This quote, from a new paper at
Nature,
High-resolution genomic history of early medieval Europe by Speidel et al., is arguably the most idiotic take on the ancestry of present-day Hungarians that I've ever read.
Present-day populations of Hungary do not appear to derive detectable ancestry from early medieval individuals from Longobard contexts, and are instead more similar to Scythian-related ancestry sources (Extended Data Fig. 6), consistent with the later impact of Avars, Magyars and other eastern groups.
In fact, present-day Hungarians are overwhelmingly derived from West Slavic and German peasants, showing only minor ancestry from early Magyars (or rather Hungarian Conquerors). So in terms of genetic ancestry they're basically typical East Central Europeans.
Scythians and Avars don't even deserve a mention in this context.
The reason that Speidel et al. found present-day Hungarians to be broadly similar to Scythians is because they used so called Hungarian Scythians in their analysis.
It's important to understand that these Hungarian Scythians are genetically fairly typical Central Europeans for their time, and, by and large, don't show any significant genetic relationship to Asian Scythians, Avars or early Magyars. So they're mostly either just acculturated Scythians or wrongly classified as Scythians by archeologists.
That is, the broad similarity that Speidel et al. found between present-day Hungarians and Hungarian Scythians derives from the fact that both of these populations are genetically Central Europeans, rather than the false idea that they show strong genetic links to Avars, Hungarian Conquerors and other eastern groups.
Here's a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of West Eurasian genetic variation, courtesy of the excellent
Vahaduo:Global25 Views, that perfectly illustrates my point.
If Speidel et al. were correct about the genetic origin of present-day Hungarians, then the Hungarian_Modern and Hungary_Scythian samples would be shifted away from other Europeans, much like many of the Hungary_Avar and Hungary_Conqueror individuals. But that's obviously not the case, and instead they cluster strongly with, say, present-day Germans from Hamburg.
I emailed two of the authors of this paper, Leo Speidel and Pontus Skoglund, when they posted the preprint of the paper at
bioRxiv to cordially discuss this issue (see
here). But they totally ignored me.
Citation...
Speidel et al.,
High-resolution genomic history of early medieval Europe, Published online: 1 January 2025, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08275-2
69 comments:
It must be said that the ancient DNA revolution is sadly a bit of a clownshow.
Western scientists have been brainwashed by Prussian and Nazi hate-filled racist propaganda, which aimed to erase Slavs from history.
@Dave
In your opinion was J2b-L283 principally spread into Europe by Yamnaya/CW males? This seems to be the case based on the aDNA:
ZO1002; J2b2a-L283 (xZ600)
I10206; 2900-2500 BC; Crihana-Veche, Cahul District, Moldova; Moldova_EBA_Yamnaya; J2b2a-L283
CGG_2_103750/CGG_2_103753 (twins); 2500 BCE J-L283 >> Z597 Late Yamnaya - early Catacomb, Constantinovca, Moldova
@Simon Stevens
It looks like J2b-L283 got to the western end of the steppe with a Caucasus-derived group, and then mostly spread from the steppe into the Balkans with a Yamnaya-related group, but that's not to say some of it didn't spread with Yamnaya and even Corded Ware.
This qpAdm graph shows that modern Hungarians have about as much East Eurasian-related ancestry as modern Norwegians.
https://i.imgur.com/lCFgp2Y.png
In other words, nothing significant.
You have absolutely correctly pointed out that these European/Hungarian Scythians are largely local, culturally assimilated peoples (probably, by that time, the burial rite for those Hungarian samples was typically Scythian). As a "Scythian" source, one should choose purer, earlier, and more eastern samples of Scythians from Ukraine and the Southern Urals, those Scythians who do not have additional "Central European" admixture.
I've only just noticed that the earliest Scythian samples are from Ukraine πΊπ¦.
in g25 these Scythians look so different that I don't even know what is better to take as a source, perhaps some groups of early Sarmatians are more suitable for this purpose, I mean most of the early Scythians are similar to the Slavic peoples (Slovaks, Czechs, or the same Hungarians, etc.)
the Scythians were not some specific people. The Scythians were a way of nomadic life
@Davidski, do today's Hungarians also have slight genetic traces/admixture of Scythians, Avars... like the Romanians or Szeklers?
