Wednesday, February 5, 2025
G25 available again
To get your Global25 coords, please use the app HERE. The whole process usually takes a couple of days. Feel free to spread the word.
Please don't order the Global25 unless you have experience in modeling Global25 data with the Vahaduo analysis tools.
Note that the conversion of VCF, BAM, CRAM and/or fastq files is 30 to 50€ extra depending on the case. For enquiries please email teepean47 on g25requests@gmail.com.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
777 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 601 – 777 of 777"Both—related— individuals from Grave 5 and Grave 14 plot close to other Yamna and Corded Ware individuals in PCA (Fig. 1). Yamna is also the right keyword regarding their Y chromosome profiles. However, the woman from Grave 19 is different, and the distance in PCA space between 5&14 and 19 is striking. She also
displays a non-admixed, 100% steppe ancestry. However, her position in our PCA is slightly shifted towards Neolithic farmer ancestries, similar to the Cernavodă I and Usatove peoples described in Penske et al. 2023, which is also more congruent with her dating into the last centuries of the 4th millennium BC."
I'm not sure how in an admixture run it can show zero ANF yet still overlap with Usatovo/Cernavoda I on a PCA but if true it sounds like another thracian individual similar to Bul4 (I-L699 sample cladal with Cernavoda I).
U4a2 Mtdna is Volga derived and also found in Usatovo.
Burial posture apparently is similar to Mykhailovka, interestingly.
Chinese scientists have managed to recreate a composite sketch using DNA?
De Novo Reconstruction of 3D Human Facial Images from DNA Sequence
https://advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/advs.202414507
@ Arsen/ Shomu Tepe
'' I haven't seen this version, the steppe Eneolithic clearly contacted the Darkveti group and Sioni Ginchi''
They can not only be depicted as ''in contact' in Maps, but we know Steppe En. ancestry is present in Chalcolithic Armenia - Areni cave. However, Areni cave do not require any CHG, they are a 2-way mix of Steppe_EN + Iran-shifted PPN
The following Kura Araxes are different - with marked rise in CHG and plummeting of Steppe_En to noise levels. Whether the source of CHG is from a Sioni -like source, as AW suggests, a post-Chokh group, as you suggest, or Georgian-CHG, remains to be seen
an interesting sample from Adygea, the Western Caucasus, which is approximately located on the border of the steppe Eneolithic and Darkveti, according to the map you posted, genetically it also shows a mixture of these populations
Target: Russia_Adygea_Maykop_Tsarskaya_LateNeolithic:I4429__BC_3350__Cov_70.98%
Distance: 1.6001% / 0.01600072 | R3P
51.4 Russia_Steppe_Eneolithic.AG
28.2 Russia_Caucasus_Eneolithic_sibling.I2055_sibling.I2056.AG
20.4 Israel_C.AG
You heard Donald J. Trump's wonderful speech at the conference in Eriyadh, and what do you think? This populist is not as simple as he seems, there are professionals behind him and he knows how to speak beautifully.
@Davidski
When's your post on this Iranian paper coming out? Put down the Didgeridoo and get to work man.
@ Ethan - what are you referring to ?
I was always amazed at how similar Sanskrit and Russian are, probably because some of the representatives of Balanovo-Abashevo remained in Eastern Europe and ultimately influenced the East Slavic language, in particular the Russian language. What do you think?
in grok made a comparative table of numerals (from one to 10, and one hundred)👇
https://x.com/mrars1313/status/1922792298137502053
@Rob
https://helda.helsinki.fi/server/api/core/bitstreams/42eb6598-0f65-4fa3-9acd-0bfaa5f5cad0/content
Right, hard to say how they quantified the admixture components ? method ? pRights, etc. But cool case study
The findings are pretty consistent
BMAC related ppl were migrating everywhere...They show up in Turkey, NW Iran at DT, Hasanlu, HajjiFiruz and now among the Parthians and Achaemenid era samples...
They largely form the same pattern of BMAC + Alalakh_MLBA/DT1 + Catacomb...
@Shomu
“I was always amazed at how similar Sanskrit and Russian are, probably because some of the representatives of Balanovo-Abashevo remained in Eastern Europe and ultimately influenced the East Slavic language, in particular the Russian language. What do you think?
in grok made a comparative table of numerals (from one to 10, and one hundred)
https://x.com/mrars1313/status/1922792298137502053”
No, it’s actually the other way around. The Balanovo-Abashevo cultures were shaped by migrations of Indo-Slavic-speaking groups, and it was Indo-Iranian languages—including Sanskrit—that evolved out of Indo-Slavic, not the reverse. This evolution occurred through contact with Graeco-Armenian-speaking populations from the steppe, as well as influences from local Central Asian substrata.
See: https://postimg.cc/bSqBtY8p
Indo-Slavic was originally spoken by Corded Ware Culture (CWC) tribes rich in haplogroup R1a, particularly in the region of present-day Poland. Some of these Indo-Slavic tribes migrated eastward, contributing to the formation of the Balanovo-Abashevo horizon.
The Slavs, on the other hand, remained in the Indo-Slavic homeland and preserved a more direct linguistic lineage. As such, Slavic languages—especially West Slavic ones like Polish—are a relatively unbroken continuation of the Indo-Slavic tongue, with minimal external admixture.
In fact, many Polish words show closer parallels to Sanskrit than their Russian equivalents—or are entirely absent in Russian—suggesting a more conservative retention of Indo-Slavic features in Polish.
😨👍
Yep, Balanovo-Abashevo was long gone by the time Russian developed, so it could not influence it. Even the Scythians didnt exist during the East Slav expansion
@Harout The tertiary hair cover was more developed than all the others in Georgian CHG and Armenian CIHG, Iran was still a little warmer
Armenians are not pure southern.
The R1b-M269 in Armenians is from Eastern Europe.
M269 from Mount Ararat lol
Fucking idiot.
Bulgarian doesn't sound like Slavic, but like some Greek or Armenian, with a Middle Eastern accent, maybe it seemed that way to me because of the style of music 🤔
https://youtu.be/O3_drgbsLRE
Bulgarian doesn’t sound anything remotely like Arabic, any Ukrainian can pretty much understand Bulgarian, for example.
But yeah some of these clarinet-based Balkan folk traditions , which go across the Balkans, do have a middle eastern vibe but the melody is quite different, far more developed. It extends to food , costumes etc.
of course any Balkan boy would say it actually originated in their grandmothers village then spread east 🤣
@Arsen & Harout
Does that mean I get my hairiness from CHG (including Europeans in general)? ANF is obviously a source as well but I don't have a lot of ANF ancestry relative to CHG.
Yes that's right
Here are those new ancient Iranian samples.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JdbIW4jFOEsucF9rU0nUKSN52N2iU7aY/view?usp=sharing
Amazing 👏
why are they different from these ones?
https://genarchivist.net/showthread.php?tid=648&page=70
Scaled
Persian:IRN2GC23W,0.086506,0.103584,-0.096166,-0.034238,-0.082785,0.012829,-0.01081,0,-0.078333,-0.032438,-0.005034,-3e-04,-0.005352,-0.000688,0.018187,0.015513,-0.00678,-0.004941,0.002388,-0.016758,0.003369,-0.015704,0.00419,-0.01217,0.005389
Persian:IRN2S57W,0.094473,0.106631,-0.101068,-0.013889,-0.082785,0.021475,0.011045,0.003923,-0.063607,-0.044466,-0.010393,0.01139,-0.010109,-0.011285,0.017236,0.030628,0.004955,0.011529,0.00993,-0.014882,0.004367,-0.023865,0.005669,-0.009399,-0.003113
Persian:IRNGC25W,0.07057,0.103584,-0.099183,-0.027778,-0.067089,0.010598,0.016451,-0.008077,-0.050108,-0.047017,-0.022572,0.027725,0.017393,-0.011285,0.015879,0.033943,-0.031683,-0.005448,0.004902,-0.018009,0.005989,-0.008161,-0.010723,-0.010845,0.02407
Persian:IRNGC65W,0.085367,0.097491,-0.097297,-0.010336,-0.093556,0.007809,0.00188,0.003,-0.055835,-0.030069,-0.006171,-0.012439,-0.009366,0.016377,0.027551,0.029037,-0.011604,0.026731,0.013952,-0.037518,0.023583,-0.01929,-0.015652,-0.002289,-0.007305
Persian:IRNS22W,0.100164,0.121864,-0.083344,-0.022287,-0.067705,-0.001952,-0.002585,-0.003923,-0.067288,-0.023508,-0.005359,-0.002548,-0.009514,0.001376,0.012622,0.012994,-0.011083,0.002027,0.007165,-0.011005,0.007362,-0.006183,-0.000739,-0.011206,0.011376
Persian:IRNS31W,0.095611,0.110693,-0.089,-0.027132,-0.065243,0.008646,0.007755,0.005077,-0.051335,-0.025513,-0.005034,0.004496,-0.001338,-0.007844,0.007329,0.029435,0.013821,-0.003927,0.013575,-0.007253,0.005241,-0.004575,-0.007025,-0.01217,0.004431
Raw
Persian:IRN2GC23W,0.0076,0.0102,-0.0255,-0.0106,-0.0269,0.0046,-0.0046,0,-0.0383,-0.0178,-0.0031,-0.0002,-0.0036,-0.0005,0.0134,0.0117,-0.0052,-0.0039,0.0019,-0.0134,0.0027,-0.0127,0.0034,-0.0101,0.0045
Persian:IRN2S57W,0.0083,0.0105,-0.0268,-0.0043,-0.0269,0.0077,0.0047,0.0017,-0.0311,-0.0244,-0.0064,0.0076,-0.0068,-0.0082,0.0127,0.0231,0.0038,0.0091,0.0079,-0.0119,0.0035,-0.0193,0.0046,-0.0078,-0.0026
Persian:IRNGC25W,0.0062,0.0102,-0.0263,-0.0086,-0.0218,0.0038,0.007,-0.0035,-0.0245,-0.0258,-0.0139,0.0185,0.0117,-0.0082,0.0117,0.0256,-0.0243,-0.0043,0.0039,-0.0144,0.0048,-0.0066,-0.0087,-0.009,0.0201
Persian:IRNGC65W,0.0075,0.0096,-0.0258,-0.0032,-0.0304,0.0028,0.0008,0.0013,-0.0273,-0.0165,-0.0038,-0.0083,-0.0063,0.0119,0.0203,0.0219,-0.0089,0.0211,0.0111,-0.03,0.0189,-0.0156,-0.0127,-0.0019,-0.0061
Persian:IRNS22W,0.0088,0.012,-0.0221,-0.0069,-0.022,-0.0007,-0.0011,-0.0017,-0.0329,-0.0129,-0.0033,-0.0017,-0.0064,0.001,0.0093,0.0098,-0.0085,0.0016,0.0057,-0.0088,0.0059,-0.005,-0.0006,-0.0093,0.0095
Persian:IRNS31W,0.0084,0.0109,-0.0236,-0.0084,-0.0212,0.0031,0.0033,0.0022,-0.0251,-0.014,-0.0031,0.003,-0.0009,-0.0057,0.0054,0.0222,0.0106,-0.0031,0.0108,-0.0058,0.0042,-0.0037,-0.0057,-0.0101,0.0037
An interesting article on BA Anatolia:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372354942_EVALUATION_OF_A_CLAY-COVERED_VOTIVE_PIT_FROM_KULLUOBA_IN_LIGHT_OF_INTERDISCIPLINARY_RESEARCHEvaluation_of_a_Clay-Covered_Votive_Pit_from_Kulluoba_in_Light_of_Interdisciplinary_Research
Tell Kazanlak, shown on the map and in the references, is the location of one of our EBA Thrace I-P78 samples.
