Scythian/Sarmatian DNA, your thoughts.

The modern Iranic folks share mainly 3 haplogroups with each other: R1a, R2a and J2a (with some J1 and R1b) ! This is a fact. Scythians were Iranic speakers too. And it's just impossible that they were only R1a. So I incline to think that they were J2 and R2a too!

There were people in Iran before the Irano-Aryan migrations. J2a can predates the IE speakers.
 
And about the Bulgarians, I don't think 20% of J2 in them is from the Turks. First of all J2a was never Turkic, it is from West Asia. Ancient Turks were from Central Asian. If Bulagrians mixed with the 'modern' Ottoman Turks, they would never get so much J2 from them.

J2 may have been brought from Anatolia to Bulgaria during the Varna culture. The shape of Varna skulls are typically "Mediterranean" according to archeologists.
 
There were people in Iran before the Irano-Aryan migrations. J2a can predates the IE speakers.
Yes, I do also believe that J2a predates. Iranic and Caucasian peoples.

J2a is West Asian, and that's why I think that West Asian Iranic folks like Kurds and Ossetians have 2 kind of J2a in them. 1 kind from Caucasian people and 1 from kind Iranic people.
This starting point justifies my thoughts that proto-Iranic (Aryan) people were from West Asia.

But I do also believe that J2a was an integral part of the ancient Iranic people too. There is J2a in Iranic speaking people in Central Asia, like Tajikistan. And there is even very much J2a among Brahmin cast in India!

I believe it's a modern myth to think that Scythians (and ancient Iranic people) were only R1a people. They found some R1a remnants of these tribes, true. But this doesn't mean they couldn't be also something else. It doesn't make any sense that a nation has only 1 haplogroup.
This would mean that Central Asians like Tajiks are more Iranic than Kurds are. Like some Iranic folks in Central Asia think. This is absolutely nonsense!

So I looked further and discovered that all Iranic speaking people share 3 haplogroups with each other: R1a, R2a and J2a.This is how I did come to the conclusion that the Scythians might be R1a, J2a and R2a folks too.

J2 may have been brought from Anatolia to Bulgaria during the Varna culture. The shape of Varna skulls are typically "Mediterranean" according to archeologists.
Thank you very much for this info. It's very interesting. But maybe those skulls were E or even I2a. Because Irano-Nordoid (Nordic-Iranian) and Caucasian skulls are 'bigger'/longer.
 
This autosomal dodecad graph is very recent and up to date. It's from June 4 2011!
123gz.jpg

http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2011/06/projecting-pakistan-populations-on-west.html
 
Like I said many people believe that Scythians were mainly R1a people. But it is just impossible that they were exclusively R1a. Nobody is 'pure' and nobody was ever pure!

J2 and J1 in Kurds is partly from the Caucasian people and partly from the Iranic people.

Some J1 and E are from the Semitic speaking peoples, like the Assyrians. And some of it is from the Greeks.

As you can see the distance between East and West Europe = only 0.044.

The distance between East Europe and Mediterranean = 0.056
The distance between East Europe and West Asia = 0.055

The distance between West Europe and Mediterranean = 0.058
The distance between West Europe and West Asia = 0.048

The closest people to West Asia are West Europeans. Distance between them = only 0.048, much less than between West European and Mediterranean which = 0.058.

North European is CLOSER to West Asia than to Mediterranean.
You are right Goga. However, note there is a problem because K=12 also says West Asian is closer to Southwest Asian than the Mediterranean is. The tree you are using belongs to K=10, where it's TRUE that Southern European was closer to Southwest Asian, but with the new interpretation of Southern Europe (Mediterranean), this has changed.

What you say it makes sense. Just wanted to point there's some discrepancy between both runs. West asian here is 0.054 from Southwest Asian, while the Mediterranean is 0.057...a bit far in comparison.

I personally think Dienekes' should named Mediterranean in a different way (as for example Paleolithic European) to avoid this problem...very obvious while checking the distances. Or just separating Southern Europe in two diferentiated regions, the same as Northern Europe (Southwest and Southeast Europe).
 
You are right Goga. However, note there is a problem because K=12 also says West Asian is closer to Southwest Asian than the Mediterranean is. The tree you are using belongs to K=10, where it's TRUE that Southern European was closer to Southwest Asian, but with the new interpretation of Southern Europe (Mediterranean), this has changed.