You can even find some African admixture in Hungarian mtDNA if you look hard enough, but no, generally there's nothing obviously Scythian or Avar about Hungarians.
However, Hungarians do show trace amounts of Y-chromosome lineages that probably come from Hungarian Conquerors from Siberia.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/05/more-on-association-between-uralic.html
Hungarian 'Scythians' dont have much Siberan ancestry, let alone 'East Asian'. A couple actually look Balkan shifted c/w some inferences on certain Vekerzug archaeological traits.
I would however think that Translyvanian 'Scythians' do have a non-insignificant Eastern ancestry, mediated via steppe Scythians.
W.r.t. paper - understanding geographic & historic details is generally encouraged. Perhaps in defence the paper aimed to bring out their new methodology, and hence made some over-generalised conclusoins about medieval Europe. It would be hard to do a paper which 'analyses everything'
They don't have to analyze Hungarians in any sort of detail if they don't want to.
But why are they claiming that Scythians and Avars made an important impact on Hungarian ancestry, when obviously Hungarians are typical Central Europeans with practically no such impact?
@ Davidski
OK, it also depends on which sample you take, for example “an example Western Scythian MJ-34 has Iranian/ Indo-European steppe branches Y-DNA Z93/ and mtdna W3a1 but is autosomal close to modern East Germans and Czechs”. I know that around 7% of Scythian can be found autosomal in modern Romanians and Szeklers, but I don’t know which samples, was it three years ago?
I don't think that we can confidently say that Romanians and Szeklers actually have Scythian ancestry, as opposed to just some minor nomad steppe ancestry from various sources largely dating to the Middle Ages.
I know that today's Hungarians are genetically closest to their neighbors and the Germans, I just meant an ancient calculator! I am only talking about admixture
I don't think there's any reliable indication of Scythian admixture in Hungarians.
There is only one sample from Hungary that is genetically Sarmatian-like (aka Scythian). Labelled as Hungary_Prescythian or smth. What needs to be understood is _Scythian doesn't reflect Scythian samples but the region under Scythian period. In Europe only Balto Slavs can have any genuine Scythian ancestry that too very minimal. Some 1-2% are also under Z93 on FTDNA.
@ Davidski
was recently presented at GenArchivist Target: Polish_Medieval_Average(n=62)
Distance: 0.9788% / 0.00978840
63.8 Lithuania_Marvele_Roman_460_AD_Cov>40%N=4
33.8 Mikusovce_LaTene_R2202__AD_25__Cov_53.20%
2.4 Sarmatians_Rostov_350_BC_Cov>25%N=6.
I don't know if the fit is good, ph2ter could do a calculation if he has time, for Hungary...
@Steppe
That model for Medieval Poles from the Speidel paper is basically garbage, because it doesn't take into account early Slavs.
Lithuania_Marvele_Roman are not early Slavs. And so the rest of the model is skewed.
“ But why are they claiming that Scythians and Avars made an important impact on Hungarian ancestry, when obviously Hungarians are typical Central Europeans with practically no such impact?”
To by cynical, maybe because they read somewhere that Hungarians are nomads, so they used data which might make that pre-proposed view fit
@Davidski
I don't understand why Speidel has no idea about calculators and presents something like this. The only people who respond to emails are Falko Daim and Johannes Krause, but Speidel and Svante PÀÀbo respond absolutely nothing!
The Agathyrsi in Histories by Herodotus (situated in Transylvania) were described as having a connection to Scythians but mostly culturally Thracian. Clear Iranic names such as Spargapeithes were carried by their rulers. They likely represent the nomads of the western pontic pre-scythian iron age pushed westwards by the expansion of the Scythian kingdom in the 7th/6th centuries BC.
"The Agathyrsi are the most refined of men and especially given to wearing gold. Their intercourse with women is promiscuous, so that they may be consanguine with one another and, all being relations, not harbor jealousy or animosity toward one another. In the rest of their customs they are like the Thracians."
However, Herodotus does not mention any "Scythians" in the Pannonian regions further west. He describes the Sigynnae but does not mention anything in connection or relation with the Scythians.
The material culture of "Hungarian Scythians" is not even a case of culturally Scythian populations like you see with some of the forest steppe Scythoid populations. It is a very clearly Hallstatt derived culture. There is a military technological influence seen in arrowheads, horse harnesses and akinakai, but most of this influence predates the Scythian period and if we define these population as "Scythian" based on this we might as well call migration era Scandinavians "Romans".
