were recently discovered in the South of Poland. R1a-M458 probably followed the same route. R1a-Z283 were further North, for example, in the area of the settlement of Serteya VIII layer B or in the area of the Usvyatskaya culture, Rudnyanskaya culture, East polesskaya culture. That's why they were in the Baltic.
By the territorial description and chronology you have given i believe we're talking about the dronikhi burial ground in the Talovsky Distric, which contains both Sredny Stog and a group of elongated burial of the neolithic
Yes, Dronikha is an established population of the proto CWC. Not a culture, but just a population
I have a bad feeling Corded Ware is from Yamnaya. I say bad feeling because it would mean we were wrong (the ones of us who are smart).
The similarity between Early Corded Ware and Yamnaya are striking. Different Yamnaya may have had different Y DNA just as different Corded Ware had different Y DNA. Which can explain R1a M417 and R1b L51, somehow also being from Yamnaya.
Whatever the case, there's no denying R1b M269 and R1a M417 come from the same population and this populaion was Indo European speaking.
@Vladimir
Apparently Z645 moved west into the Balkans along the steppes just north of the Black Sea before Yamnaya formed, as early as the Eneolithic.
But I guess we should wait for the official C14 dates for these samples.
@CrM
You are right that Areni had WHG ancestry in the extent its EHG ancestry incorporated, but nothing more. The WHG part would disappear from the results as soon as you included Sidelkino and it is also eliminated if you are included Progress/Vonyucka and some population to make up for the excess AF in Areni compared to AZE LN (The Croatian WHG type sample is rather heavily Anatolian admixed). So no detectable WHG that would come with LN European farmer ancestry that would be incorporated in a CWC-like population.
But you are right, I should not say that Areni have absolutely no Western HG ancestry. I just do not think they had anything that would indicate ancient proto-CWC like ancestry from the Western Steppe.
I am going to think about why we got different results with the Ukraine N outlier. I used genoplot.
"The problem is - there is no KMK in Balkans, no KMK in Armenia."
What does KMK have to do with Armenia? There is a thousand years between the KMK and the IE invasion of Armenia. The KMK is great on the Danube, that's where the Greeks started their migration to Greece. No problems.
Vladimir said...
"Fatyanovo, where it is found in 3100 BC"
That's not true, that's your own personal fiction. There are no such dates. It's your own personal flip-flop.
"In fact, the CWC of Central Europe R1a-CTS4385 have never been to Fatyanovo, and R1a-Z93 Fatyanovo have never been to Central Europe. They separated when they were R1a-M417 in the forest-steppe between the Dnieper and the Don about 3500 BC. R1a-CTS4385 went from there to Europe and never came back. R1a-Z645 remained in place and moved slightly North to the northernmost part of Ukraine, South of Belarus, and generally to the area of the Pripyat river. And it was from there, and not from Central Europe, that R1a-Z93 moved to the Southeast forming Fatyanovo."
It's not fact. It's all your personal fiction, you're like a Kaska.
@ Archi
“ What does KMK have to do with Armenia? There is a thousand years between the KMK and the IE invasion of Armenia. The KMK is great on the Danube, that's where the Greeks started their migration to Greece. No problems. ”
The question some asked was KMK -> Greco -Armenian ?
So I pointed out that kMK is lacking in Armenia (which rather seems to like to catacomb)
As for Greeks; I defer until a detailed & contextual analysis of more aDNA data .
@Davidski
«Apparently Z645 moved west into the Balkans along the steppes just north of the Black Sea before Yamnaya formed, as early as the Eneolithic.
But I guess we should wait for the official C14 dates for these samples.»
Of course, time will tell. You mean apparently Usatovo. I have no idea what kind of people they were. I can only guess that they were CHG/EEF/WHG people. They should be similar to autosomal Progress with the addition of the Ukrainian Neolithic and Anatolian Trypillya farmers. By Y haplogroup, they can be J2a, let's say L283. The first R1a appeared in the Balkans most likely only with the arrival of Babino (KMK).
The Greeks and the Armenians are completely different times.
Here is an example of the layout and location within the KMK (Babino).
1. Proto-Greek: Western KMK, in the Danube region. Numerous psalms of the Mycenaean type were found there, naturally about five hundred years before they appeared in Greece.
2. Proto-Armenians: Eastern KMK, in the Don area, may be northern. The name of the Don as Tanais looks like Armenian.
3. Proto-Phrygians : between them, in the Middle KMK. Their language is something between the Kentum Greek and Satem Armenian.
The Greeks went to Greece immediately with the disintegration of the KMK, apparently under pressure from the Srubnaya tribes. Armenians and the Phrygians came to Asia Minor only with the invasion of the Sea Peoples.
@Vladimir
Usatovo is R1a. I'm not aware of any J2a in these samples.
The Fatyanovans lived very far from the sea, and naturally, they had to lose the Indo-European name of the sea (mari).
Leo Klein writes:
The Greeks borrowed the name of the sea (θαλασσα) from the linguistic substrate, that is, the idea that the Proto-Greeks were a continental people.
For the Greeks, the Black Sea was just Pont - a path. Тhe Babino culture stretched along the Black Sea.
@Mike & Vladimir
I found this paper about the Dronikha culture.
https://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/DocumentaPraehistorica/article/view/44.12
It's possible that the new samples are associated with this culture, but they come from the southern edge of the zone marked in blue in Map 1, and also from nearby parts of eastern Ukraine.
So let's wait and see.
@gamerz_J
Out of respect for David I think we shouldn't talk about deep ancestry. But I'm very interested in your theory offline somewhere. Email?
@Samuel Andrews
Why would you say CW derives from Yamnaya? We haven't seen a single R1a or L51 in Yamnaya yet.
@Jatt_Scythian
Yes I agree, we should not derail the thread. I am not an expert or anything but you are welcome to email me at gamerzj2000-at-protonmail.com
@Archi sorry for my late reply but thanks for this stuff, very interesting!
@ Archi
“ Here is an example of the layout and location within the KMK (Babino).”
I guess it’s possible, it does have something of a simplistic appeal
But as I said; the aDNA and inferences from modern archaeologists is what’ll matter at the end
I think the site in question sits in the Reka Chernaya Kalitva river.
Памятники неолита и энеолита в устье Черной Калитвы
Andrei Skorobogatov.
What you found is just pre maykop individuals in south east pontic. Arslantepe LC ART018 is something like modern Hemshin and Laz people. PreMaykop is excatly south caucasian...Most probably both maykop and art018 like people have commen source around south caucaus or transcacaus. May be pontic alps...
@Gökhan
Take a close look at the PCA I posted.
Arslantepe LC shows a lot of substructure, and some of the samples are clearly pulling towards Maykop.
That's because they have recent admixture.
@Davidski
I think Damgaard et al (2018) found some East Asian ancestry in ancient BA Anatolians, could it be connected to this Maykop signal?
@Copper Axe
"I was messing about in homeland.ku.dk and one if the early Iran_N samples on the map had R1 but that is not correct right? Don't think I saw that in the datasheets of the paper on central and south Asia."
Thanks for the correction. Looking at Lazaridis et al 2016 that sample seems to be CT (and just ".." in Narasimhan et al. 2019). The homeland.ku.dk atlas has not been updated since 2018 and I cannot correct the old version, but a new atlas will appear soon with the correction. :)
Post a Comment