As expected these Iranian samples show significant Sumbar/Parkhai ancestry. The TKM_IA Saka (850BCE) did not bring Iranian languages as some claim.
@Vara
Eastern European steppe ancestry arrived in Iran at exactly the right time to be relevant to the Indo-European expansion into Iran.
Cope harder dumbfuck.
Yes, 850 BCE is exactly the right time when Persians and Medes had kingdoms on the borders of Assyria. Then somehow this 850 BCE guy switched his YDNA to J2a/J2b then time travelled and brought Proto-West Iranian, Gathic and Younger Avestan languages. Super duper genius hypothesis!
Cry more.
Saka migrated to NW Iran and Eastern borders of Iran...I am pretty sure some of the stepp_mlba ancestry in Iran is mediated by them...
As for spread of Iranian languages into Iran, it was spread largely by ppl of BMAC descent..
Whether they learnt the language just from contact with steppe groups or were the original speakers...Let's debate that someother day...
Yaz is not a Saka culture you retards.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/07/an-early-iranian-obviously.html
@ Ethan- decades ago, archaeologists noted an horizon of Cernavoda-related stuff in western Anatolia, patchy and generally undated. It hasn't received much attention in recent years. The Barcin_Ch individual might attest to this. However, the Ilipinar group do not obviously show any western/ steppe ancestry and look pretty much like Ikiztepe at a genome-wide level. We should get more clear samples as there are plenty of cemeteries, and uniparentals provide unambiguous attestation of movement despite complexity in modelling these mixed groups with often overlapping ancestries.
By the bronze age, we see a predominantly Iran-shifted population, which had obviously been there since the LN-Ch and increased as 'Mesopotamians' followed the BA trade-route. This flow reached Crete & southeastern Greece. Obviously, the idea that this ancestry can be pinned down to one specific PPN group from eastern Anatolia is facile.
There is also a back-flow of Ezero-related material into northwestern Anatolia. Not sure how they link in, as they are distinctive from Cernavoda & Yamnaya, seemingly related to Baden-Cotofeni groups.
It remains to be seen how the Hittites and other IE groups expanded their linguistic footprint during the MLBA from an early foothold. There were certainly shake ups c. 2200 BC, many sites were destroyed. Probably a mix of local military expansions, alliance building, etc. The literature on this is well developed, we just need some site-intensive DNA studies.
Kazakh-American archaeological expedition to study Krasny Yar settlement again
Scientists continue to search for an answer to the riddle of horse domestication, Kazinform agency correspondent reports.
An international archaeological expedition is starting in Krasny Yar settlement in Akmola region. The goal is to obtain new data on the process of domestication of horses and cattle, a key moment in the development of human civilization.
The expedition is headed by leading researcher of the A.Kh. Margulan Institute of Archaeology, PhD in history Sergey Zakharov and PhD from the University of Arkansas (USA), specialist in paleogenetics Taylor Hermes. Together with them, students from the USA, Kokshetau and Astana will take part in its work.
https://www.inform.kz/ru/kazahstansko-amerikanskaya-arheologicheskaya-ekspeditsiya-vnov-izuchit-poselenie-krasniy-yar-2e347d
Actually it's very obvious these samples have Andronovo and Yaz-like admix
https://files.catbox.moe/cf6dif.jpg
https://files.catbox.moe/p4n63u.jpg
Right as this Iranian data gets published they've put out a new version of the IE tree completely separating the former relationship between Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-025-04986-7/figures/1
Previous comment came out short- back on Uralic. Seems JH might be beginning to accept Uralic arrived with YakutiaLN and hg N ancestry
Not that it matters, but I guess pigs are flying ..
Pribislav writes that the sample from Doghlauri (geo015) Georgia, early Bronze Age, culturally related to the Kura-Araxes culture, belongs to the hoard
J2a-M92>Z508>Z504>PF7412>SK1344>BY44581
https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-BY44581/
Presentation on origin of Slavs uploaded today, I timestamped the Slav part in the url:
https://youtu.be/3xjm0tXZKSw?t=1577
Have watched half, it is good.
A team from the Institute of History, Archaeology, and Ethnography of the Dagestan Federal Research Center, RAS, is conducting excavations near the construction site of a bypass road in Derbent.
The work is being carried out at the archaeological complex of Zidyan-Kazmalyar, which belongs to the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition of the Early Bronze Age (mid-4th to mid-3rd millennium BCE).
In a short time, archaeologists have uncovered:
* distinctive pottery
* flint tools
* stone axes
* grain grinders
* ceramic crucibles
The findings provide insight into daily life, technology, and culture, and indicate the development of agriculture, animal husbandry, and crafts over 5,000 years ago.
Further discoveries are expected as excavations continue.👇
https://t.me/insituteofhistory/2164?single
@rozbójnik
@ Romulus
There's no I1 in Unetice.
You are right I was thinking of sample poz643, the I1 from 1919-1701 BCE Ukraine. I1 was found in Trzciniec (Komarów southeastern branch), not Unetice.
@All
I'm no longer allowing mentally retarded posts. I just don't have the time to read and correct them. As a result, they simply won't be accepted here.
The idea that a handful of samples from Iran can disprove the consensus hypothesis that Indo-Iranian languages originated in a Sintashta-related population is mentally retarded, especially since these samples actually do show Eastern European steppe ancestry.
Moreover, it's mentally retarded to argue that all of the Sintashta-related ancestry and languages in Siberia and West and South Asia were spread by Scythians/Saka.
Obviously, Indo-Aryans derive from Sintashta-related groups, and early Uralic speakers in Siberia were influenced by Sintashta-related early Indo-Iranians.
Germans are from the Elbe river basin i.e. the Jastorf culture horizon, not fucking Finland lmfao.
@Davidski
Not that you were directing this comment towards me; but I just want to be clear that I do support the Abashevo > Sintashta-Andronovo origin of Indo-Iranian, and that Sintashta-related groups which had participated in the ST horizon could have had a substratal influence on early Uralic speakers as the latter encountered the former. I just don't see the linguistic evidence for an adstratal contact period between the two groups at an Indo-Iranian or even Proto-Iranian depth. Most of the earliest loans can probably just be dated to the period immediately before Alanic phonological innovations began, which would bespeak sustained contact with early Scytho-Sarmatians if we are to look for a parsimonious explanation of diachronic loaning, rather than the Indo-Iranian proto-phases all having had ongoing contact with disintegrating Proto-Uralic. There isn't internal evidence for Uralic subclades, besides Finno-Mordvinic, until we get to the terminal branches: This just isn't diachronically compatible with the diversification of (Pre-)Proto-Indo-Iranian all the way to Alanic, which involved various cultures spread over different geographical zones.
Without the rejected anchors of Finno-Ugric, Finno-Permic, West Uralic, East Uralic, Ugric etc., the presupposed "ST adstrate" timeline is mostly imaginary. Out of ~120 "convincing" early II > U loans, only 3 are "Pre-PII", and 2.5 (2 of the 3 are parallel borrowings) are "Proto-Iranian": So about 95% of the loan corpus doesn't require those assignments. If there are other explanations for the remaining 5% (which I believe there are, but won't revisit here), then it's unnecessary to go back further than "Old Iranian" on a purely linguistic basis. I just want you all to keep this in mind when you are looking for Proto-Uralic samples: The earliest samples do not (and should not) need to be in the same spacetime as the ST expansion.
@ Finngreek
''I just don't see the linguistic evidence for an adstratal contact period between the two groups at an Indo-Iranian or even Proto-Iranian depth.''
I've been making similar comments over the years. Not on the basis of loan words, because it's not my field, but based on common sense historical linguistics.
The way I look at it - Sintashta is a cultural, linguistic and genetic progenitor of Indo-Iranian, but was not itself Indo-Iranian. It is too soon from the CW stem, and probably captures what is a late phase in the 'Indo-Slavic' node.
Moreover, the Sintastha outliers which represent an early stage of outbreeding beyond the core groups are due to admixture from the WSHG/ EHG cline, not the proto-Uralic one. So, there is nothing to support Sintastha as the early zone of Indo-Uralic interaction.
It is also looking to be the case that western post-Sintashta/ Srubna groups contributed to Thracian and even Armenian, rather than being Indo-Iranian . The problem is lamestream scholarship will continue ruminating over their previous low-aptitude frameworks and the general public interested in indo-Iranians are split into an all or nothing meme war - that either Indo-Iranian either comes from Sintastha, or has nothign to do with it becuase it in fact comes from BMAC.