So yeah archaeology, history and DNA seem to perfectly allign on here: The Hungarian Scythian population is an modern invention by Hungarian researchers, probably influenced by their turanist steppe fascination.
best summary of Radko
- a major population shift between Early Bronze Age and Middle Late Bronze Age in East-Central Europe
- Trzciniec culture population which occupied Eastern Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, etc. - Northeastern European-related, but not directly ancestral to the Slavs
- Lusatian culture population - genetically heterogeneous, according to preliminary analyses more "western European" (see Golubinski's PCA) than preceding Trzciniec culture, survival of post-Trzciniec elements in some pocket areas, i.e. Western Ukraine
- Pomeranian culture - no data, but very possible continuation of genetic "westernization"
- Oksywie culture (predecessor of the Wielbark culture) - predominantly Scandinavian/Wielbark-like
- Wielbark culture - predominantly Scandinavian-like (Sarmatian, Hunnic, Baltic, Roman, etc. genetic outliers, small scale immigration was previously noted by archaeologists)
- Przeworsk culture - predominantly Celto-Germanic-like, more heterogeneous (possible genetic outliers as a result of small scale immigration, survival of earlier post-Pomeranian elements?)
- decrease in human activity after 400's AD and then severe depopulation during the 6th century AD in Poland, Eastern Germany, etc.
- the Prague material culture which appeared in the second half of the 6th century AD is clearly connected to the Slavs (and associated with the migration from Eastern Europe by archeologists)
- genetic continuity between the 7th century Prague culture remains and later Slavs
- large fraction of segments >16 cM shared between Slavic period genomes from Eastern Germany, Poland, Croatia, etc. indicates recent descend from a common source population, at most a few generations earlier
- the same can be said about relatively young Y-DNA lineages under R-Z280, I-Y3120 and R-M458 (plus some minor lineages, i.e. R-Y14300) shared between Slavic populations
- Slavic-period sites were all relatively genetically homogenous communities with a large portion of ancestry from Northeastern Europe (i.e. BA/IA Baltic-related) and they were organised mostly along patrilines
@Mr. Funk
Scythians were in fact a "specific people". Scythian comes from their endonym Skula/Skulata (attested as Skolotoi) which is the Iranic relative of the English "shooter". In more ancient times the L was a th/d sound hence why Greeks knew them as Scythian.
It is outsiders to the steppe world such as Greeks, or us, who use Scythian asba catch-all term for any inhabitant of "Scythia" or the various related Iranic steppe nomads but from the perspective of the actual peoples Scythians were certainly a population. Within this broader population you obviously had various tribes and castes but there definitely was a shared identity in these populations to the exlucsion of other nomadic entities.
Both Cimmerians and Scythians originated in the steppes between the Azov and Caspian Seas, north of the Caucasus in the early iron age if we go by archaeology. The historical narrative features a push westwards by the Massagetae or by the Issedones from Central Asia, but this is a questionable narrative.
If you're interested, I'm currently working on a sequel to my last blogpost which will cover the formation of these populations during the pre-scythian period. First part was about the late bronze age populations which can be found on my blog and on my new substack page: https://musaeumscythia.substack.com/p/the-origin-of-scythians-part-i-the
Just wait until McColl' paper will prove that those I1 blue-eyed blond nordic aboriginal bestias were just refugees from East Europe (east baltic). And it's just on top of nonIE strong verbs system and nonIE theogony
@Copper Axe
hmm, interesting, thanks
@Copper Axe
I think this is the most plausible and logical map of the Massagetae -> Scythians -> Cimmerians, routes and migrations, etc.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Scythian_Kingdom_in_West_Asia.jpg
then in the role of the initially "pure" Scythian source some Sarmatian populations of the southern Urals, Altai, Kazakhstan, up to the 9/8 centuries BC should be chosen
@ Ashish, Mr Funk
''There is only one sample from Hungary that is genetically Sarmatian-like (aka Scythian). Labelled as Hungary_Prescythian or smth''
''then in the role of the initially "pure" Scythian source some Sarmatian populations of the southern Urals, Altai, Kazakhstan, up to the 9/8 centuries BC should be chosen''
Sarmatians are different to early Scythians / Sakae. The individual Ashish is thinking of might be IR-1, a haplogroup N male from ~ 900 bc with some eastern ancestry, acquired from Sakae/ Altai Scythians. The latter have high Inner Asian ancestry (but no east Asian ancestry) and little BMAC
Sarmatian appear later, after 300 BC, and they have low Inner Asian ancestry and ~ 30% BMAC-related ancestry
So proto-Scythians and proto-Sarmatians are different things. Everything else in the west are basically 'European' groups mixing in to some degree with those two.