What you say it makes sense. Just wanted to point there's some discrepancy between both runs. West asian here is 0.054 from Southwest Asian, while the Mediterranean is 0.057...a bit far in comparison.
Yes. Maybe it's true. I do believe this is due big parts of the Southwest Asia component are from West Asia.
Southwest Asian components are J1, E and maybe T. J1 is from IJ . And the Archaic haplogorup IJ is from West Asia. From IJ came I1, I2, J1 and J2. Hg. J1 connects Southwest Asia and West Asia.

However the closest component to West Asia is West Europe. The distance between Soutwest Asian and West Asia is 0.054, while the distance between West Asian and West European is only 0.048. West Europeans are the closest folks to West Asia.

According to this the closest components to Mediterranean are East European and West Asian, both 0.056! West Asian is closer to Mediterranean than West European is (0.058).
 
Yes, that's a good point. I think Dienekes' always tries to diferentiate the components as much as possible, and checking the distances it's always clear wich components refer to Europe, the near east, Asia, etc. But the names can cause confusion, for this reason I don't like the Mediterranean one. If the component must keep united, I think Paleolithic European was a better name to make the interpretation easier.
 
Yes, that's a good point. I think Dienekes' always tries to diferentiate the componennts as much as possible, and checking the distances it's always clear wich componenets refer to Europe, the near east, Asia, etc. But the names can cause confusion, for this reason I don't like the Mediterranean one. If the component must keep united, I think Paleolithic European was a better name to make the interpretation easier.
I do agree with you. It's just a name. But Southwest Asian and Mediterranean components share hg. E together. Most Arabs (Semites) or Arabic speakers are dominant : Semitic J1 and E ! Hg. E is both a Mediterranean and Soutwest Asian haplogroup, but it's origin is somewhere in Africa!

Origin of IJ is in West Asia
Origin of R is in Central Asian or maybe even West Asia too
Origin of E is in Afria

Btw. I think that hg. E has nothing to do with the Scythians / ancient Aryans (Iranic folks). But maybe I'm wrong.
 
First of all, it is out of question that Sarmartians-Scythians were from baltic area or belonged mainly to North European component. Their original homeland was between the Caspian and Aral See(Andronovo). This Region is high in West Asian and strong North European too. North East European peaks up in the baltic and has expanded later more south. It is delusional to believe that Baltic People or the "baltic Gene" has in anyway contact to the Scythians or Sarmatians. We only know about Scythians that they had much R1a* but don´t know this about Sarmatians. Even if Sarmatians are partly descend of Scythians still they were other People. Maybe the Sarmatians were more G than R1a*. Who knows?
The domination of what is today Ukraine was based on some Warriors which moved from East and controlled the former Cimmerian Regions. We can assume that todays Ukrainians and some South Russians have absorbed Scythian and Sarmatians but at the same time we know that during the Soviet time, many Slavs from further North were settled in Ukraine. Connecting Slavs to Scythians just because of much R1a* among them is as logical as saying the Italic tribes are up to 50% descend of Germanic tribes because of the high R1b* found among them. Both Iranic as well Slavic people belong to the Satem group of Indo Europeans and it is understandable that they share more similarities as to other Indo Europeans. However similarities don´t mean they were the same.

About the Scythian, Sarmatian-Alan presence in West Asia, well the first mentioning of Scythians in history was indeed from West Asia by Assyrians who called them "Ishkuza" They were present in Urartu, Mannea even before any mentioning of them in North. Interestingly a Greek historian wrote (I don´t know his name anymore) The Scythians moved over the Aras See into the Steppes further North.
 
Last edited:
Georgians and Armenians have 4.5 - 6% of E, and Kurds 7-11%. Iran has also 4.5%.

The numbers are quite low, lower than Italy for example (11%). Spain is in the Middle with 7%, and Portugal on the top with 14%.

Haplogroup E is quite widespread, it has something to do in lots of populations. Just see the Eupedia spreadsheet. Actually the highest European frequencies can be found all around the Balkans.
 
Georgians and Armenians have 4.5 - 6% of E, and Kurds 7-11%. Iran has also 4.5%.

The numbers are quite low, lower than Italy for example (11%). Spain is in the Middle with 7%, and Portugal on the top with 14%.

