search this blog

Thursday, October 6, 2022

Balto-Slavs and Sarmatians in the Battle of Himera


G25 coordinates for most of the samples from the recent Reitsema et al. paper are available in a text file here. They're also in the G25 datasheets at the usual link here.

A basic distance analysis with the G25 data at Vahaduo shows that the two samples labeled Himera_480BCE_3 are either early Balts or Slavs. I suspect that they're Slavs, because I believe that early Slavs had this type of Baltic-like genetic structure before mixing with their non-Slavic-speaking neighbors. Well, that's my pet theory for now, so take it or leave it.

Distance to: ITA_Sicily_Himera_480BCE_3:I10943
0.03393838 HUN_IA_La_Tene_o:I18226
0.03572886 DEU_MA_Krakauer_Berg:KRA001
0.03618075 RUS_Pskov_VA:VK159
0.03899963 SWE_Gotland_VA:VK463
0.03915018 Baltic_EST_IA:s19_V12_1

Distance to: ITA_Sicily_Himera_480BCE_3:I10949
0.03573636 HUN_IA_La_Tene_o3:I25524
0.03698768 HUN_IA_La_Tene_o:I18226
0.03732752 SWE_Skara_VA:VK397
0.03767022 Baltic_EST_IA:s19_V12_1
0.03772687 DEU_MA_Krakauer_Berg:KRA001

On the other hand, I'm almost certain that the two Himera_480BCE_4 samples are Sarmatians. The good old G25 does it again!

Distance to: ITA_Sicily_Himera_480BCE_4:I10944
0.03100861 KAZ_Segizsay_Sarmatian:SGZ002
0.03548059 MDA_Sarmatian:I11925
0.03619219 RUS_Urals_Sarmatian:MJ56
0.03626538 RUS_Urals_Sarmatian:chy001
0.03904260 RUS_Urals_Sarmatian:MJ41

Distance to: ITA_Sicily_Himera_480BCE_4:I10947
0.02989458 RUS_Urals_Sarmatian:MJ43
0.03052790 RUS_Urals_Sarmatian:chy002
0.03170622 KAZ_Kangju:DA226
0.03288789 TUR_BlackSea_Samsun_Anc_C:I4529
0.03310149 KAZ_Aigyrly_Sarmatian:AIG003
See also...

Slavic-like Medieval Germans

159 comments:

Davidski said...

I should get some sort of scientific grant for what I do...

- reviewing papers

- uploading G25 coords online

Samuel Andrews said...

You should get paid

Matt said...

Yeah, it's interesting that these Himera_480BCE_2 guys come slightly closer to Russians, specifically NW Russians (remarkably both to present day and Viking Age from the same Pskov area), than they do to Lithuanians / Latvians.

Compared to LTU_LBA and LVA_LBA they seem East Asian Siberian shifted, while compared to EST_IA they look southern shifted (slight excess of some southern Western Eurasian ancestry).

Suggests certainly that people relatively alike to NW Russians must've existed already in some place (whether they were large in population size or ancestral to the similar blends that exist today, who knows).

The Himera_480BCE_2 guys with E1b-V13 are the ones I was most interested in seeing. It looks like they fall pretty definitively into the LBA-IA North Balkan-Pannonian poolm with the closest matches being Hungary_IA_Syrmian, SRB_BA and SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros_oAegean in my set. So definitely within that pool, but not the part of it with the HG-enriched ancestry as we see represented by the SRB_IronGates_EBA sample, the samples from Maros culture, Transdanubian Encrusted Pottery etc.

Himera_480BCE_5 looks more Georgian or North Caucasus or ancient Armenian rather than like present-day Armenian.

(Himera_480BCE_1 obviously fits the profile of Mycenaeans).

Full set of distances: https://imgur.com/a/4qz7bc6

I wonder how much the provenance of these samples is because they were all linked into some trade network put together by IA Western steppe peoples who contracted out their services for war booty? That would seem to be a common factor in the region centre-of-distribution here.

Rob said...

How interesting that Greeks were already familiar with early Slavs ~ 480 BC. The correlation between autosomes with R1a-Y33 and I2a-L1826 is neat. iirc the latter was found in Narva_HG, but evidently did not expand rapidly with Slavs later on.
The Sarmatians have R1a-Z93 and a N (?similar to IR-1 line)
Also the E-V13 guys seem to plot close to BA Hungary.

Tarbagan said...

@ Davidski
" basic distance analysis with the G25 data at Vahaduo shows that the two samples labeled Himera_480BCE_3 are either early Balts or Slavs. I suspect that they're Slavs, because I believe that early Slavs had this type of Baltic-like genetic structure before mixing with their non-Slavic-speaking neighbors. Well, that's my pet theory for now, so take it or leave it.

Distance to: ITA_Sicily_Himera_480BCE_3:I10943
0.03618075 RUS_Pskov_VA
0.04154581 Baltic_EST_IA
0.04191435 HUN_IA_La_Tene_o3"

But with the same success, they can be Finno-Ugric (like Estonians). Here it is rather easier to connect them with certain peoples who were known to the Greeks - such as the Neuri, Melanchlen, Budin or Androphagi, but one can only guess about their linguistic affiliation. They could generally speak isolated languages.

Davidski said...

I doubt that early Finno-Ugrians would have Balto-Slavic drift and Y-DNA.

Estonians are only Balto-Slavic-related because they actually have Baltic and even recent Slavic ancestry.

ambron said...

David:

"I suspect that they're Slavs, because I believe that early Slavs had this type of Baltic-like genetic structure before mixing with their non-Slavic-speaking neighbors."

It is only important to remember that the modern Baltic-like genotipe (Lithuanian, Belarusian, Russian) was not in its geographic location at that time. Until the Middle Ages, the Baltic BA type was dominant there. Today's Lithuanians, Belarusians and Russians are strongly pulled back from the Baltic BA towards the Poles.

ancestralwhispers.org said...

I10951 is probably a Maeotian or a Sindi, an ancient Circassian or sorts.

Target: ITA_Sicily_Himera_480BCE_5:I10951
Distance: 2.7640% / 0.02764002
49.4 Caucasus_Hunter-Gatherer_GEO_CHG
19.2 Pontic_Steppe_Yamnaya_Pastoralist_Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
18.0 Anatolia_Neolithic_Farmer_TUR_Barcin_N
11.2 Levant_Neolithic_Farmer_Levant_PPNB
2.2 Iran_Neolithic_Farmer_IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N

High CHG, very little Iran_N, lowish Anatolia_N with an elevated Levant_N is a Northwest Caucasian genetic signature. The biggest difference between modern Circassians and this sample is that the former also score additional East Asian input.

Tarbagan said...

@Davidski

"Estonians are only Balto-Slavic-related because they actually have Baltic and even recent Slavic ancestry."

As for the Slavic admixture in Estonians, I have never heard, rather the opposite - the Russians of Pskov are genetically mixed with Chud (Estonians), so they always show a drift towards the Baltics. And what is Balto-Slavic genetic drift? Its the component of Bronze Age Kivutkalns.
And it is not necessarily related to the actual Slavs and Balts, but may be some ancient actochthonous stratum.

John Smith said...

As usual thank you Davidski for always keeping us updated with Global25!

I wanted to point out a very small oversight, there is a sample with double colon (ITA_Sicily_IA::I13125). Both ITA_Sicily_IA:I13125 and ITA_Sicily_IA:I13128 are very low coverage samples btw.

Copper Axe said...

@Davidski

Given the 480 BC date I don't think these two steppe nomads were actual Sarmatians, as these lived quite far to the east back then still, around the Ural, Caspian and Areal sea, and would only began migrating westwads in the 4th century BC. By the time of Herodotus the Sauromatae (confusingly these are a different peoples from Sarmatians) lived east of the Don. Given that we likely also have a Maeotian present it is quite likely these two mercenaries were sauromatae as well. There was a greek colony called Cremnoi on the north side of the sea of Azov and the Bosporus kingdom was just founded around these times as well. The timing fits perfectly.

I might also add that Scythian sample MJ15 has noticeably more siberian ancestry than basically all Sarmatians, and these two new samples have slightly higher siberian ancestry than most of the sarmatian samples.

Davidski said...

@Unknown

Balto-Slavic drift is what splits Balts from Finns.

Estonians have Balto-Slavic drift, while Finns don't.

https://vahaduo.github.io/g25views/#Europe2

Or do you believe that all Slavs have Estonian ancestry? Haha.

Davidski said...

@Copper Axe

Couldn't individual Sarmatian mercenaries move to the Balkans as early as 480 BCE?

Tarbagan said...

@Davidski
"Balto-Slavic drift is what splits Balts from Finns."

Its Kivutkalns component, right? At least according to the results of G25.

Tarbagan said...

@Davidski

I didn’t just touch on the topic of Kivutkalns, because I have my own version of the origin of this component in Eastern European populations. But I would just like to clarify with you whether this is exactly what you understand by the Baltic-Slavic drift, so that there are no misunderstandings.

Gaska said...

Interesting is also that we have a Sicani-Df27, undoubtedly a descendant of the Sicilian BBs of Iberian origin. I know that the naysayers will try to discredit this sample because we would already have five Iron Age peoples of the western Mediterranean with DF27 who did not speak IE languages, but his WHG level (higher than the rest of the Sicans) means that he has Iberian origin (more or less distant).

Davidski said...

@Unknown

No, I'm talking about the admixture that makes Estonians cluster with Slavs rather than with Finns.

This is not the more extreme ancient East Baltic ancestry.

Tarbagan said...

@ Davidski

"No, I'm talking about the admixture that makes Estonians cluster with Slavs rather than with Finns.

This is not the more extreme ancient East Baltic ancestry."