That said, i still think Uralic arrived to Europe before the Iron Age.
@ Radiosource
''the Elbe river basin i.e. the Jastorf culture horizon, not fucking Finland lmfao.''
Wherever it expanded from , it wasn't Finland. This type of caricature is created when people ignorant of prehistory take shortcuts by pretending that they understand paleogenetic evidence (which they don't).
This pseudomethodology was popularised by the Reich lab, so it does not surprise me that one of their social climbers is trying to popularise it. This Razdib person moreover requestrs people pay for his retarded takes on Eurasian history
''Germans are from the Elbe river basin i.e. the Jastorf culture horizon''
There has been a sort of Jastorf Derrangement Syndrome on the internet.
I have significant doubts on the models of McColl & Allentoft:
- they fudged their '3rd' /I1 associated cluster, that erodes comfidence in the rest of their work dealing with later, even more intricate 'social networks'
- they talk about East Scandic, postBell Beaker , post-CWC clusters in the Iron Age ? Theres no way they are actually detecting these things.
- their 'IBD based modelling' is discredited by genome wide & uniparental evidence.
- We do see East Baltic gene flow into Scandinavia, but this is during the Battle Axe period & the Viking Age, and not c. 2000 -1600 BC.
- their supporting linguist arguements offered by Gus Kroonen have become undermined by the dumb things he has posted about IE in general.
This doesn't mean all Germanic come from Jastorf. But the Jastorf horizon is one subregion within the broader Nordic zone which did not 'collapse" after the LBA, and in fact expanded.
@Rob
Yeah, I'm satisfied with the Cernavoda I->Thracian Cernavoda III (at Drama)->Ezero A1 sequence, which also has genetic support (2950BC Bul4 and this new 3150BC Pamukli Bair sample seem to be cladal with Cernavoda I at Kartal).
It's less clear to me whether NW Anatolia EBA is derived directly from Cernavoda III or instead slightly later with Ezero A1. Apparently there is pottery with clear Ezero parallels at EBA Cide (around where Pala later should emerge).
Much needs to be done for determining the post-split histories of Indo-Aryan and Iranian languages, but the origin of Indo-Iranian and its closest relatves within IE is a problem that is pretty much completely solved; Axel's figure summarizes it neatly.
👇
https://x.com/iosif_lazaridis/status/1926706582085083578
Masis Blur: Neolithic settlement and child burial from the Ararat valley. Day surface.
This is one of the earliest cattle-breeding settlements in the Caucasus, this girl speaks English and is translated into Russian. She talks about the life and life of this settlement around a dried-up lake
👇
https://youtu.be/P0SHcSD64dU
"Indo-Slavic Lexical Isoglosses and the Prehistoric Dispersal of Indo-Iranian" Axel I. Palmér
https://brill.com/display/title/72253?srsltid=AfmBOopo6saxCywro72ra102yA9CkQu_fMikU4ztWzvA-11oTgnaL21f
https://brill.com/downloadpdf/display/title/72253.pdf
https://postimg.cc/wt91w8Rb/64b0abb3
Nice map...
https://postimg.cc/wt91w8Rb/64b0abb3
Is there evidence for an Andronovo migration via the desert ? Maybe few sites , but the evidence is pointing to a predominantly IAMC path.
I vaguely recall East Pole posting other maps by Axel- wrongly depicting Greeks coming from catacomb. So I cant say I’m a fan
@Rob
Andronovo encampments were present along the Amu Darya River. So not really in the desert, but along watercourses.
Kuzmina describes the sites but they need modern study.
We should look at if swat IA have more WSHG/IAMC ancestry than Yaz . Could be a clue
there was most likely no desert at that time, secondly there were two rivers that flowed into the Aral Sea - the Amu Darya and the Syr Darya, and they originated from the Pamir Mountains...
interestingly, when translating into English I noticed that the endings of the names of the rivers Syr Darya and Amu Darya contain the word "Aryans", is this somehow connected? supposedly the first Aryans moved along them
In the Galgaevskoye Gorge of the Dzheyrakhsky District of Ingushetia, archaeologists have discovered traces of a settlement that may be an ancient proto-city.
https://www.svoboda.org/a/v-ingushetii-obnaruzhili-sledy-drevnego-poseleniya-/33423748.html
a lying, hypocritical, disgusting spectacle. and why are such people in power? I don't believe that Americans believe in this whole circus that this politician has arranged.
https://x.com/OliLondonTV/status/1926855915719848343
I hate lying hypocrites.
maybe a new post? It's so inconvenient to scroll down 3 pages in a row with 200 messages on the phone to read something new
@Davidski
"Nice map...
https://postimg.cc/wt91w8Rb/64b0abb3"
The map needs some correction. We know that Indo-Slavic groups migrated eastward from what is now Poland, after admixture with the Globular Amphora (GA) population in that region. It stands to reason that those who did not migrate east but remained in place were also Indo-Slavic.
Therefore, cultures like Mierzanowice, Nitra, and Unetice—especially given that Unetice partly derived from Nitra—should also be considered Indo-Slavic in this context.
@Rob
"I vaguely recall East Pole posting other maps by Axel—wrongly depicting Greeks coming from Catacomb. So I can’t say I’m a fan."
Just to clarify: those maps weren’t originally Axel’s. They were modified by Razib Khan.
@ Ethan
Actually I think I was describing Yunatsite, with its quasi/neolithic lineages. Ezero might another thing
@ East Pole
Ok noted
We know per Lazaridis 2025 et al. that Steppe_Eneolithic in the North Caucasus steppe has Aknashen ancestry, probably mediated through mixing with Nalchik-like populations. As well as WSHG ancestry from the East Caspian.
Does it stand to reason that Nalchik-like ancestry is ubiquitous to Sredny Stog, thus also present in Yamnaya and Corded Ware who descend from the latter? Does the same hold true for WSHG ancestry?
I'm asking because I want to know wether you find it an accurate assesment of the eneolithic genepool on the steppe by Lazaridis and co. Does the presence of J and Q clades attest to this?
@Armenak Harutyunyan
Gradual gene flow between nearby populations is almost a certainty, even when there are significant geographical barriers like the Caucasus Mountains or the arid steppes around the Caspian Sea. This phenomenon is called isolation-by-distance.
So it's also important to understand the precise character of the gene flow, not just whether it happened or not.
This was actually one of the main mistakes made by Lazaridis, Reich, Patterson et al.
That is, they were looking for obvious, significant signs of admixture, and not how this admixture took place, and whether the way that it happened was in line with linguistic models for the spread of Indo-European.
So they missed the fact that there was a migration from the Eastern European steppe via the Balkans to Anatolia, and they also missed the significance of this for the spread of Indo-European.
On the other hand, they literally obsessed about the gradual gene flow between the steppe and West Asia across the Caucasus, and convinced themselves that this was significant for the spread of Indo-European, simply because it made more of an impact on their admixture bar charts.
@Davidski I take everything into consideration and see that the authors made obvious mistakes by running on faulty assumptions, but the pertinent question remains wether their admixture barcharts are accurate for Yamnaya or not, that is, do you see any obvious sign of Aknashen and Tutkaul ancestry or not?
I'm not interested in the implications for PIA because I don't believe in the fact that eneolithic geneflow from outside the steppe served as a vector for a PIA language transmission.
Once more: is there Aknashen and Tutkaul ancestry in Yamnaya or not? Or do we need more data to figure out?
🤔why does everything work?
Target: Russia_Nalchik_E.SG:nalchik2023.SG__BC_5025__Cov_41.82%
Distance: 2.5285% / 0.02528535 | R3P
45.4 Russia_Saratov_Khlopkov-Bugor_Meso:I6300_enhanced__BC_5126__Cov_52.19%
28.6 Serbia_VincaBelo_Starcevo_EN.SG:VC3-2.SG__BC_5534__Cov_99.86%
26.0 Georgia_Kotias_Mesolithic.SG:KK1.SG__BC_7728__Cov_99.86%
@Armenak Harutyunyan
Yamnaya has Aknashen-related and Tutkaul-related admixtures, but these admixtures were acquired from populations that were far removed from Aknashen and Tutkaul.
Seems like Indo-Aryan developed along the IAMC and reached the Swat-Indus region. proto-Iranian might have hung back in the Amu Darya a bit longer, before moving into Iran. We just need some Median -era samples
Davidski - Harvard didn't miss anything, because they were informed of the reality. They chose to misrepresent facts.
New J1-M267 definements
- Late Maikop MK5008 (originally undefined, from Wang et al)
- Catalhoyuk west Mound (~ 6000/5500 BC; Doğu et al preprint)
@ Arsen - nil further downstream as yet, just check the J1 tree on ftDNA
@Davidski How far removed are we talking exactly?
You seem to suggest these admixtures are only related in a very distal sense, so not actually present in the way Harvard describes them.
@Armenak Harutyunyan
They're certainly not the direct ancestors of Yamnaya. Not even close.
It's hard to say much more than that.
Isn't “core Yamnaya” just Volga-Don Steppe Eneolithic groups that took on ancestry from Dneiper-Donets locals and Trypillian communities, before engaging in female exogamy amongst themselves to reach a homogenous profile? So these people have a minor amount of Anatolia_N ancestry in general but it’s derived from multiple sources that are proximate to the steppe, the CHG-rich pulse from Abkhazia that went into the Kuban and then EEF via the western regions of Ukraine.
My general impression was that this is the case but LAZaridis, Reich et al. understood the linguistic implications and decided to use “pre-Maikopian” hybrids to claim it all came from a recent southern wave to the north Pontic instead. This is beneficial for them because it removes EEF from the formation of core Yamnaya and Europe itself from the migrations of Proto-Anatolian by denying the Balkan route.
That’s my assessment anyway, that the Harvard lot are trying to muddy the waters.
@Tom
Yes, that's my impression.
@Tom Do you think those Don-Volga eneolithic groups had Nalchik-related ancestry from contacts with North Caucasus steppe eneolithic groups?