@ Steppe (? nomad)
''best summary of Radko...''
That makes sense, but people should not be overconfident
The publicaitons will probably go for an erroneous conclusion like ''Slavs come from Kiev culture''
Remember this is Krause's team who came up with the heggarty debacle
I don't see any authors on the paper who could be associated with Hungarian nationalism. If the source of the term "Hungarian Scythian" is not just bad nomenclature but rather disinformation, maybe the cited authors for this study could be analyzed as the source. I don't get the impression that the authors of this study meant to use the term in bad faith.
This reminds me of that modern Greeks are descendant from ancient Greeks paper. "Oh they're both southern European? Then one must come from the other!"
Si parva licet, I could say that my daughter-in-law, Flemish, 100% Frankish, has links with the Bathory Family and above all King Bela III Arpad Dinasty (mt H1b, Y R-Z2123), Genetic Distance: 9.7397 Sample Match! 97% closer than other users, at MTA, and we have in the uniparental markers all the vicissitudes of the genetics of the Siberian corridor with their come and go from east to west and from west to east, but that makes us pretty much 100% Italian (me) or Frankish (my daughter-in-law).
@Finngreek
I made no comment regarding Hungarian nationalism in particular as Hungarian nationalism does not hinge on the Scythians. Furthermore, the Hungarian Scythian affair is not the result of one article or one author, it's the standard in Hungarian archaeology. A. Kuzabova has covered this error fairly extensively in articles.
@Davidski
Have you looked into the claims of significant geneflow from Central Europe into Scandinavia in the early middle ages? Any thoughts regarding this or the methodology of the claim?
I haven't looked into that yet.
I'm starting work on a preprint about this paper for bioRxiv in which I'll be making Speidel & Skoglund look really dumb, so I might cover the Scandinavian thing as well if I can.
I'll then try to publish this preprint at Nature as a reply to their paper.
Sounds hardcore, looking forward to it. Any reason why this article in particular rather than the hundreds of other published articles with odd claims?
Copper Axe
In any case, the Sigynnae had a Scythian influence: these migrations began from about 600 BC and the trade links brought the nomads of the Pannonian Plain under Scythian influences and contributed to the transformation of the Agathyrsi and Sigynnae cultures into a more Scythian form, which led to the development of the Mezocsat culture of the Sigynnae into the Vekerzug culture, which, however, from 500 BC onwards is strongly dominated by Le Tène culture, which is also partly reflected in the DNA. The only question is, who are the Sigynnae? Post-Srubnaya groups with amalgamation of other groups, the Agathyrsi could have been a Geto-Dacian-Cimmerian population with the upper class being predominantly steppe nomads and the wider population Dacian. Later, when the Le Téne culture took control of the area, the Sigynnae were absorbed (Celtic southward migration), the Agathyrsi were absorbed into the Dacian population. However, important cultural technological characteristics of the steppe nomads were adopted: trousers, arrows, acinaces (daggers), horse equipment... The cultural contacts, as CopperAxe has already mentioned, had been present since the Hallstatt period.
Well, because it's a standout.
They actually got the Hungarian thing comically backwards, which is going to make a great story for the editors at Nature to hear about.
And they didn't do anything about the problem at the preprint stage after being told about it, not even acknowledging the email that I sent to them.
I looked through the supplemental table to try and rationalize it (maybe they at least found a preference for those "Scythians" compared to Hungarian La Tene samples).
Unless I'm misreading it, Hungarian La Tene wasn't used in the analysis, and the preferred model they seem to be referring to combines the Hungarian "Scythians" with Slovakian La Tene samples.
So they ought to have known this was sensationalist framing.
Scythians originated in the Chust-Burguliuk culture.