But Estonians can cluster with Slavs rather than with Finns just because Estonians have low Siberian ancestry, and not due to a specific admixture.

Rob said...

‘Scythians’ have Sarmartian ancestry whilst ‘Sarmatians’ are a later pure Sarmatian group. In both occasions , they became significantly more western with time although separated by 500 years

Davidski said...

@Unknown

But Estonians can cluster with Slavs rather than with Finns just because Estonians have low Siberian ancestry, and not due to a specific admixture.

Nope.

In intra-European PCA, Various Finnic groups (Finns east and west, Vepsians, Karelians, Mordovians etc.) with variable levels of Siberian ancestry cluster together, but Estonians cluster with Slavs.

Also, Ingrians, Karelians and Mordovians with recent Russian ancestry cluster where Estonians do.

So it's pretty clear that Estonians have recent Balto-Slavic admixture and we can see this in their Y-chromosomes too.

Copper Axe said...

@Davidski

Maybe you can show where Estonians plot jn relation to the early Finnic Est_IA samples, particularly the sample 0ls10.

Davidski said...

@Copper Age

Check this out:

The Estonian gene pool takes shape during the Iron Age, from a mixture between ancient Balts and Uralians, and then it continues to change due to more admixture from modern-day Balts and Finns, as well as from Central Europeans (Germans, Poles?).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HHVMs2gJv_FRVl8ZGh5j4Fka4WoGds6G/view?usp=sharing

0LS10 looks like a western Uralian, but possibly already with some Baltic-related ancestry.

Tarbagan said...

@Davidski

"Also, Ingrians, Karelians and Mordovians with recent Russian ancestry cluster where Estonians do."

But for example Mordovians have little Russian ancestry - look at their very low level of Y haplogroup I2a. But they have significant Kivutkalns component.
When I look at the PCA, what I see?:https://vahaduo.github.io/g25views/#Europe2 - I see that Slavs and Balts as if by a magnet they are attracted to ancient samples from Kivutkalns. This is exactly what distinguishes them from other European peoples. So this is the very Balto-Slavic drift.
Perhaps you didn't like the example of the Estonians. I just wanted to show them that genetics does not always correlate with linguistics. The languages ​​of the Uralic family came from the east - but in the case of Estonians, the local genetic component was decisive. But who told you that this could not happen to the Balts and Slavs? The Balts and Slavs differ from Kivutkalns by a greater South European admixture - accordingly, they could initially be more South European, but assimilate the local autochthonous component, which possibly spoke the now extinct family of languages. If all this is summed up, we can say the following: any population, regardless of linguistic affiliation, which has developed as a result of adding some South European admixture to the Kivutkalns component (base), will look like a Balto-Slavic.

Copper Axe said...

@Davidski

"Couldn't individual Sarmatian mercenaries move to the Balkans as early as 480 BCE?"

I'd find that quite unlikely. It would predate the main migrations that formed the Sarmatians of antiquity by more than a century.

The Sauromatae seemed to have formed in the 7th/6th century BC. Interestingly Hecateus of Miletus who predated Herodotus and likely used older sources did not mention them when he wrote about the Scythian and Caucasian tribes, making it quite likely that the Scythians still ruled east of the Don back then. However by Herodotus' writings (450 BC) the Sautomatae were a separate nation with the border between it and Scythia being the Don.

I'm not sure what the main cause of Sarmatian migration into the Don-Caspian steppes (Sauromatae territory) would have been but it seemed to have happened in fourth century BC.

The Sarmatian migration into Scythian territory seems to correlate with both the collapse of Scythian hegemony around the Black Sea and the Balkans as well as Seleucid pressure on central asian tribes.

The Sarmatian material culture has a bit more fo a central asian flair to it. The cranial deformations and tamgas that show up with the Sarmatians are good examples of those. I recall that Sarmatians had some linguistic/cultural cognates/parallels with Avestan and central asian zoroastrian Iranians that the Scythians lacked.

Davidski said...

@Unknown

I didn't say that all Mordovians had Russian ancestry. I said that Mordovians, Ingrians and other Finns with recent Russian ancestry clustered with Estonians.

Have a look here. Mordovian MOE-495 and Ingrian GS000016896 have Russian ancestry, and they cluster with Estonians. Other Mordovians don't have Russian ancestry and they cluster with Finns.

https://vahaduo.github.io/g25views/#Europe2

Anyway, I don't have time for this, so you can believe what you want.

Tarbagan said...

@ Davidski

Ok. One more question - do you have any contacts with the authors of "Population Genomics of Stone Age Eurasia"? I have some questons about the samples from Voloshskoe. The people buried in Voloshskoe anthropologically differed from other Ukrainian hunters. It is possible to value the genetics of Yamnaya. I did not have time to ask this in previous topics.

Davidski said...

@Copper Axe

Don't large scale migrations usually take place along routes that are well known for one reason or another, like trade?

Just saying that Sarmatians wouldn't migrate west at such a brisk pace if they didn't know where they were going exactly, and the way they would know is if some of their people had been going back and forth between Europe and the Urals for quite some time.

Davidski said...

@Unknown

Nope, you would need to try and email them yourself.

Steppe said...

Davidski : The two samples I10949 and I10943 are definitely Baltoslavic, but they have a slight Sarmatian admixture and one even has something Celtic, could it also be related to the Milograd culture as a contact zone? would like to know your opinion

Rich S. said...

@Gaska

“ I know that the naysayers will try to discredit this sample because we would already have five Iron Age peoples of the western Mediterranean with DF27 who did not speak IE languages, but his WHG level (higher than the rest of the Sicans) means that he has Iberian origin (more or less distant).”

You do realize, of course (but maybe not), that the ethnolinguistic affiliations of Iron Age peoples have no bearing whatsoever on the Indo-European origin of their distant Y-DNA ancestors, from whom they were separated in time by a couple of millennial or more?

In other words, the Iron Age is too late a period to use remains from it to argue about things that took place in the third millennium BC.

Jugu said...

David, just a heads up, be carefully with the new Alb averages you are composing through the guidance of Bruzmi who is clearly filtering individuals, selecting for those of Illyrian profile to shift random average to a biased one. Read his own words here yourself.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?26280-quot-The-Genetic-History-of-the-Southern-Arc-A-Bridge-between-West-Asia-amp-Europe-quot/page216

Romulus said...

In my wildest dreams I would never expect to find my haplogroup in an Ancient Greek Mercenary but there it is in I10949. It's been a huge month for us I2a-L233, there were two samples from the Anglo-Saxon paper as well including a 100% CNE individual from East Anglia.

Now we have a total of 5 ancient samples L233+

(SHG)Spiginas 1 4442 - 4243 BCE Narva Culture Lithuiania
(Greek Mercenary from the Baltic) I10949 480 BCE Himera/Sicily
(100% CNE Anglo Saxon) Lakenheath 6 400-600 CE Suffolk England
(Frisian) Groningen 2 775 - 995 CE Groningen, Netherlands
(Viking) Ladoga 22 900 - 1200 CE Ladoga, Russia

Looks like its presence among Balto-Slavs and Germanics comes from SHG contribution to each.

Davidski said...

@Steppe

No idea, but if the dates match then it's a possibility.

Blue Caviar said...

@David , how did these Scytho Siberians/Sarmatians arrive here? Via Odessa?? Yes you should get a grant!



sample: ITA_Sicily_Himera_480BCE_4:I10947
distance: 1.6982
Sintashta_MLBA: 74
Dzharkutan1_BA: 13.5
Slab_Grave_EIA_1: 12.5

LivoniaG said...

Matt - you wrote: " some trade network put together by IA Western steppe peoples who contracted out their services for war booty?"

There was some tradition with using outsiders as regular troops that might have gone back as far as the bell beakers. It's reported that the police in Athens were Scythians. The theory was that outsiders were not involved with local politics and could be fair. Caesar had his personal German body guard who were away from home and owed loyalty to him and not Rome. Recruiters for later emperors found these men quite far from Rome so that they were pretty much isolated within their units. And remember Xenophon and his 10,000 Greek mercenaries traveled 1000s of miles to fight in Persia.

Being a mercenary from a distant place could pay a lot better in Greece than you could probably do in a modest little village back home. So there was good incentive to sign up.

Rob said...

@ Davidski

''Just saying that Sarmatians wouldn't migrate west at such a brisk pace if they didn't know where they were going exactly, and the way they would know is if some of their people had been going back and forth between Europe and the Urals for quite some time.''


Although 'Scythian period', these guys are genetically Sarmatian-like (compared to some Altai-shifted Scythians/ 'Cimmerians'). So the historical 'western Scythians' formed in Black Sea region from disparate groups

Arden Muse said...

Interesting to see how this translates and affects the modern day languages from those ancestries.

Davidski said...

The date, ~480 BCE, is the early Sarmatian period near the Urals.

I think it's even possible that these people moved into the Mediterranean via West Asia.

It's not at all unimaginable, considering the contacts between Greece and Persia.

Steppe said...

yes 480 BC was an eventful year in history!

Battle of Salamis,
Battle of Himera,
Death of the Spartan King and the sons of the Persian Great King,

Even before Alexander's conquest to the east, the Greeks already had extensive contacts to the steppes and to central and central Asia,and the Sarmatians were already around from the 4th century BC the Urals, the Eurasian steppe was then the highway of antiquity, perhaps you also belonged to the tribe of the "Massagets" who later became part of the Sarmatian confederation.

CeRcVa said...

"Target: ITA_Sicily_Himera_480BCE_5:I10951
Distance: 2.7640% / 0.02764002
49.4 Caucasus_Hunter-Gatherer_GEO_CHG
19.2 Pontic_Steppe_Yamnaya_Pastoralist_Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
18.0 Anatolia_Neolithic_Farmer_TUR_Barcin_N
11.2 Levant_Neolithic_Farmer_Levant_PPNB
2.2 Iran_Neolithic_Farmer_IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N"

It looka a bit like Georgian_Khevsureti or Georgian_Tusheti(Northeastern Georgian).