After all, these groups on the steppe were very mobile but Berezhnovka supposedly lacks this Nalchik-like signal.
Tutkaul has no stakes in IE game and Aknashen-like admix in Yamnaya is not from South Caucasus proper but Darkveti-Meshoko complex (Kartvelian & NWC-NEC), so that's pretty much the end of it, no population links Anatolia, Indus, Steppe in the required time gap, thus the Heggarty model is bullshit
I don't think there is much evidence for Trypillia in Sredni Stog/Yamnaya. I'll want to review against Trypillia mtdna once ftdna updates their tree though.
Berezhnnovka, csongrad, khvalynsk, KartalA etc have no south Caucasian ancestry, so this is something that impacted groups primarily around the Don and Dnieper and also the Steppe groups that explicitly moved to the piedmont steppe like Progress, Vonjucka etc.
It's still difficult to distinguish whether this involved direct contact with Nalchik, Remontnoye, or Meshoko imo.
The Remontnoye are interesting because Anthony seems to think they seasonally migrated between there and the lower Don..
@Davidski
Hi!
Could you please take a look at 4 samples from fairly recent research from a cemetery in Modling in Austria (3 results - MGS322, MGS321, MGS286) and Zalavar in Hungary (1 result - AHP07)?
According to the authors, the people from Modling are of local, non-Avar origin. Sample AHP07, on the other hand, has little information. Could you at least quickly analyze them and say what you think about them? What do you think their origin is?
We have reached the point where your opinion is more credible and authoritative than most research results...
Thank you in advance and best regards!
@Niko Bellic
Meshoko seems to have gotten their hands on steppe concubines judging by their modest yet significant ~ 10% Berezhnovka-like admixture per G25. Don't feel the need to check formally (e.g qpAdm).
Not seeing any discernable Meshoko-like admixture in Yamnaya. Aknashen provides better fits in conjuction with Trypillia. J-L283 is probably from Armenian sons (Nalchik).
Alternatively, J-L283's predecessor was already on the steppe since the mesolithic. Thus, representing CHG-male mediated input like the the known cases in Karelia, Popovo and Khavlysnk.
There's no point getting confused by the sea of relatively meaningless labels, such as Masis Blur, Aknashen, Berezhnovka. The reality of steppe prehistory cannot be reduced to some sham models, often based on singleton reference samples.
Look at the big picture, its quite easy . As an example from the Caucasian perspective:
- some minor Meso-CHG gene flow c. 5000 bc toward lower Don and Volga
- 4500 arrival of Darkveti-Meshoko : mix of CHG/ Farmer. J2a-CTS6619 founder effect
- 4000 arrival of Majkop: low CHG, high Farmer, dash of steppe. Larger range of Y-hg introduced: L, T, G2, J2b
- 3400 bc Novosvobodnaja phase and Dolmenization: CHG bounceback
- 3000 bc: Yamnaya pushes toward the mountains, Majkop collapse, rump Dolmens in Western Caucasia
We see proto-Yamnaya R1b-Z2013 clans integrating into the northern Majkop zone (which in reality stretched as far as the lower Don during its zenith) thus the autosomal profile of R1b-M269 clans swung quickly from an EHG to a ''steppe Eneolithic'' profile (Steppe EN is itself a obfuscatory term introduced by Harvard). CW-related R1a-M17 was a separate group, which then became embroiled in the proto-Yamnaya network, thus probably acquired Caucasian admixture secondarily. So I think Ringbauer et al are wrong on their contentions on CW.
@Niko Bellic
why do you think that the Aknashen admixture did not come from the south, but from the North Caucasian cultures as intermediaries? the Nalchik Eneolithic is older than many North Caucasian cultures, including the Darkveti or Sioni Ginchi
Here is what I mean about Meshoko vs Maikop vs Novosvobodnaja
https://imgur.com/a/qsk04gl
Meshoko have high CHG: Farmer ratio
That is flipped in earlier Maikop
Then CHG rises again in Novosvobodnaja
The Nalchik can be modelled as a mix of EHG + Meshoko, with an R1b-V1636 male founder effect from EHGs
There's some patchy Tripylia ancestry being picked up there, but its probably just noise.
@ Ethan
''Berezhnnovka, csongrad, khvalynsk, KartalA etc have no south Caucasian ancestry, so this is something that impacted groups primarily around the Don and Dnieper and also the Steppe groups that explicitly moved to the piedmont steppe like Progress, Vonjucka etc.
''
You're right according to G25
https://imgur.com/a/eNOiXgt
But that looks suspicious, because even Yamnaya comes out as a 2-way mix of CHG + EHG. There were a lot of debates about that in the past
I know that with qpAdm PG2001, etc do need some sort of South Caucasian input
But what is glaring with G25 is that south Caucasian really picks up with the Zolotarovka & Remontoye individuals
Have I missed any important samples ?
@Rob why in your models do you completely remove the Iran Neolithic, which could have been from both the northern Caucasus and the southern (together with Shomu Tepe)
@Shomu
Darkveti-Meshoko complex is as old as 6000BCE (when Colchis-Abkhazia Hunter Gatherers dropped hunting economy and switched to Neolithic inventory borrowed from Anatolia).
Aruchlo_outlier (dated 5600BCE) samples are also autosomally same as Unakozovskaya (Meshoko). Nalchik is made of Meshoko and (CHG+EHG).
No direct Aknashen (Shu-Sho-Arat) ancestry is involved in formation of Nalchik, Steppe Eneolithic, and Proto-Novodanilovka (Krivyanski)
@Nirvaan Ved aka Harout
Sorry to burst your bubble but J-L283 isn't in the picture until Maykop appearance. To say it was present in North Caucasus before 4000BCE is pure nonsense
Berezhnovka, Csongrad, Khvalynsk, are part of Steppe Eneolithic & derivatives, so they do have Meshoko ("South West Caucasian") ancestry.
But these guys are irrelevant to origin of Sredny Stog, the North Steppe_En aka Berezhnovka is infact a total dead end, like Khvalynsk, while South Steppe_En descend into Remontnoye and Areni
@Rob
"Have I missed any important samples ? "
From that area, I can only think of KST001, NV3003, KartalB, KHB003, Eneolithic Krivyansky as the other samples really worthy of analysis. Latter two being dead-ends but still interesting.
"because even Yamnaya comes out as a 2-way mix of CHG + EHG"
I haven't seen it do that, but interestingly in G25 it's hard to get Yamnaya to not prefer Trypillia to South Caucasus (but Sredni Stog doesn't appear to show any obvious preference for either in G25).
Also to touch on Cernavoda,
I am now starting to suspect that the Steppe source in Kartal A is some kind of "Pre-Sredni Stog" with around 4 to 1 ratio of Berezhnovka to Ukraine_N.
I think the two way model of Berezhnovka+Trypillia is less harmonious, as the Kartal B cluster doesn't like Trypillia, and you would expect both clusters to have the same farmer source (Lazaridis seems content with the geographically incoherent models that Kartal A's farmer source if Trypillia, but Kartal B's farmer source is ChL Yunatsite).
I still think a Romanian population like Gumelnita is the most logical fit, even if there is a large settlement gap at some sites like at Kartal (see Manzura 2022). My guess is that there should be some remnant Gumelnita groups in the late 5th millennium BC like the Bolgrad variant, who interestingly enough, had quite a lot of horses.
The farmer source in Cernavoda is relevant because if you use Trypillia, the high WHG in it sucks up most of any possible Ukraine_N.
I also note that it is under-discussed that we unfortunately don't have earlier C-T samples, Verteba cave dating to around 3650BC.
I wonder when these kurgans will be sampled? I hope they don't go ignored.
https://x.com/nrken19/status/1758881283302699455
Most of the Besiktas kurgan burials were cremated, apparently.
@ Arsen
“ why in your models do you completely remove the Iran Neolithic, which could have been from both the northern Caucasus and the southern (together with Shomu Tepe)”
I don’t quite understand what you’re saying. I have there “south Caucasian farmer”, which contains or is similar to Iran N, and is fine for the purposes of north Caucasian En.
South Caucasian farmers lie within a triangular cline of east Anatolia, Iran & CHG.
@ Niko
Exactly. darkveti -Meshoko are like north TRB in Europe, but even more extreme.
They are Georgian HGs with minor Shuvaleri gene flow & were the first west/ north Caucasian farmers. But our friend Arsen doesn’t like this scenario 🤣
@Niko Bellic
what about this?
Abkhazia and the Western Caucasus:
Approximate time of neolithization: late 7th to 6th millennium BCE.
Characterized by pottery with pit-comb decoration, stone hoes, mortars, and grinding stones.
Influenced by Neolithic cultures of Anatolia via the Black Sea coast.
The transition to agriculture and animal husbandry occurred relatively early, especially in coastal river valleys such as the Kodori.
Central Caucasus:
Neolithization occurred later than in coastal areas, approximately in the 6th to 5th millennium BCE.
The region was less accessible to early farming communities, and hunting and herding traditions remained prevalent for a longer time.
Archaeological sites reflect a mixed subsistence economy combining agriculture, herding, and hunting.
Northeast Caucasus (including Dagestan):
One of the earliest neolithized regions in the North Caucasus.
The Chokh cave site contains some of the oldest Neolithic layers, dated to the mid-7th millennium BCE.
Finds include pottery, domesticated animals (sheep, goats), and possibly early forms of agriculture.
Strong cultural links with regions to the south — Mesopotamia and the South Caucasus.
Sites such as Kyurtler and the Gimri culture (Dagestan, 6th–5th millennium BCE) indicate a well-developed early agricultural system.
@ Ethan
Yep I had Kartal B in there, just couldn't fit it all in the screen shot.
Kartal B have some Caucasian Farmer admixture. There is a tendency for them to be a tad younger than Kartal A, and Usatove eneolithic continue (& peak) the trend of Majkop/ Caucasus admixture. As I said, in G25, Yamnaya lack this signal, instead they pick up Euro Farmer
Sredni Stog are all over the place from almost pure Dnieper HG to overwhelmnigly Berezhnovka-like (Oleksandria_En) to overwhelmingly Trypilje like (e.g. Soldanesti_En). The L699 clans were in the middle of two main ancestry expansions - Tripolje Farmers and Volga Eneolithic.