@ Ashish Kulkarni
Chust Culture rather think of sedentary Iranians but not Scythians (Indo-Iranian steppe nomads/ Circum Altai Region )
Chust proto Scythians when expanding in steppe became nomadic for obvious reasons.
@Steppe
yes, it is better to first find an original Asian source for the Scythians, maybe Mongolia Khovsgol, or something else from Mongolia older than the thousandth year BC.
and sources like Andronovo + BMAC together with the Srubnaya culture will be an Iranian source for the early east Scythians
The whole "Karasuk is Scythian" or the newer "Deer-Stones/Khovsgol is Scythian" theories are plain rubbish. Scythian is an Eastern Iranian language which originated in Murghab along with Central East Iranics (Bactrians, Sogdians, Chorasmians) and Southern East Iranics (Pashto-Pamiris, Ormuri-Parachis). 'Scythian' is a Northern East Iranic language group comprising of Scytho-Sarmatian, Tasmola Sakan, Dahaean, Khotanic, Massagetean, Ferghana Sakan, etc.
Pasting an older comment.
Yaz culture is proto Eastern Iranian and Scythians descend from Yaz migrating over late Andronovo remnants and parallel Khovsgol migration. Notably the Chust culture is likely progenitor of Scythians.
Here is proto Scythian (early Chust-Burgliuk Horizon)
Target: Kazakhstan_LBA_Irtyshkoye:I6709__BC_1284__Cov_37.66%
Distance: 2.5995% / 0.02599495
51.2 Yaz_I_&_II
48.8 Andronovo_Alakul_Culture
Target: Sarmatian_Kazakhstan
Distance: 1.8037% / 0.01803661
53.6 Andronovo_Alakul_Culture
46.4 Saka_Kyrgyzstan
Target: Sarmatian_Kazakhstan
Distance: 2.0073% / 0.02007263
50.8 Kazakhstan_LBA_Irtyshkoye_(Chust?)
38.2 Andronovo_Alakul_Culture
11.0 Khovsgol_Culture
Target: Saka_Kazakhstan
Distance: 1.3130% / 0.01313027
55.2 Sarmatian_Kazakhstan
44.8 Khovsgol_Culture
Target: Saka_Kazakhstan
Distance: 0.8898% / 0.00889826
41.2 Khovsgol_Culture
31.0 Saka_Kyrgyzstan
27.8 Andronovo_Alakul_Culture
Target: Saka_Kyrgyzstan
Distance: 2.5429% / 0.02542924
70.4 Kazakhstan_LBA_Irtyshkoye_(Chust?)
29.6 Khovsgol_Culture
So basically, we have Yaz I (Sine-Sepulchro Culture) (formed 1700-1500bce) back-migrating northwards ca. 1300bce. They admix with Andronovo remnants 50 : 50 to form Chust-Burguliuk. Parallel, there is Khovsgol coming in replacing South Siberian and Altaian Andronovo. Chust-Burguliuk admixed with Khovsgol to give Saka_KGZ/Molaly profile. This profile formed around 1100 then begins migrating north, northwest, westwards and creates the generic Scytho-Sarmatian (50 : 50 = Chust : Andronovo) and Tasmola-Pazyryk-Sagly (30:70 = Chust : post NE Andronovo) clines to simplify.
Yaz I (1500bce) -> early Chust-Burguliuk (1300bce) -> late Chust (early Chust + Khovsgol) -> West Sakan (50 Chust + 50 Andronovo), East Sakan (30 Chust + 40 Khovsgol + 30 Andronovo), possibly Dahaean (unknown), Ferghana Sakan (90-100% Chust). West Sakan then migrate to Caspians steppe, Caucasus (admix with local NWCs), Ukraine, etc. East Sakans too migrate to Siberia and Tuva but mostly retain genetic profile other than giving some admix to proto Turkics. Khotanic Sakas are unresolved case imo.
The early Scythians originated from the steppe area and did not migrate from Iran to the Altai region, but early Iranian groups migrated from the Andronovo cultural horizon to Iran and the Fergana Valley where older cultures already existed (BMAC ...)
The common misconception that "Srubnaya is Iranian" is also based on faulty lone premise such as Scythian hydronyms being assumed for proto Iranian. In reality, Srubnaya is not even Iranian but an unknown Indo-Iranian lect. 'Srubnaya Alakul' is just Alakul (proto Iranian West Andronovo), the person who makes AADR labels is to some extent stupid.