Haplogroup E is quite widespread, it has something to do in lots of populations. Just see the Eupedia spreadsheet. Actually the highest European frequencies can be found all around the Balkans.
Georgians are not the same as Armenians.

There's some portion of E in West Asian because of the Greeks. Part of West Asia belonged to the (East) Roman Empire. Even before that, Alexander the Great was in West Asia. Also Mitanni were allies of the the ancient Egypt for some time. Greeks loved Egyptians and imported the 'African' to Europe, while Mitanni & Kassites imported 'African' E to West Asia. Also the Jews attributed to this process very much too.

But E is still from Africa and it is an African lineage. Who am I to rob and deny the African influence in the Mediterranean, and and to the lesser extent Europe and Asia.

Every time when I hear hg. 'E' I will always accredit and merit that to the Africans. Doesn't matter for me how much it is in other parts of the world. I'm not a hypocrite...
 
About the Scythian, Sarmatian-Alan presence in West Asia, well the first mentioning of Scythians in history was indeed from West Asia by Assyrians who called them "Ishkuza" They were present in Urartu, Mannea even before any mentioning of them in North. Interestingly a Greek historian wrote (I don´t know his name anymore) The Scythians moved over the Aral See into the Steppes further North.
True, the Assyrians (Akkadians) were annihilated by the Medes and Scythians. That was 612 BCE. Everybody is talking about a coalition between the Medes and Chaldeans, but I believe that Scythians helped their kinsmen very much.
 
And who say Scythians and Sarmatians were same nation ? Herodotus say Saramatians are descendants of Scyths and Amazones. But do you believe Amazones egzisted ? Even Herodotus clearly separate Sarmatians and Scythians - by teritory , languague( he say it is spoiled Scythian wich only mean they both speacked IE -Iranian languague- in that times there wa not such big diference betwen IE languagues) , customs,...
I would repeat it again because clearly nobody hiered me first dozen times Herodotus story do not hold water( I would not say nonsence out of respect toward Herodotus, but again there was not Amazones) , while Diodorus ofers reasonable story : during they rule in Asia ( 650-626 )Scythians moved part of Medians north of Caucasus and they are known as Sarmathians -Solar Medes.
All of historians clearly separate Scythians and Sarmathians , aldo Sarmathians were some kind of vasals to Scythians . Later Sarmathians were the ones who conquered and destroyed "they cousins" Scythian state .
Scythians were clearly R1a ( greater percent ) with significant N1c ( Yakuti who call themselves Sake had 80% of N1c ) , and some Q and maybe some other haplogroups .
And I do believe most of Slavs are descendants of Scythians - it is hard to believe one enormous population of R1a simply disapeared , and then in same place apeares another enormous population of R1a , and they dont have nothing in comon .
As I previosly explained I believe Sarmathians were I2a2 -Din , and they descendants are Serbs and Croats , and other tribes that blended in Slavic populations . So the Medes were I2a2-Din , which is clearly represented in Kurds .
Also it is quite posible that some of J2 in Balkans came with Thracians ( came from Asia Minor), Turks( Ottoman-Osmanli) , Neolithic farmers and Phoenicians and some with Sarmathian nations of Serbs , Croats and Bulgars .
If somebody won to see why I think they are Sarmathian go to tread Sarmathians , Serbs , Croats and I2a2 and read my posts .There you will also find how most of I2a2 get were is it now.
 
And yes some of Scythian tribes get to Baltic - Neuri ( mentioned by Herodotus like Scythian nation) , there is some evidence that sugest that Neuri are ancestors of today Balts ( river Nevra , few cities with simillar names , ... ). They could also be same with Venedi .
 
Also I wasnt able to provide valid data about I2a2-Din in aeria around Caucasus where Sarmathians originaly dweled previous to they move to west( I allready posted data for Ossetians - north 32% of I2a2-Din and south 13% ). And now there it is :
Tatars from Kazahstan ( where Alans lived ) : R1b 6% , R1a29%, I2a2 16% ,N1c 25%, E1b1b 2% , J 8% , G 7% , other 6%
Chuvash ( on Caucasus ) : R1b 12% , R1a 18% , I2a2 24% ,N1c 18% , E1b1b 6% , J 6% , G 18%
Baskhirs R1b 47% , R1a 26% , I2a2 4% ,N1c 17% , others 10%

other : C , F* , N* , Q , R2
All of this nations are Turkic ( Altai ) speacking . And they could be conected with Sarmathians that stayed in Hunic empire - Roxolans (bright Alans ) . One part of Roxolans acording to some Roman sources took Hunic languague and way of life , and they were called Saraguri
 
Thank you very much for your input. But maybe the Scythians were North Caucasian folks too? And that their relatives - the Medes - lived in South Caucasus (- North Mesopotamia - Kurdistan).