So in the Dnieper region, the scenario is something like
: Tripolje ancestry expansion
: lower Volga expansion
: partial, and targetted movements of postMajkop groups to late Cerandova/ Usatavo centres.
: Tripolje collapse, Majkop collapse
: big expansion of Z2013 'proto-Yamnaya' clan
; pre-Yamnaya clans move deeper into Balkans.
: homogenization of ancestry, with Tripolje-rich & Majkop-rich subsets blending into a Yamnaya-esque status quo
@Niko Bellic
initially i wrote about eneolithic cultures, and that's why i mentioned nalchik, because it's the most ancient genetic sample we have of an eneolithic settlement in the north caucasus. well, since you mean neolithic settlements, then abkhazia is not in first place here
@ Ethan
also, any uniparental trace-dyes for TTK ancestry ? Some Y-hg Q1 appears in Steppe Majkop, but that's 1000 years later ..
Steppe Maykop is in fact North Kazakhstan hunter-gatherers WSHG/NKHG, who mixed with the populations of the steppe Eneolithic of the Ciscaucasia. Therefore, among the steppe Maykopians, Q1 is found, characteristic of ANE
Even in heavily compartmentalised models like below, "Core Yamnaya" profile does not require additional Caucasus-related ancestry beyond the CHG + minor Meshoko that it gets from the Steppe Eneolithic cline between Berezhnovka-Piedmont. They simply pull west, towards proximate Mesolithic and Neolithic groups of Europe whose immediate sources in Ukraine are quite obvious. Maikopians on the other hand appear to be the actual genetic successors to hybrid WSH/South Caucasus types like Nalchik, Remontnoye etc. who were centred on the southern end of the territories.
But I will wait for a more thorough analysis and blog by David.
Target: Ukraine_Eneolithic_SrednyStog_high
Distance: 1.2917% / 0.01291725
72.6 Russia_Steppe_Eneolithic
11.6 Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic
8.6 Russia_EHG
5.6 Hungary_EN_Koros
1.6 Russia_Tyumen_HG
0.0 Armenia_Aknashen_N
0.0 Azerbaijan_Caucasus_lowlands_LN
0.0 Russia_Caucasus_Eneolithic
Target: Russia_Samara_EBA_Yamnaya
Distance: 3.4314% / 0.03431361
82.0 Russia_Steppe_Eneolithic
7.2 Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic
6.4 Hungary_EN_Koros
4.4 Russia_EHG
0.0 Armenia_Aknashen_N
0.0 Azerbaijan_Caucasus_lowlands_LN
0.0 Russia_Caucasus_Eneolithic
0.0 Russia_Tyumen_HG
Target: Russia_Caucasus_Maikop
Distance: 3.0999% / 0.03099929
54.0 Azerbaijan_Caucasus_lowlands_LN
18.0 Russia_Caucasus_Eneolithic
16.4 Russia_Steppe_Eneolithic
7.4 Armenia_Aknashen_N
3.8 Russia_Tyumen_HG
0.4 Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic
0.0 Hungary_EN_Koros
0.0 Russia_EHG
@ Arsen
''Neolithization occurred later than in coastal areas, approximately in the 6th to 5th millennium BCE.
The region was less accessible to early farming communities, and hunting and herding traditions remain''
The same nonsense again & again.
The earliest Shuvaleri farming sites in Georgia and Armenia date just after 6000 BC, ie 5800 BC. The earliest 'European' Farmers to reach the Dnieper were 5300 BC. Yet, according to Arsen & others from northeast Cauasus, God sent in cattle to Dagestan (? via UFOs) in 6500 BC
And no, none of Amirkhanov's data show anything to support such an early date. For ex in ХРОНОЛОГИЯ КУЛЬТУРНЫХ ОТЛОЖЕНИЙ ЧОХСКОГО МНОГОСЛОЙНОГО ПОСЕЛЕНИЯ(ПО ДАННЫМ НА 2022 ГОД, there is not a single domestic animal bone dating before 4300 BC. The 'Neolithic' pottery he cited in fact comes from Chalcolithic or Bronze Age affinities.
The international scientific community has repeatedly stated the same conclusion - 'The first evidences come from the Neolithic sites of Kültepe I in Nakhchevan (Azerbaijan) and the earliest levels of Aknashen or those of Aratashen in the Ararat Plain (Armenia), as well asfrom Haji Elamxanli in the Middle Kura Valley (Azerbaijan) where sherds related with the Halaf and Samarra cultures have been discovered...we now have a very homogenous image for the occupation at that time, with the extreme earlier da te going back to 5882 cal. BC, and the extreme later one dated to 5536 cal BC. In median dates, both phases are situated between ca. 5800 and 5600 BC''
(Bertille Lyonett)
Amirkhanov should be honest and produce better quality work
@Rob
"also, any uniparental trace-dyes for TTK ancestry ? Some Y-hg Q1 appears in Steppe Majkop, but that's 1000 years later .. "
Hard to say because of limited eastern samples but:
https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/Q-M25/tree
(Khvalynsk, Giurgiulești, a Romanian Yamnaya sample with excess EEF)
https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/Q-Y6846/tree
(Csongrad, Corded Ware, Afanasievo)
@Rob
listen, relax
https://youtu.be/rjJWGv4stsY?si=It33Qw9_4Ubr7YU1
@Rob
there are links to textbooks below
1. Chokh Site (Chokh Cave)
- Located in the Gunib District of Dagestan
- One of the most thoroughly studied Neolithic sites in the region
- Excavations began in the 1960s (led by S.A. Semenov, later A.Kh. Khalilov and others)
- Radiocarbon dating of the lower layers: approximately 6500–6000 BCE
- Finds include:
- Early Neolithic pottery
- Stone tools (including grinding stones and hoe-like implements)
- Bones of domesticated animals: sheep and goats (identified by zooarchaeologists)
- Evidence of sedentary life: habitation layers, hearths, ash deposits
2. Evidence of Animal Husbandry
- Bones of domesticated animals, particularly sheep and goats, indicate the presence of animal husbandry
- Found at Chokh and other Early Neolithic settlements in Dagestan (Kyurtler, Amirkhanaul, Kamilukh)
- Some remains are morphologically distinct from wild species
- Agriculture may have been secondary; pastoralism played a leading role
3. Other Archaeological Sites
- Kyurtler (southern Dagestan): settlement with evidence of early agriculture and herding, pottery, and stone tools
- Gimri Culture (Dagestan, 6th–5th millennium BCE): developed pottery, stable early agricultural system
4. Scholarly Sources
- Khalilov, A.Kh. Neolit Dagestana. Makhachkala, 1981
- Munchayev, R.M. Kavkaz na zare bronzovogo veka. Moscow, 1975
- Amirkhanov, Kh.A. The Earliest Farmers and Herders of the Eastern Caucasus (in: Archaeology of the Eastern Caucasus)
- Tringham, R. Hunters, Fishers and Farmers of Eastern Europe, 6000–3000 BC
- Munchaev, R.M. Neolithic of the Caucasus (in: The Neolithic of the Near East, ed. A.A. Boucharlat)
@ arsen
Yes chatGPT is awesome.
But “Data” means primary evidence - sample ID, site & value. Care to share some and such as it critically ?
The “Neolithic” layer at Chokh has produced 2 dates of 6000 BC, the rest date to the Kura araxes period.
Obviously something suspicious is going on. Even if we admit the 6010/6000 bc dates published by Amirkhanov, there is nothing from 6500 or 7000 bc , as you claim. Moreover, even 6000 bc is a bit suss, as that is a couple of decades earlier than Shuvaleri sites in the south, which are closer to Mesopotamia. So if you want to be a big boy, you need to think and be objective
@Rob & Ethan
Why the fuck would hunter-foragers from Tajikistan move thousands of km's to live on the steppe for no apparent reason? This sounds more kooky than Iranian farmers moving into Khvalynsk.
@Davidski
IIRC you mentioned a good while ago some unpublished Eneolithic samples from Voronezh Oblast being the ancestors of Sredny Stog. Does this still hold true?
Apparently, they lacked the minor WSHG signal found in Khvalynsk and were loaded with CHG ancestry.
Lastly, do you know wether they carried Nalchik-related ancestry?
These models are more or less reflective of my thoughts posted above on the Kartal samples:
https://imgur.com/a/V2A0VMK
TTK ancestry would come from the Aral-Caspian area , Kelteminar culture. It’s an at archaeological no-brainer
Couple of the new Q+ samples clade with TTK, others with West Siberian HGs
It also depends on which EHG you use distal modelling. Sidelkino, the oldest, has more WHG, others have more ANE/ WSHG due to inflows from Siberia and Central Asia.
So that would impact the required degree of TTk admixture
We have found another Bronze Age settlement (during road construction). Can anyone advise which radiocarbon lab would be best to submit the materials from the settlement to for an accurate age determination?
Back on Caucasus Neolithic, not even Darkveti has been confirmed to be from 6000 bc. From a great article by Meshveliani (2013)-
“The survey and field work conducted in 2008–2010,
trying to evaluate the new “Neolithic” (according to the
existing literature) sites in western Georgia (Odishi, Darkveti, Anaseuli, etc) raised grave doubts as regards previous claims concerning the very existence of Neolithic, i.e., agricultural and permanent
settlements in the region. We failed to retrieve any
evidence supporting that hypothesis. We found no traces
of structures, nor early ceramics, bone tools, inserts of
sickles, or any other artifacts typical of the Neolithic
cultures as known elsewhere, not to mention the total
absence of faunal remains”.
It is simply the case that early farming only expanded across the fertile valleys of Kura & Araxes. It took another thousand years for modified, CHG-hybrid farmers to spread north across the mountains and west across the swampy marshes of western Georgia.
@Rob, I asked chatgpt and deepseek
, the two most powerful language models — about how the aknashen admixture made its way from the south caucasus to the steppe. Which intermediary cultures were involved in this process. Should I send you what they told me?