Matt said...

@Livonia, yes, noted. Possibly these people were all "Scythian mercenaries" to Greek writers for simplification and perhaps due to a common lingua franca.

Off-topic: Seems like a bunch of Medieval German samples - https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB49149?show=related-records (avoid files labelled virus). If anyone cares about trying to download and convert them, which seems like a big effort.

Jugu said...

Davidski, it appears Bruzmi latest G25 average for Albs is a mirror image of northern Gheg average. He is clearly profiling and selecting his picks, he is providing you with biased samples, not a random sample.

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/37692-Where-does-the-Albanian-language-come-from-VIDEO/page138?p=659731&viewfull=1#post659731

Davidski said...

@Jugu

What does Albs mean? Albanians?

So which samples should I use? Can you make a list of what's available?

Davidski said...

@All

I'll be continuing my Dear Iosif series early next week, with a bomb about the Kura-Araxes culture.

And this will be another very harsh blog post about the Lazaridis, Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al. paper.

This is unfortunate but unavoidable.

Rob said...

I don’t think there’s much point in focussing on the shortfalls of this one paper. Distal, un-contextual approaches are unfortunately the Norm in the field

Steppe said...

I'm looking forward to the best blog with Anthro. together but don't raise jugu, just ignore the person.

Andrzejewski said...

@Davidski “I'll be continuing my Dear Iosif series early next week, with a bomb about the Kura-Araxes culture.”

It just occurred to me that many Georgians and Israelis look almost indistinguishable from one another; it may then be that the Chalcolithic migrants from Zagros mountains and the Caucasus, who have intermingled with the Levant Neolithic PPNB (Natufian + Anatolians) in almost 1:1 ratio may be the ones responsible for the new phenotype.

Whereas the Peki’in population referenced by Lazaridis 2018 had blue eyes, fair skin and mtDNA T, they seem to have been an offshoot of Barcin-like groups. On the other hand, the Dzudzuana/ANE admixture into Israeli and Lebanese PPNB autochthonous populations, which has created the Canaanites, could’ve been darker skinned and similar to what Sephardic Jews look nowadays.

I sort of believe that all those fairy tales about some “Abraham the Patriarch” are echos of a 4300BP - 3800BP westward migration wave that has shifted the Levantine population towards Iran and the Caucasus and thus rendered the phenotype of the inhabitants- as well as its genotype, of course - closer to that CHG - Iran_Neo cline.

Moreover, it seems as if the Jebusites were a Kura-Araxes tribe, with a mitani maryanu elite, which explains why Arawna has an Indo-Aryan name. Biblical scholars believe that many Judaic traditions are Hurrian/KAC in essence, quintessentially Indo-Iranian. Even the name “Yahweh” could be interpreted as similar to Div-Pater.

The name Abraham could be a Semitic corruption of the Hurrian name “Ebirma” or “Ebirami”.

The Ancient Israelites being pastoralists could be a result of contact with these Indo-European ruled Hurrians, along with words with similar etymology between Hebrew and IE languages, such as: Six, Seven, Horse, Grain, Wine, and many more.

Andrzejewski said...

So in conclusion, these are the bullet points, in my humble opinion:

1. CHG and Iran_Neo have actually shifted Levant populations towards current day phenotype.

2. Israelis and Republic of Georgia residents look very similar, and they both stand out compared to both “Arabs” and Europeans.

3. It was the influx of Barcin-related ANF into Peki’in and the Levant which rendered the PPNB/PPNC Levantine pop closer to Neolithic Europe, as well as being largely responsible for the lightening of that population.

4. Many similarities in the OT between Israelites and IE people stem from the latter’s influence, through Kura-Araxes, Hittites and Philistines, on Iron Age Canaanite society.

5. CHG-Iran_N cline is responsible for darker pigmentation and I also suspect that CHG-rich pops such as Greeks, Southern Italians and Balkanic groups owe their relatively swarthier appearance to CHG-ANF admixture, in groups like Minoans, Eteocretans, Pelasgians, Sicani, Kaskians and Hatti.

The most important takeaway from this dissertation is that “CHG” in Pontic-Steppe CAN NOT be similar to Iran_N/CHG due to the latter groups being phenotypically different from the Steppe based “CHG-like” groups. I suspect that the Eastern European CHG-ish groups has had lots if genetic drift, founder effect and isolation, all are factors which rendered anything reminiscent of “South of Caspian” affiliation obsolete.

@Samuel Andrews I hope you can incorporate my theories into your videos. :)

Rob said...

@ steppe
dont make stupid comments. 90% of AG is crap, and its admins are plebs

Steppe said...

Rob

I don't make stupid comments, everyone has to know for themselves. You have to be careful with some admins, but what's important to me is to learn more about new studies and that's why Eurogenesblog and Anthro. the best sites for it

Steppe said...

You shouldn't accept any orders, just read the studies or if you feel like posting something yourself, of course everything at the level, unfortunately a good friend would be deleted (rms2)

Rob said...

@ steppe - its best that people read the primary papers themselves, not via a forum.
There's are a lot of half-baked theories on AG, and that's putting it kindly.
And personally not interested in reading how much Yamnaya % somebody's mum scores

Rob said...

..with the exception of Simon_W's delightful Prussian grandmother

CeRcVa said...

@Andrzejewski

"2. Israelis and Republic of Georgia residents look very similar, and they both stand out compared to both “Arabs” and Europeans."

This is complete nonsense. There is no similarity between them, I had a Jewish ancestor and I tell you this completely objectively, Georgians and Jews do not resemble each other.

Steppe said...

Rob

everyone has to know for themselves what they are doing and the nice Prussian grandmother also has a Baltic genetic input and just like some Polish people have a Germanic input, people often have problems with themselves and do not want to have some things true, like my work colleague (from Saxony) he thinks he's purely Germanic, we all know that the East Germans have Slavic input

EastPole said...

The presence of Slavic mercenaries from northern Europe in Greek armies fighting in the Mediterranean 480 BCE opens the possibility that Hyperboreans were Slavs. At that time Greeks had contacts with Hyperboreans and were influenced by Hyperborean culture. Solar religion came from Hyperborea and its similarity to Slavic and Vedic religion indicates common origin in Northern Europe. Hyperboreans had fair hair like I10943. Of course they could be Thracian elites which had links with Slavs but Hyperborans cannot be excluded.

Andrzejewski said...

@CeRcVa “ This is complete nonsense. There is no similarity between them, I had a Jewish ancestor and I tell you this completely objectively, Georgians and Jews do not resemble each other.”

Phenotypically, not so much genotypically, they do. Sephardic Jews (Mizrahi mostly) as in “middle eastern Jews” in particular.

I’m not talking about just Jews whose ancestors came from Gerorgia but almost all Mizrahi Jews can be confused with Georgians or even Armenians.

CeRcVa said...

@CeRcVa
"Phenotypically, not so much genotypically, they do. Sephardic Jews (Mizrahi mostly) as in “middle eastern Jews” in particular.

I’m not talking about just Jews whose ancestors came from Gerorgia but almost all Mizrahi Jews can be confused with Georgians or even Armenians."

It's impossible. Moreover, Armenians and Georgians are not similar to each other, but there are some Georgians who resemble Armenians, Jews, Arabs, etc. But this cannot be the average Georgian appearance, in general a typical Jew looks different, unless he/she is mixed with a Caucasian-European.

I had a great grandmother who was a Georgian Jew, but she looked like an Imeretian because she was about 1/3 or 1/4 Jewish and 2/3 Georgian.

Simon_W said...

@Steppe

"everyone has to know for themselves what they are doing and the nice Prussian grandmother also has a Baltic genetic input"

Baltic and Slavic - even more Slavic than Baltic according to my latest model:

58.2 DEU_Schleswig_MA
33.4 POL_Sandomierz_VA
8.4 Baltic_LTU_Kaunas_500

So either the Old Prussians were Slavic-like, or what's more likely, the Polish admixture outnumbered the Baltic substrate at least in this part of East Prussia which had belonged to Royal or Polish Prussia from 1466 to 1569 and then to the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth until 1772.

"and just like some Polish people have a Germanic input, people often have problems with themselves and do not want to have some things true, like my work colleague (from Saxony) he thinks he's purely Germanic, we all know that the East Germans have Slavic input"

True, there are lots of people who either lack the necessary historical and genetic knowledge, or who even have a preconceived opinion about their identity which they defend against all evidence. I'm not one of these; I just carry a picture of Alemannic warriors at the battle of Strasbourg in my avatar, because these seem to make up the biggest fraction of my ancestry.

Andrzejewski said...

CeRcVa “ It's impossible. Moreover, Armenians and Georgians are not similar to each other, but there are some Georgians who resemble Armenians, Jews, Arabs, etc.”

Jews, Armenians and Arabs don’t look like each other. Ashkenazi Jews are Southern-Euro-shifted and with a considerable Eastern Europeans admixture. Armenians are more ANF-shifted than Georgians. Stalin looked distinctly different than a typical Slav. The sheer fact that one can set apart most most Georgians from most European Russians, for example, just by looking at them tells us that CHG appearance in the Caucasus mountains must’ve varied a lot from the CHG-related admixture in Progress and Vonyuchka.

Simon_W said...

Quite interesting that the Sicani were Sardinian-like and close to (western) Sicily_LBA. So we can guess that the Siculi (Sicels) to their east, who had come from mainland Italy later, may have had a bit more Steppe ancestry, but a similarly low Anatolia_BA.

Jugu said...