I don't think the Scythians were "North Caucasians". They were very much culturally (and obviously also linguistically) Iranian. Besides, the Scythians occupied in Antiquity an infinitely larger space than the North Caucasus (unlike the Ossetes today):
Scythia-Parthia_100_BC.png

Scythians are in orange
 
I don't think the Scythians were "North Caucasians". They were very much culturally (and obviously also linguistically) Iranian. Besides, the Scythians occupied in Antiquity an infinitely larger space than the North Caucasus (unlike the Ossetes today):
Scythia-Parthia_100_BC.png

Scythians are in orange
Yes, I know this map. But I'm talking about the OLDER Scythians!

this map is from 100 BCE, while the Scythians I'm talking about were already in the Middle East 700 BCE!!! Or 600 years before this map. Maybe even before that.

Scythians I'm talking about lived together with the Medes. Parthians came much later and were Central Asian Iranic folks (maybe backmigration).
 
I would repeat it again because clearly nobody hiered me first dozen times Herodotus story do not hold water( I would not say nonsence out of respect toward Herodotus, but again there was not Amazones) , while Diodorus ofers reasonable story : during they rule in Asia ( 650-626 )Scythians moved part of Medians north of Caucasus and they are known as Sarmathians -Solar Medes.
All of historians clearly separate Scythians and Sarmathians , aldo Sarmathians were some kind of vasals to Scythians . Later Sarmathians were the ones who conquered and destroyed "they cousins" Scythian state .
Scythians were clearly R1a ( greater percent ) with significant N1c ( Yakuti who call themselves Sake had 80% of N1c ) , and some Q and maybe some other haplogroups .
And I do believe most of Slavs are descendants of Scythians - it is hard to believe one enormous population of R1a simply disapeared , and then in same place apeares another enormous population of R1a , and they dont have nothing in comon .
As I previosly explained I believe Sarmathians were I2a2 -Din , and they descendants are Serbs and Croats , and other tribes that blended in Slavic populations . So the Medes were I2a2-Din , which is clearly represented in Kurds .
Maybe 'Amazones' were just wild/barbaric people without any respect for rules.

Also, I read nowhere that the Medes came from north (Eastern Europe) and entered West Asia. Most historians do agree on that the Medes were native to West Asia or they came from Central Asia. But I do believe they were West Asian and just a continuation of Mitanni/Kassites. I've my own reasons for that.

Some people link Kassites to Scythians.

I do also believe that the very first original Medes were J2, R1a & R2a people. But later they mixed with I2a-something people who lived already in Kurdistan folks like Guti or came later like the Hittites or even the hypothetical so called 'Cimmerians'.

Also Scythians came NOT from the Baltics! Maybe they were there, but the Baltics was not their native homeland.
 
Were Kassites that live in the Mesopotamia 1700 - 1000? BCE related to or even the same as Scythians / Saka ? Notice that after them came Scythians. And people in the Mesopotamia started to write about Saka/'Ishkuza' and not Kassites. The name of the Kassites (Karanduniash) vanished from this region, while the name of the Scythians entered not much later after that.
The neo-Babylonian Empire of these Kassites was also called Karanduniash. '-niash' means land. So, land of the Karandu.

http://www.emmetsweeney.net/article-directory/item/61-kassites-and-scythians.html
 
As I previosly explained I believe Sarmathians were I2a2 -Din , and they descendants are Serbs and Croats , and other tribes that blended in Slavic populations . So the Medes were I2a2-Din , which is clearly represented in Kurds .

[FONT=&quot]Sarmatians came from South Ural and they were Iranic-speaking people. Does it look like some I2a2-Din people from Balkans? Surely not. It's obvious that Sarmatians were predominantly R1a people. [/FONT]
 

This thread has been viewed 477415 times.

Back
Top