@ Arsen
''I asked chatgpt and deepseek
, the two most powerful language models — about how the aknashen admixture made its way from the south caucasus to the steppe. Which intermediary cultures were involved in this process. Should I send you what they told me?'''
sure share it here
No, I changed my mind
Great news from russia, Davidski, how do you like it?
@Shomu tepe
"Great news from russia, Davidski, how do you like it?"
Davidski is glad because he lives in Australia and not in Poland!
@Rob
Colchis-Abkhazia Post-Mesolithic is not proper Agro-Pastoralist Neolithic like Shulaveri-Shomu, but a lesser sophisticated form of transition from hunting economy, afaik they didn't farm much until 4500 BCE when generic Darkveti phase happens, so the gap between 6K and 4.5K BCE in Colchis-Abkhazia is similar to Steppe Eneolithic type economy. But the Darkveti genetic profile was present in this phase too. And it contributed to Nalchik, Krivyanski, Steppe Eneolithic
@Shomu tepe
Chokh is SSAC's outlier site, the main sites are Aruchlo, Aratashen, Aknashen, Shulaveri, Shomutepe, Kultepe, etc, i.e. Armenian Plateau. Also Hajji Firuz is different. There is just no population that can join Steppe, Indus, Anatolia, the neo-OIT (South Caucasus homeland) arguments are mere delusions pioneered by bloggers Vasistha (Ashish Kulkarni @agenetics1 on Twitter) and Shrikant Talageri (talageri.blogspot.com)
I'm very happy with Ukraine taking out so many of Russia's bombers and other aircraft.
It means that Russia has fewer resources to kill Ukrainian kids while they sleep and to attack the West, including Poland.
I don't understand why anyone outside of Russia would not support Ukraine defending itself like this. Ukraine has that right.
Can't really see an negatives. It's not like China will allow Russia to use nuclear weapons as retaliation for something like this.
@ Nick
“ Colchis-Abkhazia is similar to Steppe Eneolithic type economy. But the Darkveti genetic profile was present in this phase too. “
Maybe but no evidence for anything other hunting & gathering before 4500 bc in Abkhazia
The earliest farmers/ pastoralist in Colchi might be as late as 3000 bc
@Davidski
yes and I'm talking about the same thing, if Russia were to be deprived of its "nuclear club", would it behave as brazenly, would it behave like a terrorist? Would it blackmail neighboring countries, Western countries?
No
@Niko Bellic what do anomalies mean? it wasn't people living there, maybe aliens lived there? what was the genetic profile of these people, could you answer that? most likely they were similar to caucasian hunter gatherers, but slightly different, because they were separated by the caucasian ridge, it was impassable, it is still impassable, but during the mesolithic, when the glaciers did not retreat even in summer, the passage was more difficult to access. perhaps, the fact that they lived in the northern caucasus, they could have been influenced by north eurasian populations such as ANE, isn't that logical
maybe in qpadm they will show as kotias + iran_n+ane
not even kotias, but satsurblia
@ aarsen
“Changed my mind”
Ok, well the world awaits your insights, because nobody whispers to chatGPT like you do.
outlier site🤨
Regarding "Ukrainian Nazis". Here they posted a photo of a Russian soldier. All tattooed with a swastika. But at the same time he is a so-called war correspondent.
https://x.com/lasdallas010/status/1929508171241980003
@ Arsen
I've spoken to a few archeologists. Short of it is there are some Neolithic dates in Chockh. They date just after the Shuvaleri horizon and clear cultural links to it. I think 5500 BC is a reasonable dating for these, and so earlier than Meshoko in NW Caucasus
Couple more sites being excavated as we speak.
Can you run coordinates for these two samples?
https://www.mediafire.com/file/cp6wrscxvrf4uhk/Susat_2020.zip/file
@Rob
since I'm lazy, I won't look for sources or read articles, I just asked Perplexity about the differences between the chokh Neolithic and other Neolithic cultures of the Caucasus. And nothing is written here about the fact that chokh was influenced by the Azerbaijani Armenian Neolithic, it arose on the basis of local Mesolithic cultures.
Main Differences of the Chokh Neolithic Culture from Other Caucasian Neolithic Cultures
1. Local Origin and Cultural Continuity
The Chokh Neolithic culture developed based on the local Mesolithic culture, with direct cultural continuity. This distinguishes it from many other Caucasian cultures, where the Neolithic is often associated with migrations and influences from the Near East. In Chokh, the transition to a productive economy (agriculture and animal husbandry) occurred gradually, rooted in the achievements of the indigenous population.
2. Geographical and Ecological Setting
The Chokh settlement is located in the high-mountain zone of the Northeastern Caucasus, unlike most other Neolithic sites in the region, which are concentrated in foothills, low mountains, or caves of the Western Caucasus. This setting imposed specific adaptations in economy and lifestyle suited to subalpine conditions.
3. Type of Settlements and Dwellings
In Chokh, stone-built, circular, and more permanent dwellings have been discovered — a rarity for the Caucasian Neolithic, where frame constructions or cave sites are more common. Such stone architecture indicates a more sedentary and organized way of life.
4. Cultural and Technological Complex
A large number of flint tools with local characteristics were found in Chokh, along with pottery and agricultural implements, reflecting an early stage of agricultural culture formation. In contrast, Neolithic cultures in the Western and Central Caucasus are mainly represented by cave sites with different types of flint tools and less developed stone architecture.
5. Chronological Aspect
The Chokh Neolithic culture dates back to the Early Neolithic (around 6000 BC), making it one of the oldest in the region. Other Caucasian cultures — especially in the west — have later or mixed chronological frameworks and are often linked to external cultural influences.
6. Cultural Connections and Influences
While Western Caucasian cultures (such as Gubskaya and Khostinskaya) show close ties with the Near East and Transcaucasia, Chokh reflects a more isolated development, emphasizing mountain adaptations and local traditions.
Conclusion
Thus, the Chokh Neolithic culture stands out as a unique local culture of the Northeastern Caucasus, with independent development of a productive economy, stone architecture, and adaptation to high-mountain environments — distinguishing it from the more widespread cave and foothill Neolithic cultures of the Caucasus.
@Rob
but I think this Neolithic site is more interesting from the point of view of steppe populations, since it is localized in the central Caucasus, not far from such monuments as Nalchik, Progress, Vonyuchka, KST001, etc.
The Cmi site, located in Northern Ossetia (Alagir District), is a multilayered open-air archaeological settlement that documents the transitional stages from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic. Excavations took place in 2007 during the construction of the Zaramag hydroelectric power station and covered an area of about 8,000 square meters. Researchers identified three main cultural horizons.
Horizons 1 and 2 belong to the Mesolithic period and date to the end of the 7th – beginning of the 6th millennium BC. The stone industry of these layers is characterized by blade and chopping traditions. Archaeologists found conical and flat cores used for producing microblades, as well as cores with circular or open fronts and small conical shapes. Geometric microliths, such as segments and trapezes, also appeared, some with signs of bidirectional retouch. This toolkit reflects a typical hunting-gathering way of life, consistent with the Late Mesolithic of the North Caucasus.
Horizon 3, dating to around 6000–5700 BC (calibrated), represents the Early Neolithic. A radiocarbon date of 7510 ± 80 BP was obtained from this layer. In Horizon 3, archaeologists found a fragment of a thin-walled ceramic vessel, suggesting the very early use of pottery. The lithic industry continues Mesolithic traditions, but begins to show signs of transformation—tools become larger, and flaking techniques rougher, indicating a shift toward Neolithic technology. However, there is no evidence of full-scale agriculture or animal husbandry at this stage. These features would appear later at more developed sites.
The Cmi site is located at the foot of the medieval Tsmi fortress, on the right bank of the Nardon River, at an altitude of about 1,000 meters above sea level. It is one of the rare Early Neolithic sites in the high-mountain region of the North Caucasus, as most known Neolithic settlements are located in foothill or lowland zones. Cmi is especially important because it documents early, local processes of Neolithization. It reflects the gradual adoption of ceramic and tool-making technologies in a mountainous environment, without direct evidence of large-scale migration from the Near East.
In comparison with the Chokh Neolithic culture in the Northeastern Caucasus, which by the end of the 6th – beginning of the 5th millennium BC shows developed agriculture, animal husbandry, and stone architecture, the Cmi site represents an earlier phase. It shows only the first signs of Neolithic innovations—sporadic pottery, continued use of microlithic tools, and slight technological shifts. Nevertheless, it demonstrates how local Mesolithic communities in the mountain regions began adapting to new ways of life.
In conclusion, Cmi is a key site for understanding the early stages of the Neolithic transition in the North Caucasus. It reflects a slow, locally driven process of adopting new technologies and forms of subsistence in response to both internal development and limited external influences.
@Davidski
Since you had made updated plots for kra001 (https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-uralic-cline-with-kra001-no.html), have you made/could you make the same plots for BOO when you have some free time? I'd like to see how BOO performs compared to kra001 on those same plots. Thanks!
@Norfern
Scaled
Latvia_Medieval:G488,0.138864,0.131003,0.087115,0.11079,0.040931,0.034304,0.011986,0.016384,-0.00409,-0.037358,0.002923,-0.017534,0.035827,0.0417,-0.020222,-0.011005,-0.016559,-0.005448,-0.005405,-0.002501,-0.004617,-0.017559,0.01023,-0.019762,0
Latvia_Medieval:G701,0.125205,0.120848,0.093903,0.104006,0.041854,0.029284,0.021621,0.020999,-0.006136,-0.051026,-0.001624,-0.018583,0.026016,0.038947,-0.013029,0.009679,0.015776,0.001014,0.00264,0.004502,-0.004617,-0.005935,0.008504,-0.017352,-0.006347
Raw
Latvia_Medieval:G488,0.0122,0.0129,0.0231,0.0343,0.0133,0.0123,0.0051,0.0071,-0.002,-0.0205,0.0018,-0.0117,0.0241,0.0303,-0.0149,-0.0083,-0.0127,-0.0043,-0.0043,-0.002,-0.0037,-0.0142,0.0083,-0.0164,0
Latvia_Medieval:G701,0.011,0.0119,0.0249,0.0322,0.0136,0.0105,0.0092,0.0091,-0.003,-0.028,-0.001,-0.0124,0.0175,0.0283,-0.0096,0.0073,0.0121,0.0008,0.0021,0.0036,-0.0037,-0.0048,0.0069,-0.0144,-0.0053
@ Arsen
There were no wild wheat, cattle or goats to domesticate in northeast Caucasus. These were all introduced from Shuvaleri-communities after 6000 bc, and ultimately from Mesopotamia. The pottery also shows links with Shuvaleri. The continuity in some stone tools probably means that some local hunters participated in the mixture.