Part 2 response:

This is a northern Gheg Average provided to me by Sorcelow in anthrogenica(You should contact him if you need to see it's composition).
Albanian_Gheg (N=10),0.1257746,0.1455253,0.020406444,-0.0146642,0.0267743,-0.0080878,0.003572,0.0009692,0.0007364,0.0167476,-0.0000902222,0.0035967,-0.0058127,0.0087664,-0.0191094,-0.0025722,0.0132599,0.0007603,0.0068379,-0.0057529,-0.0095956,0.0009151,0.0008626,0.0039885,-0.0000121


And this is Bruzmi's latest Albanian grand average
Albanian_new_G25,0.1250916,0.1457284,0.0166129,-0.0182818,0.0257279,-0.0083667,0.003243,0.0013614,-0.0001021,0.0190802,-0.0007146,0.0044958,-0.0071359,0.0063443,-0.0201952,-0.0018031,0.0129469,0.0003802,0.0066997,-0.0073536,-0.0101322,0.0004452,0.0017624,0.0034221,-0.0034847
Posted here: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?26049-Genetic-Origin-of-Albanians&p=876427&viewfull=1#post876427


Compare it to the Northern_Gheg average, it is basically the same. This is not random selection. His regional averages don't even agree to his own G25 average(shown above).
This individual is hell bent on proving a Illyrian connection to the point of outright fudging the regional averages with a HRV IA profile(please test this out on your own, please do). His G25 average is made of careful picked selections. Albanian average should not be identical to Gheg northern Average.
I looked at your original Alb profiles(N=12), and without knowing who they are, they seem to be Albanians from Albania(1/3 north, 1/3 central, 1/3 Alb) that is my speculation on how they responded to my Thracian vs "Dardanian" cluster test.

That is all I can offer, I wish I had my own database and was involved with the project, in that aspect I am of no help.

Jugu said...

Hi Davidski,

This is my final reply on the matter:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/37692-Where-does-the-Albanian-language-come-from-VIDEO/page138?p=659833&viewfull=1#post659833

I will read your replies. It would be easier if you participated in a forum(Eupedia or Anthro). Nevertheless at this point, you know everything you need to know. I hope you run your own tests on the matter.

Thanks for the reply!

Regards,

Jugu

Matt said...

By Iron Age, steppe ancestry probably at a fairly even 10-20% across the whole southern tips of Europe from southern Iberia to Sicily to Peloponnese?

Comparing available - https://imgur.com/a/LVBIZPY

Rob said...

@ Davidski

''The Estonian gene pool takes shape during the Iron Age, from a mixture between ancient Balts and Uralians,''


is that your view for Estonians specifically, or western Uralics as a whole ?

Rob said...

Don't know what the issue is between 'Bruzmi' & "juggu', but any overly autochthonist position for Albanians doesnt seem realistic. The Illyrian, Dardanian and Bessi theories popular in fora like AG or Eupedia (and advocated by renowned anthropologists like Dua Lipe) arent feasible, as most of the Balkans (south of Danube) was depopulated after 450 AD. Pannonia and neo-Dacia appear to be hotspots for E-V13 rich populations which served as the major demographic source for early Albanians as well as South Slavs and modern Greeks.
The Adriatic and Aegean coasts obviously show some continuity, but these were Romance & Greek speaking, resp.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Matt,

I don't that would be accurate to say.

Because Italy, Croatia, Slovenia, Albania are technically the southern tip of Europe too and they had higher "Steppe" ancestry. About 30%.

Davidski said...

@Rob

Only Estonians and Livonians (and maybe Setos, but I don't know much about them, or even if they still exist after Russifcation).

Finns, Ingrians and Karelians etc. have a different population history.

Rob said...

@ Davidski

Makes sense. What do you make of BOO? With all due correlation cautions, do people see them as early Uralic speakers ?
Russian scholars propose a later, more forceful migration wave from high transUrals due to subarctic meltwater etc in the LBA-IA

Davidski said...

Yes, I think BOO were Uralic speakers, although their language probably didn't survive long.

Steppe said...

Simon_W

Thanks for the information

LivoniaG said...

Matt wrote:
By Iron Age, steppe ancestry probably at a fairly even 10-20% across the whole southern tips of Europe from southern Iberia to Sicily to Peloponnese? https://imgur.com/a/LVBIZPY

That 40% Steppe Sicilian from 2700 BCE (I14433) looking at that, is it strange your list doesn't have at least someone carrying like 80% steppes ancestry? You have this population movement, but actual primary carriers of steppe ancestry never quite make it to these areas. There are always admixtures. Wouldn't you think that there would be more range in the ancestry? At least a few with much more steppes?

Matt said...

@Sam, the southern tip of of those peninsular countries, I'm talking about. Of course what are those countries today had variation within themselves back then (maybe the north of them had 30%, I haven't surveyed it, it seems higher than likely but possibly), and have variation now.

@Livonia, regarding that person

BU32, grave 3032 (Sicily_EBA11443, I11443). Petrous bone, C14 dated to 2279-2102 calBCE (4090±60 BP, OxA-32773).

Among the Sicilian Early Bronze individuals, I11443 from Buffa Cave (Sicily_EBA11443) and individual I8561 from Isnello (Sicily_EBA8561) were not consistent with forming a clade with the remaining Early Bronze Age Sicilians in the great majority of tests. We therefore treated them as outliers for analysis (Supplementary Table 2).

The sample is identified as a high-steppe person in the source: https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/reich.hms.harvard.edu/files/inline-files/2020_Fernandes_NatEcolEvol_WestMediterranean_Supplement.pdf
These sort of outliers happen relatively early in sequence.

Rob said...

@ East Pole

''Of course they could be Thracian elites which had links with Slavs but Hyperborans cannot be excluded.'''


They dont look like Thracians.
proto-Thracians come from western post-Fatyanovans, ie Srubnaja-> KMK, and were R1a-Z93 (the groups some online people were erroneously attributing to proto-Greeks) + picked up E-V13.
Link with Slavic back in the homeland in northwest Ukraine

CeRcVa said...

@CeRcVa
"The sheer fact that one can set apart most most Georgians from most European Russians, for example, just by looking at them tells us that CHG appearance in the Caucasus mountains must’ve varied a lot from the CHG-related admixture in Progress and Vonyuchka."

Yes, Stalin did not look like a Russian, just as southern Europeans do not look like a Russian. This does not mean that Georgians resemble Jews or any Middle Eastern people. As for CHG, in western Georgia, where CHG is a high percentage, Western Georgian look quite European.

LivoniaG said...

Matt wrote: "These sort of outliers happen relatively early in sequence."

By that I think you mean high steppes ancestry happens early and then flattens down to where these early cases become outliers.

And of course we might be looking for these outliers to guess when that ancestry first enters the limited geography we're using as a label. So with Sicily, we don't see carriers of relatively high steppes ancestry (except for the single 40%)

So should we guess that historically -- despite what the Y-dna might say -- actual immigrants from the steppes never made it so far as these peripheral areas of southern Europe? That it took what? maybe 10 generations of mixing in the north before any steppes ancestry showed up?

Otherwise there should be more high steppe ancestry outliers?

LivoniaG said...

@Matt "Possibly these people were all "Scythian mercenaries" to Greek writers for simplification and perhaps due to a common lingua franca."

As far as the Athenian Scythian police go, in Aristophanes plays they speak Greek with a foreign accent. "Artemisia" becomes "Artemuxia."

But what’s your name?
Artemisia.
I will remember it. Artemuxia.

Huck Finn said...

Based on that what I've seen (and understood, probably not a lot) by reading the fresh Allentoft et al, the only common East Asian/Siberian feature among Uralic speaking groups is NEA i.e. the old North East Asian of the Amur-Baikal area. BOO, on the other hand, has quite a lot of WSHG or the old Neolithic West Siberian Steppe. If this is true, the Uralic expansion belongs to the more generic East Asian expansions of the late BA or the early IA, when the WSHG of the Neolithic West Siberia is being driven to the Arctic area. The fact that there's a secondary, partly linguistic expansion of Uralic towards North of course makes things complicatedy. However Ymyakhtakh, possibly being related to BOO and having it's earliest origin (also?) possibly somewhere around Zeya river, next to Inner Manchuria, might represent a parallel expansion to that of Uralic. There's N-L1026 in places like Heilongjiang, even if people there don't speak Uralic. Anyways, I look forward to seeing samples like Alletoft et al's NEO538 of the late BA/early IA Vologda area in G25, if possible, thank you in advance, D. This N-Z1936 guy might look surprisingly similar to the early Hungarians of the Ural area, but we'll see.

Tarbagan said...

@Davidski

David, do you K13 components for the samples I10949 and I10943?

Copper Axe said...

@Rob

"Russian scholars propose a later, more forceful migration wave from high transUrals due to subarctic meltwater etc in the LBA-IA"

Do you have some sources for this? I'm interested in reading them. Is it specifically about the Ananinyo culture? Thx in advance.

Andrzejewski said...

@Huck Finn “ Based on that what I've seen (and understood, probably not a lot) by reading the fresh Allentoft et al, the only common East Asian/Siberian feature among Uralic speaking groups is NEA i.e. the old North East Asian of the Amur-Baikal area. BOO, on the other hand, has quite a lot of WSHG or the old Neolithic West Siberian Steppe. If this is true, the Uralic expansion belongs to the more generic East Asian expansions of the late BA or the early IA, when the WSHG of the Neolithic West Siberia is being driven to the Arctic area. The fact that there's a secondary, partly linguistic expansion of Uralic towards North of course makes things complicatedy. However Ymyakhtakh, possibly being related to BOO and having it's earliest origin…”

Would it validate the Ural-Altaic theory?

Andrzejewski said...