I have seen through you, you support the theory that Indo-Iranians do not originate from the steppe (the eastern CWC horizon), but from Iran/Central Asia and migrated to the steppe and that Pashtuns also have other Z93 branches that do not originate from Scythians but from early Indo-Iranian/Indo-Aryan groups such as Z93 - L657 or Z93 Y3...
I am of course not the real Ashish Kulkarni aka Vasistha/a-genetics.blogspot.com
Merry Christmas to Ortho-bros
All good, everyone is entitled to their opinion, however you should read scientific studies: Nature, PLOS ONE .. or blogs such as Eurogenes or MuseumScythia, archaeological books (for example, the Peoples of Eurasia / Parzinger, ....)
@Ashish Kulkarni Why would you name yourself as someone else? Just be yourself. We aren't supposed to know if you are or aren't someone you named yourself after.
@ Rob
not nomad but steppe an old Anthro Amigos known as Alain
@ the ? not real "Ashish''
I can appreciate that Cimmerian / "Initial Scythian', deer-stone folk might not be Iranian. They have no BMAC, and derive their admixture from eastern Saka who are almost 50% Khovsgol.
The issue is that we dont have 'classic' steppe Scythians from the Don and lower Dnieper.
@ Finn Greek
''Why would you name yourself as someone else?''
If true, a bit ... creepy
@ Slav
ΡΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½ ΠΠΎΠΆΠΈΡ
Aside from the archaeological issues with claiming that Chust is "Proto-Scythian", thess models are simply made up as sample I6709 from Northeast Kazakhstan has nothing to do with the Chust culture. Stick to spreading misinformation on social media platforms.
The relation between Chust and the local Saka of the Alai is the following:
"The formation of the Alai Saka culture itself occurred as a result of a powerful migration wave of cattle-breeding population coming from the northeast at the turn of the 8th-7th centuries BC.1 Having passed through the territory of the Tien Shan, it could not directly penetrate Alai, bypassing the territory of the Fergana Valley. Since the spurs of the Fergana Range almost completely isolate Alai from the northeast, there are simply no convenient passes for the passage of large masses of people there. Therefore, having invaded Fergana, this migration wave contributes to the decline of the Chust culture [Zadneprovsky, 1962: 171] and is superimposed on the local post-Bronze Age population. "
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sakskaya-kultura-alaya-yugo-zapadnaya-chast-kirgizii
Furthermore, no "separate khovsgol migration" occurred on the Central and Western steppes. The main Y-haplogroup of Khovsgol_LBA, Q-BZ180, is found in a wopping 2 of the hundreds of Scythian samples we have. The more derived clade, Q-FT421589, in none. We have plenty of samples from this early stage and the eastern ancestry clearly spread with a mixed profile, as seen in populations of the Altai-Sayan during the LBA.
Neither Khovsgol (literally impossible) nor Karasuk are proto Scythian. Chust is related to Yaz expansions and most likely represents proto stages of Scythians. BS archaeological speculations simply don't hold. Your whole substack and blogspot is full of misinformation apart from few posts which copy paste paper supplements. Chust developed into Ferghsns Sakas, and the pottery also remained in use by them. Quoting obsolete Soviet articles from 1962 isn't going to do anything.
Molaly sample from the closest proximity to Ferghana Valley and is basically I6709 + Khovsgol, basically Ferghana Saka profile. Thus it's extremely likely I6709 represent the earliest phase of Chust.
@Copper Axe
"Have you looked into the claims of significant geneflow from Central Europe into Scandinavia in the early middle ages? Any thoughts regarding this or the methodology of the claim?"
Modern Scandinavians score a lot more Barcin-like (ANF) component than Iron Age Scandinavians did. In my opinion it can be partially attributed to Celtic thralls from Ireland/Scotland, partially to immigration from Northern Germany & the Netherlands (Hanseatic League), partially to a genetic drift.
Target: Norway_IA.SG
Distance: 4.8543% / 0.04854321
51.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
29.4 TUR_Barcin_N
19.2 WHG
Target: Norwegian
Distance: 4.6437% / 0.04643725
50.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
34.0 TUR_Barcin_N
15.8 WHG
Interestingly, the Yamnaya proportion changed little, but a large chunck of the WHG component flipped towards Barcin. Perhaps the single biggest factor is a genetic drift?