Amirkhanov now accepts this.
Not much more to debate here
@Rob
it's quite possibl
@ Arsen
So your hypothesis that the southern ancestry in Steppe En comes from a north eastern Cauc N. source remains possible. Suffice to say, Meshoko serves well as a surrogate source.
Either way, although very interesting from a Caucasian perspective, it’s not gonna really tilt things in any major way as far as yamnaya & IE are concerned. Hope that makes sense.
OITards seem to be riding on Vasistha's lies still. Man, Ashish Kulkarni did spread a lot of bullshit information. It's one thing to consider "South Caucasus homeland" as a second possibility, but another thing to spread wrong information as evidence to it rather than what actually is
"Origin of Kurgans is unknown, but timing coincides with arrival of U Mesopotamian ancestry in Steppes and it appears simultaneously in Steppes and Caucasus. Burial traditions differ on both sides but reasons are unknown. Remontnoye follows Maykop tradition
YHG != male mediated (check X chrm to Autosomal contribution for that)
Dairy, Sheep, Wool, herding/farming all that is from U Mesopotamians. Maykop brought wheeled transport.
Most tech development in Steppes is after 5000BC arrival of Caucasus farmers"
Vasistha was a latecomer to this whole South Caucasus/Iran thing. David Reich, Iosif Lazaridis and Nick Patterson got the ball rolling after getting hooked on Dienekes Pontikos' scribbles.
One day I need to write something up that connects all the dots and explains how Dienekes inspired Riech et al. to push the Armenia/Iran PIE homeland hypothesis.
It's a hell of a story. It'll probably end up being my most popular blog post.
@Davidski
If you will study the "Dienekes' Anthropology blog", you'll find all my letters. We had then only the uniparental markers, but Dienekes was working to his "Galore", if I remember well the name, and he had my data too. Perhaps we'll get proofs if Dienekes was Lazaridis or not. I supposed that he contacted me through the nickname of Costa Tsirigakis (thousands of letters between us), but he denied. In this case his Y was a J2a originating from Chioggia, Veneto, Italy. All his ideology was clear to me, for that I spoke of "Ex Oriente lux" and of the "levantinists-kurganists-levantinists"...
@ Niko Bellic
The reality of the situation is that Indians have a crippling racial inferiority complex towards Europeans/Whites. Hindus in particular are a people who are completely obsessed with social status, perceptions and looks in a manner that rivals, perhaps even exceeds, Hollywood degenerates. This is largely because of their caste system and the type of socio-sexually frustrated “underground man” it creates, but also the exacerbation of this system as a result of being conquered by not just the Anglo-Saxons and Latins, but successive waves of fairer skinned Muslim invaders from the north, the most well known being the Turko-Mongols, who came in, carried them off as slaves to be sold in Central Asia, and placed their local princesses in harems. They used to be able to cope in the face of this by claiming Vedic culture was uniquely ancient and native to the subcontinent abd that outsiders from the north were dirty barbarians who had contributed nothing to human civilization. But genetics has now proven that Aryans were fair-skinned Europoids that brought Vedic-Sanskrit from the Eastern European steppes to India through mass intermixing with the females of the local IVC/AASI population.
OIT and adjacent theories which they live vicariously through e.g. Southern Arc, must be understood as a reactionary movement of emasculated Hindu incels to this nightmarish information. The reality of the steppe hypothesis has broken them from Brahmin striver to Dalit taxi-driver.
@Davidski
Do you think Dienekes Pontikos is Iosif Lazaridis? Simple yes or no will suffice.
@Niko Bellic
What is YHG?
@Moustaki
Lazaridis is not Dienekes Pontikos.
@Tom
You are a vitamin D deficient anglo coper with an inferiority complex towards West and South Asians. Did one of them take your girlfriend, or what?
No one who doesn't have an inferiority complex will obsessively racially denigrate others to feel more secure about their own ancestral origins, regardless of the nonsensical political narratives being pushed surrounding the location of the PIE urheimat.
I notice this kind of behaviour is very prevalent anglos on this blog and elsewhere on the web.
Other Europeans are much more level-headed and cordial, perhaps because they are not incestual island monkeys with an unjustified god-complex.
"Remontnoye follows Maykop tradition"
Anthony and Shishlina on Remontnoye: "Steppe Eneolithic burials were placed in both simple pits and pits with a side chamber(catacombs). Bodies were usually arranged supine with raised knees, like Khvalynsk and Serednii Stih, or sometimes in a contracted position on their sides. Inventory items typically include saiga astragali, bone rods, and pottery vessels similar to Serednii Stih."
This topic about David Reich pushing for the West Asian PIE homeland for over a decade is really interesting.
Although Dienekes Pontikos and his online propaganda are an important part of the story, it's just one aspect of it.
This is also about the "decolonization" trend in left wing academia, which assumes that history has been tainted by Europe's colonial past and Eurocentrism, and that it needs to be destroyed and re-written.
David Reich is part of this effort, whether he realizes it or not. It's still an open question for me whether he does have a clue about what he's been doing.
@Davidski
Academia has an inherently left wing bias. It has been like this for the last 40 years, at least. Nothing new.
You could see how this "decolonisation" trend would unfold from far away after the first major ancient DNA papers were published regarding Yamnaya, Corded Ware and Indo-Europeans in general. Total shock from archeology as expected, some denial, some backstabbing and others riding the wave so to speak.
David Reich is just a completely clueless woke guy. You can hear it when he speaks. I'm sure he has earnest intentions, but he and his team have caused a lot of irreversible damage. I wonder what goes through their head when they read this blog and it's many comments (I know you are reading David, and Iosif and Nick).
Anyways, they should face consequences for the rubbish they published the last decade surrounding the origins of Yamnaya, Khvalynsk etc.
Yeah, there is irreversible damage courtesy of Reich et al.
On the one hand, they raised a lot of interest in this topic and funding to research it, so now we have many useful ancient samples to play around with.
On the other hand, they used their academic credentials and clout to push some really shallow nonsense that will stay with us for generations.
I need to talk to them at some point, but not until I've taken a very close look at all the relevant new data.
I almost lost interest in the topic after they published their Southern Arc fantasy paper, but I'm getting my head back into things now.
The main problem with 'maintream' genetic research is uncontextualised stat-tardism. Sometimes they ignore or do not perform Ydna analsysis, therefore do not even do the genetic data justice. Then, their historical rationalisation is piss-poor. Sometimes they get basics right, some times not. As for 7D analysis - forget about it
I think I know more folks of South Asian heritage than I do of East European or Balkan, just just so happens. They don’t seem to have any issue with a nuanced AIT, when I explain things to them. But these do tend to be a more cosmopolitan educated Cohort than online OIT grifters pretending proficiency with qpAdm
Bit of a ramble here, but it fits the topic.
An element is the "farmer dispersal hypothesis" which explains all the major languages spreading through agricultural scoieties, as this seems goundational to the approach some of the DNA institutes have. At MPI there is a trend of them sponsoring research relating to this topic, whether for Indo-European, Afro-Asiatic or Turkic/Mongolic with the Transeurasian stuff. The research of Reich and Lazaridis also seemed to be alligned with the farmer dispersal craze.
MPI's interest was in proving the Anatolian neolithic origin of IE and thus German. There is some political implication when a German institute is heavily pushing for the origin of the language spoken in their country coming from Turkey. The 2014/2015 results (steppe ancestry, Haak 2015) caused a shift towards Armenia/Iran, which is what Reich lab was zooming into ever since they did their research in India and defined "ANI" as "Georgian-like" and "ASI" as "South Indian-like", which coincides with their 2009 research on neolithic agriculturalists.
The MPI research in 2010-2014 was supposed to prove the Anatolian neolithic origin of IE languages, and their work after was supposed to show an Armenian/Iranian origin via Maykop, with geneflow through the steppes mediating this linguistic dispersal. They even made a TV documentary about them solving "the puzzle", which shows that they were quite adamant about this route. Although articles such as Haak 2015 and Wang 2019 have different conclusions to these points, you can find arguments for the original thesis dispersed through these articles.
The horse related articles that MPI were involved in seem to run on similar lines: The research in 2015 - 2020 was supposed to show that equestrianism spread with people from Central Mongolia, and the subsequent research was supposed to show that Yamnaya and Corded Ware possessed no domestic horses. Since the results did not exactly show that in the final articles these points had to be amended a bit, but you can again find traces of the original hypotheses in them.
To me this all suggests that the research projects MPI associates with or invest in are ones which serve their grander narrative. I do not k ow what the process would be: MPI stating a conclusion and finding fitting researchers or them finding researchers with interesting hypotheses and then funding their research.
With Harvard I do not see the same trend of picking and choosing, so I am more inclined to view the "transcaucasian goosechase" as a result of them being in an information bubble rather than them being on a mission to prove a certain narrative. It could certainly be the case that individuals within this information bubble are pushing for certain theories however.
P.s Davidski, when are we getting a new post?
I'm very critical of the Reich Lab for the past ten years of muddying the waters in regard to the PIE homeland.
But the MPI team is a whole other level of stupid. So stupid, in fact, that I don't even discuss them anymore.
Yep Davidski you were a Reich fanboy werent you? I never was, because I’m superior.
I was a fan of the fact that the Reich Lab took on this project, and I assumed that a team from Harvard would quickly get the hang of things and produce high quality work.