@Huck Finn “ However Ymyakhtakh, possibly being related to BOO and having it's earliest origin (also?) possibly somewhere around Zeya river, next to Inner Manchuria, might represent a parallel expansion to that of Uralic.”

Ymyakhtakh is a Paleo-Siberian(70% East Asian, 30% ANE) which is likely ancestral to Yukaghir and is also regarded kin to other Paleo-Siberian lineages - Nivkh, Katchadals, Itelmem and Chukchi.

From that reason, I don’t think that Native American languages are ANE but NEA or Paleosiberian (East Asian) ones.

Whatever Kelteminar and Botai spoke has had nothing to do with Yenisseyan, regardless of what Balžek or Vajda say.

There IS a theory linking Uralic with Yukaghir however loose the evidence so far is.

Davidski said...

@Tarbagan

I don't run those tests anymore.

Huck Finn said...

@ Andrzejewski: Ural-Altaic is a linguistic theory so it basically can't be validated by genetic results. The typological connection seems to be real anyway. Also, there indeed seem to be very old looking Uralic loan words in Yukaghir, which possibly can be explained by connections around Baikal area, before Uralic moving towards West, maybe from the Upper Altay Sayan area and Yukaghir towards East, where ever it then first was. This may be far fetched and strictly my personal imagination but possibly even Uralic-Yukaghiric encounters around the most Upper reaches of Lena, during the very first Uralic migration from the Inner Manchuria (or some place nearby) to the Upper Altay Sayan area, might be possible. European Avars, Turkified or not, seem to be a good proxy if we're are trying to imagine what kind of people the earliest Uralic speakers were, in the genetic sense.

DragonHermit said...

Davidski, are there any rumours of any incoming third-party IBD calculators? Feels like it's long overdue. We could easily dispel so many myths from these samples using it, and not have useless discussions.

Michalis Moriopoulos said...

This is a very exciting paper for me; I've been waiting for this one to drop for some time. It's too bad the civilian samples are such low-coverage; maybe they'll have better luck in the future.

Also, thanks for getting us those G25 coords so fast, David. I've analyzed the whole lot of them on AG, and screenshots of my analysis are below for anyone who isn't a member there. The outliers are interesting, and I agree the two Balto-Slavic-like outliers are probably Slavs and not Balts. I mention a plausible vector for their arrival in Magna Graecia in my commentary below, as well.

My Sicani commentary:
https://i.imgur.com/CUMyaTx.png

My Battle of Himera 480 BCE commentary:
https://i.imgur.com/gsWfmXW.png

My Battle of Himera 409 BCE commentary:
https://i.imgur.com/q2RGCrj.png

Also, Laz mentioned that they included some new modern Greek and Italian genomes in the dataset file here:
https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/reich.hms.harvard.edu/files/inline-files/Reitsema2022PNAS_Modern_HO.zip

Any chance they could be given G25 treatment, Dave? These would be awesome to have because they come from regions we haven't seen G25 representation for yet (like Rhodes, the Cyclades, and Emilia-Romagna). Any gaps in Mediterranean representation are closing fast.

A friend of mine mentioned there might be some extra ancients from the paper in this file, too, so might be worth double checking that:
https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/reich.hms.harvard.edu/files/inline-files/Reitsema2022PNAS_Ancient_1240K.zip

Thanks as always!

Matt said...

@LivoniaG, yeah, I think people direct from the steppes, if any, would have been rare; it might have happened in Greece to "explain" Greek but we don't have any samples to say it did (and someone more knowledgeable will probably point out that some Eastern Balkan route via intermediary cultures is more likely).

The y-dna gives a mixed picture, e.g. the Sicily_IA here are all G2a, which is not surprising if they only have ~15% steppe ancestry, and that haplogroup is common in other parts of Italy after steppe ancestry bearing migrations too. An enrichment of steppe y-dna lines through these places seems likely, but it doesn't seem too obviously representating male biased migration.

Even in El Argar in Iberia, which does see a total y-dna replacement, there's a scenario where the associated of R1b-M269 y-dna with an excess of autosomal steppe ancestry compared to X chromosome breaks down - https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abi7038 - "On the basis of this rationale, we do not observe significant male bias (in El Argar on the autosome compared to X) in steppe-related ancestry using either distal or proximal sources (Fig. 6B and table S2.22). The fact that the male bias is not detectable could be indicative of an already balanced ancestral component in both sexes, as is reflected in the work of Mittnik et al. (77), where the male bias in the steppe component is only detected in Corded Ware, but no longer in Bell Beaker or BA populations. "

This indicates some complicated scenario where there was some kind of reversal of sex-biases that left no trace in the y-dna, perhaps because it was due to shuffling of ancestry within the mixed culture (e.g. if you had a group with 5% steppe ancestry who all have 100% steppe y-dna through mixing of cultures, and they then mix in a male sex biased way with a group with 30% steppe ancestry again all through males, you could retain the y-dna signal but the autosomal signal might be erased completely). Which indicates - not that we didn't expect it from the autosome alone - that there was a more complicated pattern of sex-bias and mixture between intermediary populations.

In fact also Saupe et al - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrievehttps://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(21)00535-2 - "we also noted through outgroup ƒ3 tests in form f3(Italian_CA/Italian_EBA_BA, ancient; Mbuti.DG) (Data S2K) that populations associated with Steppe-related ancestry did not leave a male-biased signature in Italy, which, if at all, can instead be seen through the contribution of pre-existing N groups (Figure S5).".

The Corded Ware culture seems to have had an excess of female input from EEF populations, although looking at the earliest CWC in Czechia, this appears to me to be a stable pattern of only like 1/30 offspring for about 15 generations, so they did clearly migrate with women. But then shuffling between later mixed cultures and maybe some male-biased input from EEF seem to have broken the pattern of greater steppe contribution on autosome than X-chromosome.

DragonHermit said...

@Rob

Dude, please don't act like an expert on stuff you don't know anything about. There is this thing called a "language", and if Slavs/Albanians/Greeks all largely descended from 1 group you'd see a linguistic component shared between all of them. You don't in the slightest. Modern Greek/Albanian have very little Slavic loanwords, nor is there any evidence of an early Medieval lexicon shared between them.

If you study Byzantine history, there is no evidence of complete depopulation anywhere. Even Yugoslavs/Bulgarians have noticeable Balkan ancestry, especially in eastern parts like Serbia/Macedonia/Bulgaria. People have mentioned the uptick in E-V13 but that includes all parts of Europe, including Italy. It's not just the Balkans.

Rob said...

@ Copper Axe

of course , its from an article Vlad mentioend a while ago by Kuzminykh (Introduction to the Archaeology of the Ananyino culture)
It discusses the dissipation of Andronovoid cultures, spread of Textiel ceramic horizon, an 'aboriginal (CCC-WSHG linked) renaisence', and diffusion of new elements from Trans-Urals

Rob said...

@ DragoHermit

Well sorry to burst your bubble, but nobody understands these processes better than me; but thanks for pointing out that Greek, Slavic & Albanian are different languages, that’s high level insight


''There is this thing called a "language", and if Slavs/Albanians/Greeks all largely descended from 1 group you'd see a linguistic component shared between all of them. You don't in the slightest. Modern Greek/Albanian have very little Slavic loanwords, nor there any evidence of an early Medieval lexicon shared between them.''

Ok genius, ever heard of the Balkan sprachbund ?

But that's beside the point, what I said was E-V13 rich populations served as a major demographic source for early Albanians as well as South Slavs and modern Greeks.
This is beyond contention

The question is what caused this and what is the source ?



''If you study Byzantine history, there is no evidence of complete depopulation anywhere.''

Your misunderstanding - I said *most*, not all, and hinterland esp, but less so coasts.
In fact, Byzantine sources you allege to have studied mention plagues, wars, famines, raids, earthquakes and depopulations. Ring a bell ?

Archaeolgical evidence shows the countryside was devastated post Gothic wars and Hun raids, even before the Slavs & Avars. A minor build-back with Anastasius & Justinian, but this was temporary and often populated by armies, clergy and administrative peoples rather than a bustling coutryside
By 620, there is little evidence of much of a population in the interior, apart from littoral / coastal regions (eg. Komani Kruje), as pointed out in my initial comment

The adna data shows that a major hotspot for medieval EV13 is Pannonia and the limes area. It is also a source for related but distinctive EV13 Clades in Western Europe, due to its spread through Germanic groups
Also, have you seen the aDNA from medieval Balkans incl Greece ? Pretty profound shifts


BalthazarBothaDesnuts said...

Are modern eastern and western slavs basically an even mix of baltic and scythian types from 2000 years ago?

DragonHermit said...

@ Rob, it can't be "most", because language would reflect that. It clearly doesn't. You don't replace most of a population and the lexicon doesn't reflect it at all.

Slavs speak Slavic, Greeks speak Greek, Albanians speak Albanian, with very little borrowing from one another.

A "sprachbund" is not the same thing as a lexicon, because almost all borrowed words are of Ottoman origin. A sprachbund develops out of neighbouring contact, not shared ancestry.

Davidski said...

@BalthazarBothaDesnuts

Are modern eastern and western slavs basically an even mix of baltic and scythian types from 2000 years ago?

No, it's impossible, because there's no Scythian ancestry in any Slavs. It would be easy to see if there was, because Scythians were rich in R1a-Z93 and had some East Asian ancestry.

There's also no Baltic ancestry in most western and eastern Slavs, because Balts are rich in N1c, while most Slavs are not.

Most Slavs are Baltic-like because they largely descend from Corded Ware groups southeast of the Baltic, like Balts do.

Rob said...

@ DragonHermit

I said most of the Balkan landmass was depopulated, not that Greeks or Albanians derive their ancestry mostly from newcomers
The gradual repopulation of the Balkan inland was subsequently a complex process which entailed Balkan like people as well as Slavs
See the difference ?