@Copper Axe
that is, this Asian source khovsgol does not fit the early Scythians, is that correct? If it does not fit, then we need to look for another source.
One more question. Would the Scythians have been Scythians if not for this Asian source in the Scythian samples. I mean specifically about the early Scythians, about their culture and customs, which turned them from ordinary Iranian-speaking nomads into Scythian warriors and cattle breeders?
I am asking you this question because you clearly know more about the Scythians than anyone else
@Radiosource
Genetic drift is random, so it can't change autosomal ancestry proportions.
The most likely causes are demographic factors coupled with isolation-by-distance.
@ Mr Funk
CopperAxe really knows a lot about the subject:
In my opinion, the Scythians were definitely Indo-European Indo-Iranian speaking horse nomads from the Altai region with a slight East Asian admixture/input which later increased and was absorbed into the local population in some cultural areas, see Agathyrsi (Dacians and pre-Scythian population...) hardly any East Asian input to nothing at all but for example the Pasyryk Culture, the individuals have a high East Asian gene content and tended to be similar to today's Tuvinians
@ Copper Axe
''Furthermore, no "separate khovsgol migration" occurred on the Central and Western steppes. The main Y-haplogroup of Khovsgol_LBA, Q-BZ180, is found in a wopping 2 of the hundreds of Scythian samples we have. The more derived clade, Q-FT421589, in none. We have plenty of samples from this early stage and the eastern ancestry clearly spread with a mixed profile, as seen in populations of the Altai-Sayan during the LBA.''
Most of it might have been gradual dissemination of genome-wide Inner Asian ancestry toward the west, but we do have clear evidence for brisk migrations from Inner Asia (broadly) toward the Urals and western Steppe. I mentioned IR-1 from Hungary who belongs to N-B482, the 2 Q you mentioned, and im sure more will show up. Also, some of the R1a-Z93 lineages should be looked at for return migrations from the Kazakh regeion to the west.
Of course, these individuals are a relative minority imposing themselves on the collapsing Belozerska / late Srubnaja settlement pattern, who themsleves were mostly R1a-Z93
''https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7997506/
Figure 4A''
A good article written by Nmozhenov documents these movements archaeologically.
As I said, once we get Don Scythians, things will become clearer (ie more complex, because they might also have Koban ancestry, early Sarmatian admix, etc)
@ Mr Funk
'that is, this Asian source khovsgol does not fit the early Scythians, is that correct? ''
It depends on what you mean by early Scythians. However, Khovsgol or Baikal BA are certainly valid source of admixture in steppe Sakae and so-called Altai Scythians shown by qpAdm (e/g me or more formally Gnecchi-Rusconi). There's no doubt about this
@ Steppe
''In my opinion, the Scythians were definitely Indo-European Indo-Iranian speaking horse nomads from the Altai region with a slight East Asian admixture/i''
Hi Alain. Some of the Altai Scythians & Sakae have almost 50% Khovsgol admixture. Do you count that as slight ?
We cant make sweping assertions on what language they spoke unless one does a detailed study on the social structure of an individual community.
However, by the time of the so-called Initial Scythians in the west are ambiguous, classic Scythians ~ 550 BC (which we lack aDNA for) , steppe chiefs appear to have had Iranic names
@ Rob
slightly not but it depends on the culture! for example the Pontic Scythians or Western Scythians have a not so high East Asian share or Zevakino chilikta IA or the Sarmatians in the Urals as Tasmola or Pazyryk
There is no evidence that Tasmola Sakas (30% Ferghana Saka + 40% Khovsgol + 30% Andronovo), spoke Iranian language. No attestation or idea of words (we have Khotanic, Massagetae, Dahae, Scytho-Sarmatian attestations), from their language (spanning from C, E Kazakhstan, Altai, Tuva, W Mongolian plateau). No living descendants (Scytho-Sarmatian evolved into Ossetian, Old Khotanic evolved into Wakhi). These 50% Khovsgol admixed 'Sakas' were at best some Turkic-like speakers, just as Huns and Avars. Another theory can be eastern Tazabagyab evolved into proto Scythian while also giving meta East Iranian in Yaz (CE + SE).