But instead, they spent a decade out in the weeds.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867425005598#app2
Hopefully we can get the G25 coordinates of these samples. I have a bit of a Hungarian sample fatigue to be honest, but the two Romanian early iron age samples are very interesting ones which hopefully will be available.
@Copper Axe
this is better
Currently ongoing project due to wrap up in November that seems relevant:
Anatolian Caucasian Relations from the Neolithic to the Middle Ages: An Archaeogenomic Study on the Human Remains of Anatolia and Azerbaijan
https://genarchivist.net/showthread.php?tid=991&pid=53855#pid53855
''Anatolian Caucasian Relations from the Neolithic to the Middle Ages: An Archaeogenomic Study on the Human Remains of Anatolia and Azerbaijan
https://genarchivist.net/showthread.php?tid=991&pid=53855#pid53855''
Hopefully they get more Eneolithic samples.
''Anatolia had a heterogeneous structure consist of different cultural features such as the formation of hierarchy, the establishment of religious structures and the use of weapons, while ancient DNA studies showed a general genetic continuity in Anatolia during this period, unlike the cultural dynamism''
'General genetic continuity' is misleading, and obscures the fact that there was a profound turnover in Anatolia after 5000 BC, almost no site continues.
Have they check out their own PCA ?
Yet in Central Europe, Harvard & Haak tell us that there was a complete population turnover because they didnt understand, or lied about, who the Corded Ware indivduals actually were.
Some other zingers from stat-tardism
- Bell Beaker folk from Iberia and North western Europe have no affinities
- British farmers come from Turkey
- Bacho Kiro is from East Asia because they have affinities to the ENA Palaeolithic lineage
- PGMc is from Finland because IBD go brrrr
Facial reconstruction of a man buried in a catacomb burial in Duba-Yurt, Chechnya, dated to the Alan-Khazar period.
The man had a medium-large cranial length of 187 mm, a narrow cranial width of 131 mm, and a medium cheekbone width of 131 mm.
https://x.com/Sulkalmakh/status/1933502111742112121
The second volume to this compilative series re: Anatolia has been released (open access):
https://brill.com/display/title/72155
@EthanR
At last linguistics and genetics demonstrate that Etruscans were "Italians" and the Sea Peoples largely too:
"Furthermore, the second basic problem with the Anatolian origin has been that we have no other evidence for it beyond the antique claim, which was already contrasted in Antiquity by the autochthony claim. Although Beekes (2002,especially221–226)convenientlysummarizedtheotherarguments,they turned out to be invalid (Simon 2015c:4 fn. 15). Since everything else points to an Italian origin of the Etruscans, the Lemnians can easily be explained as immigrants from the Italian Peninsula (as per above), and the entire alterna tive theory can be easily explained away as an antique construction to explain the Lemnians’ geographical position; indeed, the Anatolian origin would never even have emerged were it not for this antique idea" [p. 207].
Italy, like parts of central Europe and sth Scandinavia, and obviously the Balkans, preserved pre-Yamnaya-CW lineages & social structures. From recent studies in Italy we see Bronze Age G2a and I2c males with steppe ancestry. So no need to call in Anatolian migrations for Etruscan, this was just a myth created due to their cosmopolitanism.
I recall that we see some some Central European /“ Italian” lineages appearing in the Aegean to account for Lemnians
@Rob
I largely agree with you of course, and you know that I never separated Italy from the Balkans, above all in the oldest times when the Adriatic Sea was a land. You know that it is still suspended if all the R1b descend from the Villabrunas (but that I-M223 was in Italy from 20000 to 10000 Years ago reinforces that), and about he Sea Peoples I wrote a lot, when many supported that neither Twrsh Shrdn and Shklsh were linked to these peoples from Italy, and I demonstrated that a language in old Crete was linked to Italic languages and now it is possible that Lemnian Language derived just from the Twrsh..
Are these Indo Europeans or not?
Target: Armenia_Areni1_Chalcolithic
Distance: 1.2163% / 0.01216263
45.0 Iran_HajjiFiruz_N.AG
28.2 Turkey_Central_Catalhoyuk_N.SG
26.8 Russia_Steppe_Eneolithic
Target: Iran_ShahTepe_BA
Distance: 1.1641% / 0.01164066
68.2 Turkmenistan_C_TepeAnau
31.8 Armenia_Areni1_Chalcolithic
Target: Turkmenistan_Gonur_BA_1
Distance: 0.9773% / 0.00977314
46.4 Iran_ShahrISokhta_BA1
38.8 Turkmenistan_C_TepeAnau
14.8 Armenia_Areni1_Chalcolithic
Southern route for Indo-Iranian can be possible via this route....Proto-Indo-Iranian are Areni_C....Proto-Indo-Iranian at ShahTepe_BA and Indo-Iranian at BMAC....
Typo in last post...
At Areni_C it would be Proto-Indo-European...
And from west would be Proto-Anatolian...
Target: Turkey_Central_Kalehoyuk_OldHittitePeriod:MA2200__BC_1625__Cov_80.74%
Distance: 1.8931% / 0.01893057
88.8 Turkey_Central_CamlibelTarlasi_Chalcolithic
11.2 Ukraine_CernavodaI_Kartal_C
Areni C was not Proto-Indo-European. Or any sort of Indo-European.
And it's not related to BMAC, which was also not Indo-European.
A massive FTDNA discover update dropped this morning. Still waiting on the Eneolithic Balkans from the Harvard paper to be completed, but almost everything else is up to date.
Looks like there is a bunch of I-P78 in the Avar era Vienna basin. Below might not be the most scientific way to analyze them, but it seems to further attest to I-P78's Anatolian character:
Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓
A: ModernAustrian
B: Austria_ViennaBasin_Mödling_Avar_I-P78_Average
C: ↴
0.04140455 Iberia_Catalonia_Hellenistic_Empuries_(Classical_Greek_Profile)_(n=1)
0.04122547 Romania_Roman_Empire-Early_Medieval_(Byzantine)_Histria_(Anatolian_BA_Profile)_(n=1)
0.04106480 Anatolia_Early_Medieval_(Byzantine)_Nicaea_(East_Med-Anatolian_Profile)_(n=5)
0.04102539 Austria_Roman_Empire-Late_Antiquity_Wels_(East_Med-Anatolian_Profile)_(n=1)
0.04088681 Anatolia_Hellenistic-Roman_Republic_Gordion_(Anatolian_BA_Profile)_(n=1)
0.04070585 Italy_Lazio_Roman_Empire_Rome_(Anatolian_BA_Profile)_(n=3)
0.04061708 Anatolia_Late_Antiquity-Early_Medieval_(Byzantine)_Nicaea_(East_Med-Anatolian_Profile)_(n=3)
0.04051352 Greece_EBA_Early_Helladic_Nea_Styra_(Anatolian_BA_Profile)_(n=3)
Areni can be well represented as
67.8±2.9% Armenia_MasisBlur_N
32.2±2.9% Russia_Remontnoye_EBA_Yamnaya
p=0.86:
target left weight se z
Armenia_Areni1_Chalcolithic.AG Armenia_MasisBlur_N.AG 0.678 0.0291 23.3
Armenia_Areni1_Chalcolithic.AG Russia_Remontnoye_EBA_Yamnaya.SG 0.322 0.0291 11.1
$rankdrop
# A tibble: 2 × 7
f4rank dof chisq p dofdiff chisqdiff p_nested
1 14 8.50 8.62e-1 16 755. 2.73e-150
0 30 763. 2.93e-141 NA NA NA
@Rob,
you might be interested in
Two cultural layers. In the North-Eastern Caucasus, Russian Academy of Sciences scientists have found a new Eneolithic settlement
https://poisknews.ru/arheologiya/dva-kulturnyh-sloya-na-severo-vostochnom-kavkaze-raskopano-novoe-eneoliticheskoe-poselenie/
quote :"In 2025, large-scale archaeological research began in the Republic of Dagestan, preceding the construction and reconstruction of the R-217 "Kavkaz" highway, the M-4 "Don" - Vladikavkaz - Grozny - Makhachkala - border with the Republic of Azerbaijan on the bypass section of the city of Derbent."...
"According to archaeological features, the layer can be tentatively attributed (with a possible correction of about 200 years) to the time corresponding to the beginning - the first quarter of the 5th millennium BC."
also, such interesting figurines (a pig?) were found there, which are associated with the Shomutepe culture of Azerbaijan and Armenia
https://poisknews.ru/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/oba-1170x326.jpg
@Rob
here is a little more detail about it
https://archaeolog.ru/press/articles/novoe-eneoliticheskoe-poselenie-na-severo-vostochnom-kavkaze
🦴 and also this human burial from this burial ground, there are specialists here, what do you think, is it possible to extract DNA from this skeleton? Judging by its appearance, time has really battered this skeleton.
https://i.ibb.co/p6NS0Gc8/8-1.jpg
according to what tradition is he buried? looks like shomutepe? or something like steppe eneolithic
It was a statue of a bull , not a pig . There 's also a bronze pin . I remind you that this monument is estimated to be 7000 years old. 🤔
@Arsen- interesting, looks promising. But we can't tell for sure; well preserved bones can have good collagen for C14 dating but produce no DNA, and crap bones can produce decent DNA
Thought you all might enjoy this new paper: Bonmann & Fries 2025, "Linguistic Evidence Suggests that Xiōng-nú and Huns Spoke the Same Paleo-Siberian Language" (Yeniseian).
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-968X.12321
@Rob
if there is a figurine of a bull, does that mean he was a cattle breeder? and the dating is 5 thousand years BC ±200 years, estimated
@ Arsen/ Shomu
''if there is a figurine of a bull, does that mean he was a cattle breeder? and the dating is 5 thousand years BC ±200 years, estimated''
Yes it would imply familiarity with bulls/ cattle and other domesticates. Not surprising given their presumed dating of 5000 - 4700 bc, in line with other north caucasus sites, such as Meshoko & Nalchik. They should obtain a more precise date with C14, whatever it is, its a great find.
They link the sites material with Shuvaleri
I guess it''ll be Nalchik-like genetically
😊I think he is connected with the cattle breeders of Khvalynsk.
Post a Comment