And lexical borrowing is irrelevant when languages of near-equal status interact. Communities keep their own language & words and identity but the widespread interaction and multilinguality leads to profound structural convergence as people accomodate their own language to that of their neighbours

Rob said...

Given his advertisement, it’s funny reading the comments of Michalis’ posse on AG, claiming ancient Ancient Macedonians were east Mediterranean & pretending that a distinction between AM & Greeks never existed
Southern Greeks are a southern, diluted , & middle eastern admixed sub-group of Macedonian-Phrygian folk. In historical terms, they sported clearly separate identities & it’s disingenuous to sweep them under the same rubric

It’s perverse that Michalis & his henchmen (Avram & Bodilkas) accuse others of nationalism when it is they who are twisting history. Look at that Avram Kavkadis clown sporting a “ CHG pride /Lazarides Avatar”.

Michalis Moriopoulos said...

@Rob

First of all, I never said ancient Macedonians were East Med. I said I predicted they would fall on a Mycenaean to Bulgaria IA-like cline. If you think that's irrational I'd love to hear why.

Secondly, do you have some kind of psychiatric condition we should know about? I am at a loss as to why you constantly feel the need to act out the way you do. Please learn to conduct yourself with some dignity and I hope whatever has gone wrong in your life is soon addressed. Please seek help if you need it.

Steppe said...

Davidski

There are some Slavs or mixed people who use the Ancient G25 Calculator Sarmatian_Ural or Scy_MJ15 at a low level of 5-10% points or modern slightly Uralic, clearly typical Slavic R1a lines are Z280 and M458, what about Z92? clearly the predominantly ancestry CWC

Rob said...

@ Michalis

Thanks for your concern but my life is blessed, due to innate gifts and hard work. So I do what I can to help others . At the same time i speak the truth in a very straightforward manner. You’re obviously not used to it because you live an non-reality echo chamber. So stop preaching and go back to entertaining your doggies . Atta girl

Michalis Moriopoulos said...

@Rob

"Help others?" Wow. With friends like you, who needs enemies?

Maybe one day you'll decide to start behaving like a man instead of a little brat. Until then me and the people in my "echo chamber" should just be thankful we can skip over your inane comments. Peace.

Matt said...

@DragonHermit (whose name I often confuse on here with "WiseDragon"):

"Davidski, are there any rumours of any incoming third-party IBD calculators? Feels like it's long overdue. We could easily dispel so many myths from these samples using it, and not have useless discussions."

It seems like there is imminent progress in calling IBD blocks with ancients - https://pypi.org/project/ancIBD/ - release June 2022 - "This software package screens ancient human DNA for long IBD blocks (Identity by Descent segments) shared between pairs of individuals. The method relies on imputation with a modern reference panel, therefore it is not appicable for deeply diverged humans such as Neanderthals or Denisovans. However, experiments showed that the method works well for Eurasian ancient human DNA (tested for data up to 45,000 years old). ... The method is relatively data-hungry. Imputation with Glimpse only works sufficiently well for samples with >0.5x coverage on 1240k SNPs. ... Ideally, your data therefore has >1x coverage for 1240k SNPs, or >0.5x coverage for WGS data. For robust IBD calls of long IBD (8 cM or longer), at least 600,000 SNPs on the 1240k panel should be covered at least once. Note that there still can be occasional false positive IBD, so please always treat the output with necessary caution and not as a black box. ... Generally, the shorter the IBD, the less robust the calls, and IBD shorter than 8 cM are prone to false-positive signals."

If the ancient dna is public and the software is public, I don't see any reason why Ancestry.com and the like shouldn't incorporate it into their sales?

What are you hoping for here though? IBD matching between deep ancients and recent people seems maybe difficult, or even perhaps the LBA-EIA, given the decay of signals over time. That might work better than I think but maybe not. People in Late Antiquity and present-day populations should be plausible?

Rob said...

@ michalis

The problem with your echo chamber existence is ignorance of the real world. Your forum has been using various data I generated for years. But I’m not into autobiographies.
So feel free to obtain a reality check , but by all means keep reaching for the stars ⭐️

Rob said...

@ Matt

There is IBD data of Balkan individuals. For ex, shows close affinities between Albanians and Romanians. Pretty important, but what it means is more difficult to discern. But something along the lines I sketched out here

ambron said...

David:
"Most Slavs are Baltic-like because they largely descend from Corded Ware groups southeast of the Baltic, like Balts do."

The common origin of the CWC is not what makes the Slavs similar to the Balts and at the same time distinguishes them from the Celts and Germans. Celts and Germans have the same CWC origin, yet they are clearly different from Balts and Slavs. This marker it is the WHG origin specific for Balts and Slavs. Southeast of the Baltic Sea there was no or was very little of this origin in the Bronze Age. It started to dominate there only in the Iron Age, as a result of the migration of Baltic tribes. In the Middle Ages it was diluted due to the migration of the Slavs who had more of the specific EEF origin. The specific Slavic EEF is another marker that distinguishes today's Balts and Slavs from Celts and Germans:
https://slavicorigins.blogspot.com/2021/05/surplus-eef-ancestry-in-modern-day-slavs.html

Davidski said...

@ambron

Celts and Germans descend from Single Grave groups in Western Europe.

Balts and Slavs share very similar late Corded Ware ancestry, and of course there's a reason why Baltic and Slavic are related language groups, and this doesn't have anything to do with any unique WHG component.

ambron said...

David, if by "late CWC" you mean the population represented by N47 and N49, I can agree with you. But there is no indication that such a population lived in the Bronze Age southeast of the Baltic Sea.

I understand what you are implying... the main vector of the language is paternal uniparental markers. But in these markers, the Balts fundamentally distinguish themselves from the Slavs.

alex said...

Thank god the Mycenaean Greeks "diluted their blood" and admixed with Middle Easterners because otherwise we wouldn't know anything about them (or about their 'pure-blooded' neighbours for that matter)

Steppe said...

ambron

Slavs and Balts also share some Y-DNA markers (Balto-Slavic) such as R1a Z280 -Z92 or Z280 - Y32 or Y33 or other subclade !

Davidski said...

@ambron

Balts and Slavs share near and far related R1a clades.

The N1c in Balts is of post-Corded Ware Uralic origin, so it's irrelevant.

Andrzejewski said...

@ambron “ The common origin of the CWC is not what makes the Slavs similar to the Balts and at the same time distinguishes them from the Celts and Germans.”

Celts and Germans share the source for EEF with Slavs and Balts (GAC), but they have an ADDITIONAL portion from Western Europe (some Cardial Pottery related)

Rob said...

@ Alex
Don’t get Saultry. I was defending the largely ‘local’ and Mediterranean affinities of Mycenaeans long before Emperor Michalis graced us with his presence

Davidski said...

@Michalis

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aka9oiY6CjHTMi3gvAIiglfIE2oCIfyU/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w1rnb1T1_98vSnET7FMaWKojeEkI6KaD/view?usp=sharing

Michalis Moriopoulos said...

Much appreciated, David, thank you!

Simon Stevin said...

@Davidski

Dave, what’s the best way to utilize G25 when using ancient samples? I remember you saying a few years back that you were displeased to see amateur models mis-utilizing G25, via the use of very similar source pops. Thanks

Davidski said...

@Simon

Don't overfit models by using too many reference samples, and design models that are plausible in terms of chronology and geography.

If you get a good fit (~2%) with only 2, 3, 4, 5 or maybe 6 reference populations, then it's likely to be a useful model.

Getting good fits with 20-100 references doesn't mean anything.

Davidski said...

@All

Does anyone know if there's a direct relationship between Kura-Araxes and Maykop Novosvobodnaya?

In terms of ancestry, even fine scale ancestry, they're very similar, but are there any archeological links that would imply Novosvobodnaya ancestry in Kura-Araxes?

ambron said...

David, Steppe

The Baltic Y-DNA pool is very different from the Slavic one. N1c aside, the problem is with M458, Z92, and I2a-Din. The only connector is here CTS1211. But can't see to the south-east from the Baltic the late CWC population rich in this marker. Fatyanovo, which was supposed to come from the middle Dnieper, is mainly Z93.

ambron said...

Andrzejewski, the problem is precisely that the Balts and the Slavs do not share the EEF source with the Celts and Germans. Celto-Germanic source is close to GAC, while Balto-Slavic source is close to LBK:

https://slavicorigins.blogspot.com/2021/05/surplus-eef-ancestry-in-modern-day-slavs.html

ambron said...

David:
"There's also no Baltic ancestry in most western and eastern Slavs, because Balts are rich in N1c, while most Slavs are not."

Most Slavs are indeed not rich in N1c haplogroup, but because it is little in Western and Southern Slavs. In contrast, the East Slavs have a relatively lot N1c, which proves that the East Slavs have a lot of Baltic (and Uralic) ancestors.

Vladimir said...

@Davidski
Does anyone know if there's a direct relationship between Kura-Araxes and Maykop Novosvobodnaya?

In terms of ancestry, even fine scale ancestry, they're very similar, but are there any archeological links that would imply Novosvobodnaya ancestry in Kura-Araxes?

Here in this article there is a lot of interesting things about the connections of these cultures. As far as I understand they have common origins of metalworking:
Ancient Metallurgy in the Caucasus From the Sixth to the Third Millennium BCE
Courcier Antoine
2014, Archaeometallurgy in Global Perspective: Methods and Syntheses
https://www.academia.edu/5789550/2014_Ancient_Metallurgy_in_the_Caucasus_From_the_Sixth_to_the_Third_Millennium_BCE

Richard Rocca said...

@Davidski...