@Rob
Its certainly a sudden migration rather than gradual diffusion. How sudden is hard to say but within one century seems likely. The strongest replacement seemed to have occurred in the Central Kazakh steppes with almost no legacy from the LBA groups there. The least is in the Volga-Ural region, Minusinsk Basin and North Altai region. Latter two are peripheral regions of course.
The route of expansion in the EIA is another point. The nomads from Dzungaria to Moldova all have common traits to the exclusion of those around the Altai. Kovalev points to the usage of deer stones in EIA Dzungaria being very similar to those in Europe as well as similar burial rites so an expansion from this area westwards is possible but there are other possibilities. Will all be discussed. Fyi we have two samples from the early classical Scythian phase by now: UKR113 and UKR078. You'd find the profile of the former interesting I think.
The eastern substrate is the same "type" of population as Munkhkhairkhan/Khovsgol_LBA but the samples from west-central Mongolia just carry slightly different subclades. Q-L332 for example is a major one both in the west and east. Perhaps the right subclades are to be found in Xinjiang Altai or Tuva? Hard to predict. And yeah you have specific "eastern" R1a clades common in Scythians and you can find those in the Circum-Altai zone samples.
I wouldnt fall in the trap of thinking that just because they have 50% eastern ancestry that they would not be Iranian speaking. Most Iranian speakers of the iron age had the same or even more non-IE admixture yet we dont speculate about how TKM_IA could have spoken "BMAC language". Food for thought but the material culture of those eastern populations is practically entirely derived from the steppe_MLBA rich cluster in the Altai as well, if anyone did a language switch it would be them.
The only serious homeland for Scythians can be either Tazabagyab or Yaz. The strange theories like Karasuk origin clearly ignore the fact Scythian has East Iranian character along with innovations. There are no legit Karasuk samples, all of them are unrelated to others by huge distances.
@Mr. Funk
The horse-based lifestyle, nomadic economy, scythian animal art and warfare systems all have their origins in the eastern regions yes, and without these elements you would not have Scythians as we know them. For example the Akinakes short sword developed out of a particular type of Karasuk-style dagger (with additional North Caucasian influences). Without this migration you would have developments of a short aword no doubt, but it would not become an akinakes if you get my point.
The Srubnaya-derived populations were not nomadic but sedentary and/or transhumant cattle pastoralists. You could argue that the development towards full blown nomadic pastoralism could have developed in the European or Central Asian steppes as well. In our timeline though, it didn't. Circumstances such as climate/geography play a larger role than ancestry I would say. Keep in mind that in these region I am talking about was inhabited by people which had 50-75% steppe_MLBA ancestry so the "basis" on which those cultural developments occurred ultimately originate in the western steppes.
@Not Asish
No offense but you cannot call my posts misinformation when you blatantly misattribute samples to push through your ridiculous theories which have no factusl basis or academic support. Its funny too that you denigrate Soviet archaeology but then talk about Yaz and Chust as if these are not material cultures that owe nearly all their excavations to the Soviet period.
The genomes fo the Tian Shan Saka perfectly display what happened in those regions. 50/50 autosomal profile between Yaz-like farmers and Tasmola-like nomads yet the vast majority of the paternal lineages are from said nomads. We primarily see northern R1a clades as well as the ocasional Khovsgol_LBA related lines under Q and N, shared with other nomads. A minority of southern paternal input is certainly there but these are specific to this cluster rather than showing recent links with other nomads. You can do the math on the implications.
Also if Chust evolved into "Ferghana Saka" then they are not the source of all Scythians as the Cimmerians and Scythians had already invaded the Middle East, and burials like Tunnug 0 and Arzhan 1 were well over a century old by the time the Ferghana Saka came around. Classic case of Dunning-Kruger...
This model has an even better fit than Speidel's model:
Target: Polish_Medieval_Average(n=62)
Distance: 0.8541% / 0.00854104
56.0 Latvia_BA_Kivutkalns_550_BC_Cov>50%N=7
29.0 Glinoe_Dacians_290_BC_Cov>25%N=5
15.0 Goths_Weklice_90_AD_Cov>40%N=9
What do you think about it?
Happy New Year! We were worried about whether you were O.K. for a while.
Post a Comment