Probably not enough to pique one's interest, but some light reference to metallurgy...

https://www.persee.fr/docAsPDF/paleo_0153-9345_2014_num_40_2_5634.pdf

If we turn to the measures of quantity or age, we find that
the Kura-Araxes metalwork is not a stand out in the world of
the Caucasus. The Maikop tradition was far more productive
and precocious, and in its second phase (the Novosvobodnaiia
stage) stylistic traits show that it influenced Kura-Araxes
metal-smiths.

Rob said...

@ Davidski

They’re quite different archaeologically and are treated as such by scholars. Eg lack of ostentatious burials in KA
Some had even suggested that Majkok demise was due to KA strangling their trade with Uruk
I think they’re also different in fine scale ancestry and represent different events

DragonHermit said...

@Matt,

We would have never believed Corded Ware was that closely related to Yamnaya, if it wasn't for IBD. It's more about seeing the relation of these ancient samples to one another.

Plus I assume even within a few hundred years period, you might get some IBD data?

DragonHermit said...

I agree with Rob on 1 thing though: Ancient Macedonians were clearly more northern than Ancient Greeks. It's not a surprise they plot with Illyrians.

Comparing Ancient Macedonians to Greeks is like comparing northern Italians to southern Italians. I know it's not super scientific, but even Macedonian paintings showed them with light hair and light skin. We know at least Alexander was pale with light/blonde hair. Ancient Greeks were more Mediterrenean, and Aristotle described them with "medium brown skin".

Modern Greeks plot more closely to other Balkanites in this day and age because of Slavic admixture (plus Roman era DNA).

Davidski said...

@DragonHermit

We would have never believed Corded Ware was that closely related to Yamnaya, if it wasn't for IBD.

That's not true.

Corded Ware samples were modeled as ~70% Yamnaya since day one, and most people accepted that this was due to a close relationship with Yamnaya rather than a coincidence.

There were only a few crackpots online arguing that Corded Ware and Yamnaya weren't related because one was apparently all R1a and the other R1b.

Samsun raraavisss said...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatism

Is there any validity in this? I got Scythian and Sarmatian similarities in my dna test results. I am Volga Tatar.

Rob said...

@ Dragon Hermit

''I agree with Rob on 1 thing though: Ancient Macedonians were clearly more northern than Ancient Greeks. It's not a surprise they plot with Illyrians.''


I’m not into eye colour or phenotype. Sure it’s interesting but it’s not something I bother about. I was just making a point about genetics and identity, I realise it was a bit provocative.


And of course, you are entitled to disagree with my other remarks on the Balkans, but then you'd be disagreeing with the evidence.

Eg “ The evidence of settlements and burials is incontrovertible: during the seventh century, the Balkans, especially the central and northern regions seem to have experienced something of a demographic collapse, with large tracts of land left without any inhabitants. The late antique cities and forts were abandoned and the population moved elsewhere, either as refugees into the coastal areas still under Roman control or as prisoners of war within the Avar qaganate.“ (Curta 2018)

There's not much to argue with

Unless Im intentionally taking the piss, what I say is state of the Art
If people think I’m speaking alien or crazy- it’s probably because they can’t keep up, are intimidated or it shakes their own preconceptions.

Rob said...

@ Davidski
- Actually, Majkop could be a major source for KA.

Armenia_EBA_KuraAraxes
Russia_Caucasus_Maikop
Azerbaijan_Caucasus_lowlands_LN



best coefficients: 0.776 0.224
0.504954


with Steppe _EN

Armenia_EBA_KuraAraxes
Russia_Caucasus_Maikop
Azerbaijan_Caucasus_lowlands_LN
Russia_Steppe_Eneolithic


best coefficients: 0.962 0.089 -0.051
infeasible


right pops:
Ethiopia_4500BP
Morocco_Iberomaurusian
Anzick
Kostenki14
Vestonice
MA1
Tianyuan
DevilsCave_N
Loschbour
Jordan_Late_PPNB
Turkey_TepecikCiftlik_N.SG
Pinarbasi
Russia_EHG
Iran_GanjDareh_N
Satsurblia_HG
Turkey_TellKurdu_EC

St said...

@Davidski, I have been enjoying your works for many years. However "No, it's impossible, because there's no Scythian ancestry in any Slavs" - I suggest you put your conclusion under re-examination. Consider this a tip. It is up to you if you would take my posting seriously. There has been evidence already coming out of a certain presentation, painting surprising picture. I would be curious, with the obvious talent you've got, and the tools you have been using, if you would be able to refute / reconfirm your own claim here. Cheers.

Matt said...

Re; Corded Ware and Yamnaya, I remember a lot of people got misled by the misdated "Sredny-Stog" sample and were saying all kinds of stuff about how this proves a deep separation of Yamnaya and Corded Ware for thousands of years, and postulated CWC having essentially no extra EEF admixture after expanding to Central Europe (due to EEF in the misdated "Sredny Stog").

Even once that was found out, people still seemed to be arguing that the CWC and Yamnaya were separated for >1000s years from the same Sredni-Stog ancestor ("Is Yamnaya overrated?"), until actual long IBD links found between CWC and Yamnaya. Although this is not yet published... (And even after that claiming that all living IE languages descended from CWC, until the Armenian BA samples from Southern Arc!). So I see what DragonHermit is saying.

I don't know if "third-party IBD calculators" could add much to the question of links between ancients though. We will just have to wait for the academic publications.

Davidski said...

@Matt

Despite the IBD links between Corded Ware and Yamnaya nothing has really changed since I wrote this post.

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/09/is-yamnaya-overrated.html

Or this one, where I tried to explain the obvious contradictions (ie. Corded Ware is closely related to Yamnaya, but not necessarily derived from it).

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/07/on-origin-of-corded-ware-people.html

And we've known about Z2103 in BA Armenia for several years, since that first Allentoft paper.

But Z2103 in BA Armenia doesn't mean Yamnaya migrated there. You might remember this post.

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/02/catacomb-armeniamlba.html

Davidski said...

By the way, I never used the wrongly dated Sredny Stog sample to argue anything about Yamnaya. Carlos Quiles did that.

My argument was always that early Corded was basically identical to Yamnaya, despite that Sredny Stog sample.

Michalis Moriopoulos said...

Of course the frequency of blondism should rise the further north you go, but it's silly to expect the average ancient Macedonian to have been anything but dark-eyed and dark-haired. This has always been the norm in Southern Europe; if anything modern groups have likely gotten lighter due to historic admixture with northern Europeans.

I have actually commented on some of the ancient Macedonian (and other) samples that the Greek lab Biomuse has been teasing on their website in the thread below. There are even some phenotype predictions:

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?26105-Preview-Upcoming-Ancient-Greek-Transect-(Mesolithic-to-Medieval)-from-Biomuse

The leaked PCA marked with my best guesses about what the codes stand for:
https://i.imgur.com/weYyLLD.png

Several of the pop names are cryptic, but I have a strong hunch "Aca" is Akanthos, a site that one of the authors has spent time working on. Two of the Aca samples cluster with the other archaic/classical Greeks (and possibly shifted more west in the area where Bulgaria IA/Thracians would be), while Aca1 is floating in the North/Central Italy area. This person might have a North Macedonia IA-type profile or perhaps the sample is dated later (could be a Slavic-mixed individual in medieval Macedonia for all I know). It could be that both Mycenaean and North Mac IA types existed in core Macedonia in antiquity. A cline running west to east from Albania IA-like to Bulgaria IA-like and one running from north to south (Bulgaria IA to Mycenaean-like) seems totally reasonable to me. It could be that core Macedonia will prove to be heterogeneous in the archaic/classical era. Maybe they'll look just like Logkas even (I doubt that). Who knows? I have no personal stake in how it turns out. It really should make no difference to anyone if Philip was Albania IA-like or Bulgaria IA-like.

Davidski said...

Actually, the Southern Arc paper adds nothing to our understanding about who spread Greek to Greece or Armenian to Armenia.

Just because there's Z2103 here and there doesn't mean Yamnaya did it.

Catacomb is the more likely culprit in Armenia, and then there's a problem there because we now know that the Phrygians did come from the Balkans at the right time but their ancestry was diluted.

Davidski said...

Yamnaya is definitely overrated, since Corded Ware doesn't derive from it, but from Sredny Stog.

And most surviving Indo-European languages do come from Corded Ware.

Davidski said...

@Michalis

Are the labels for those new modern samples correct, or should they be more detailed?

I'm asking because watch how as soon as I put them into the G25 datasheets someone will pop up here claiming that those Greeks should be labeled differently.

Copper Axe said...

There was a substantial movement of Catacomb groups between the Don and Caspian southwards with the 4.2 kiloyear event, the steppes being practically uninhabited in many areas. Although it seems quite secure that this is where most of the Z2103 and steppe ancestry in Armenians come from, I'm still cautious to link it to the Armenian language. Afaik Eastern Catacomb is unlikely to account for all the I2 we see in those Armenian samples. It could be similar to Britain where we have a heavy Bell Beaker/EBA NW Europe migration followed by limited geneflows, yet it is precisely those limited LBA/IA geneflow that brings Celtic languages to the Isles rather than the more obvious earlier Indo-European migration event.

I dont see any evidence for such a Catacomb movement down the Balkans, nor with later groups such as the KMK. What we do see are Yamnaya migrations into that direction however.

Rob said...

Catacomb alone can’t explain Armenian, because of all that I2c
Must be an “extra ingredient”

Michalis Moriopoulos said...

@David

I was slammed with real life stuff tonight so I didn't get a chance to go through the samples yet. I will email you a copy with my labeling scheme as soon I can (probably tomorrow night Eastern Standard Time). One thing that has been brought to my attention is some of those Apulians (maybe all of them) are Griko! I'll go through them as soon as I have a few hours to spare.

CeRcVa said...

"In terms of ancestry, even fine scale ancestry, they're very similar, but are there any archeological links that would imply Novosvobodnaya ancestry in Kura-Araxes?"

Here is a short 1-page quotes(different Georgian authors) on the similarities and comparisons of the Maykop, Kura-Araxes, and Colchian culture samples found in the territory of Georgia. For example, identical samples of Maykop were found in Imereti and etc*After the Georgian text, there is an English translation on link).

http://saunje.ge/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2053%3A2021-02-20-22-46-38&catid=1%3A2010-01-24-19-54-07&lang=en

Matt said...

@Davidski, the simplest interpretation is that the impulse derives from post-Yamnaya derived cultures. The argument that the Armenian language comes from a heavily diluted flow from the NW rather than actually the directly evidenced and impactful flow from the steppe that led to a big change in y-dna and autosome seems very difficult for me to credit. I'm not sure we'd accept it in any other context around the Indo-European languages that I have ever come across.

Re; Sredny-Stog and the over enthusiasm for Corded Ware, I am talking mainly of commentors on this blog, who were extremely egregious in my view to sort of go into some bizarre narrative of "Corded Ware is the only ancestral culture of IE speakers" that seemed simply to try and invert Carlos Quiles's line of argument.

I don't really think it matters much about whether the present-day languages descend from IE or CWC; since Armenian has all the features of the core-post-Anatolian IE, there obviously was not much separate shared linguistic evolution that defines a CWC IE as separate from Yamnaya IE.

Re; the importance of IBD, I think finding cousins between Yamnaya and CWC - if the finding bears up - will have some bearing on arguments that they were separate linguistic communities which went their own way since Sredny-Stog ancestors a millennium earlier or something like this. I do think it actually matters and adds information about how integrated vs divergent these cultures were and the degree to which it even makes sense to talk about separate communities, beyond the broad autosomal resemblence.

Matt said...

@Rob, re; I2c I guess if you could define a specific link of the I2 subclades in the Armenian BA set to Europe and specific cultures in SE Europe (rather than being some unusual localized phenomenon of I2 without a recent link to Europe), that might be interesting and be able to prove more of a complex scenario than simple push from Catacomb or closely related culture. There are a number of I2 them as you say. In the anno from the paper they are simply marked as a basal I2 (some derived rare branch possibly) or I2a2b, which is only found otherwise in the HO anno under Damgaard's LBA Armenian sample DA31 and not any other sample from the extensive European ancient and modern sample set.

I'm not enough of a y haplogroup expert to really talk on it. Though it would seem strange for only specific I2 subclades, from a group not particularly undergoing this starburst expansion, to be the only male patrilineal marker showing up with a link to SE Europe in a high sample size set. Where the male patrilineal markers in SE Europe seem to have a tendency towards more diversity and a lack of wipeout of the previous patrilineages. I would've expected more "along for the ride". Although perhaps an analysis of the J1a and E1b also found among these samples from Armenia might find such links?
Maybe ancIBD will show some things here.

Davidski said...

@Matt

The Z2103 in Armenia is actually from groups in the northeast Caucasus that are about 50% Catacomb.

So I don't see how anyone can say that Armenians got their steppe ancestry and language from Yamnaya, while most Europeans didn't, because we got it from Corded Ware.

Matt said...

OK, well that implies that the turnover from the initial migration in the EBA was even higher than the raw contribution of steppe ancestry suggests, and seems to me to increase the likelihood that this population was responsible for a change in language. Anyway, OK, I don't want to get too into the semantics of whether descent (linguistic or genetic) from a culture B, a descendent culture of culture A, is the same as descendent of culture A. But getting back to my comment DragonHermit's contention, I simply would say that he's correct that the IBD links between CWC and Yamnaya did change our ideas of how closely related and in contact these cultures / samples must have been, compared to what was put forth before (separation perhaps over a thousand years earlier). I also do think that the lack of Steppe_MLBA or CW related haplogroups in Armenia BA along with the finding of Steppe_EMBA related haplogroups significantly undermined the case that all living IE languages (and their last common ancestor) was developing in CW separately, particularly when in combination with the IBD finding.

So I'm just arguing against the idea (maybe or maybe not your suggestion, if not then certainly no need to discuss further!) that the IBD links don't really tell us anything major or interesting beyond what we already know from the genome-wide unlinked data. They are pretty important and significant. I don't think there's anything further major to talk about on these topics.

Rob said...

@ Matt

Im not 100% sure. I2c isnt really found in the Balkans. It's more of a Central-North European lineage. Was in Anatolia Neolithic, but dead end there.
Could be from Romania

Rob said...

@ Matt


'' I simply would say that he's correct that the IBD links between CWC and Yamnaya did change our ideas of how closely related and in contact these cultures / samples must have been, compared to what was put forth before (separation perhaps over a thousand years earlier). I also do think that the lack of Steppe_MLBA or CW related haplogroups in Armenia BA along with the finding of Steppe_EMBA related haplogroups significantly undermined the case that all living IE languages (and their last common ancestor) was developing in CW separately, particularly when in combination with the IBD finding.''


Dont disagree, however they could still have been a priori separated, and these IBD links evidence the act of convergence, or kurganization, of Neolithic - Eneolithic steppe groups

EastPole said...

Are there better candidates for Hyperboreans than Slavs in terms of genetics and culture? Don’t think so.
If Hyperboreans who introduced the solar cult to Greece were Slavs, as it seems now, it would have an impact on linguistics and the history of religion.
For example scientists who were saying that Greek word ‘Eros’ has no etymology and is pre-Greek may be wrong and scientists who were saying that Greek god‘ Eros’ is related to Slavic god “Juraj, Jarowit (Herowit, Gerowit), Jarylo” – the same root, the same symbolism, the same function and origin. The best explanation of ‘Eros’ and myths related to it can be found in Slavic folklore.

Steppe said...

All@

I once read that the catacomb culture had an influence on the later Bishkent culture in relation to burial rites, does anyone know more?

Assuwatama said...

So from where did Mitanni kings got their Aryan names and Vocabulary scattered across various texts since somebody here claimed that sintastha ancestry and Iranian languages reached in that area only in Iron age around 800bce and later.

Teppe hasanlu 1400bce are right on the doors of Mitanni realm.

a-ri-ia
a-a-ri-ia

There are 11 persons with this name from Nuzi. 24 from alalakh have this name.

Wise dragon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Assuwatama said...

There are some interesting Aryan names on Nuzi personal name list like beda-arta (Veda-rta), Birya (Virya), su-matra, Purusa etc

Samuel Andrews said...

@Davidski,

Catacomb comes from Yamnaya. So Armenians' Steppe ancestry does come from Yamnaya.

LivoniaG said...

@Matt - you wrote: "I also do think that the lack of Steppe_MLBA or CW related haplogroups in Armenia BA along with the finding of Steppe_EMBA related haplogroups significantly undermined the case that all living IE languages (and their last common ancestor) was developing in CW separately, particularly when in combination with the IBD finding.
Matt, your handle on this stuff is so impressive, I'm hesitant to disagree with you.
But what feels not right about this is the Armenian language itself.
If Armenian looked more like Hittite or Tocharian, it would be easy to see this.
But the problem is that Armenian does not really carry the kinds of innovations that make it so separate from the other IE languages. It's a language that shares a lot of attributes with a lot of different IE languages and that does make it odd. It's not anywhere as different as the Anatolian IE languages, but given it's isolation it should be. Those BA individuals are just too odd to be connected to Armenian as it has come down to us, which is really not as divergent from the IE core. If they did speak a IE language, it would seem like it would be more distant -- as hard to identify as IE as say Albanian. Armenian sounds and acts like it came from Corded Ware.

Davidski said...

@Samuel

If Armenian comes from Catacomb, or rather groups derived from Catacomb, then yes, it's indirectly derived from Yamnaya.

But Catacomb was quite different from Yamnaya. Much more militarized, and it may have actually forcefully replaced Yamnaya in much of the steppe.

Greek might also be from Catacomb.

This is the sort of stuff that should've also been in the Southern Arc paper, but I'm getting sick of discussing that paper now.

Rob said...

@ Davidski

“ Greek might also be from Catacomb.”

How would that work ? Catacomb wasn’t even in Bulgaria

Davidski said...

I mean something like Greek splitting from Catacomb on the western edge of the steppe and moving down into the Aegean.

Worth taking a look at that in any case.

Rob said...

I think timeframe wise Proto-Greek relates to Balkan Yamnaya , but we should not be overly rigid because all these groups were still speaking late variants of IE, with branch languages eventually crystallising in their final destinations

Legend said...

@Davidski Hey! Very cool insights about the origins of those mercenaries. My query is about how did you convert the fastq or bam files to PLINK format? I'm trying to do qpAdm analyses on those samples, but I don't know how to convert them to PLINK-format so I can merge them with my dataset. It would dope if you help me convert them.

Davidski said...

Good luck...

https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/reich.hms.harvard.edu/files/inline-files/Reitsema2022PNAS_Ancient_1240K.zip

alex said...

DragonHermit said...
"I know it's not super scientific, but even Macedonian paintings showed them with light hair and light skin. We know at least Alexander was pale with light/blonde hair. Ancient Greeks were more Mediterrenean, and Aristotle described them with "medium brown skin"

These theories again.. Thracians were also depicted as "red-haired and blue-eyed" by Greeks but we've now seen that the vast majority were brown-haired and brown-eyed, just like Greeks themselves. Hardly surprising since they were a southern European population and their 2 main sources of ancestry (Balkan-Mediterranean farmers and Yamnaya) were also brown-haired and brown-eyed. It's incomprehensible to me why people keep repeating these failed racial theories when we have direct evidence for ancient phenotypes through ancient DNA.