PDA

View Full Version : Bronze age Trialeti Culture in Transcaucasia



IronSide
08-05-17, 00:07
As there is not enough information on Eupedia about this culture, I decided to open a new thread to discuss it, it is an interesting culture which arose I believe because of an Indo-European incursion in south Caucasus.

I got everything from this book: ''Ancient Europe, 8000 B.C. to A.D. 1000: An Encyclopedia of the Barbarian World''
by Peter I. Bogucki (Editor), Pam J. Crabtree (Editor).

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/414HQS596ML._SX347_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

The end of the Early and beginning of the Middle Bronze Age, across most of Caucasia, was marked by the disappearance of the Kura-Araxes archaeological horizon (defined most readily by distinctive black burnished ceramic complexes) and the large scale abandonment of settled village communities. Except for the late-third-millennium B.C. layers from the bedeni sites in southern Georgia, there is little evidence for continuity in Early and Middle Bronze Age occupations, and indeed comparatively few Middle Bronze Age settlements have been documented in Caucasia. as a result, the vast majority of the archaeological record for the Middle Bronze Age comes fro mortuary sites. The tombs and kurgans of Shengavit, Trialeti (old group, a distinctive group of burials within the Trialeti complex), and Martkopi indicate social, cultural, and political transformations were underway during the third quarter of the third millennium B.C.

This shift in settlement patterns across Caucasia during the Early to Middle Bronze transition is traditionally interpreted as evidence of the advent of increasingly nomadic social groups predicated upon pastoral subsistence production. The appearance of ox and horse sacrifices in numerous Middle Bronze I and II attests to the increased prominence of pastoral production and equestrian mobility within these communities. The shifting subsistence economy was also accompanied by fundamental transformations in the social milieu, changes that centred on emerging radical inequality between a martial elite and the remainder of the social body. The rich inventories of Middle Bronze Age kurgans signify a profound departure in social relations from those indicated by the burials of the Kura-Araxes phase. Even more dramatic expression of this inequality are visible in the following Middle Bronze II period, when a great part of highland Caucaisa was enveloped in the Trialeti-Vanadzor horizon, which was most prominently marked by large burial complexes of unprecedented wealth. The monumental construction and rich mortuary goods of tombs from Trialeti, Vanadzor, Karashamb, and Lori Berd as well as the iconography of elite privilege portrayed on the metal vessels from Karashamb and Korukh Tash testify to profound changes in the social orders of Caucaisa and provide the initial indications of emergent socio-political inequality in the region.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/7f/18/de/7f18deeb8fd063f5f9ac668061550ffc.jpg

IronSide
08-05-17, 00:34
Horse sacrifices does it for me, these people are clearly Indo-European, and who are the Indo-Europeans of Transcaucasia ? Armenians of course. it is for this reason I don't believe they migrated from the Balkans at the end of the bronze age, but rather from the north of the Caucasus mountains a thousand years earlier. Archaeology suggests that they enter via east Caucasus corridor, Caspian sea, even genetics, R1b-L584 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L584/), the most likely candidate to have spread the Armenian language, has been found in its basal form L584* (not ancient dna) in Daghestan. It is as Arame once said, the Balkan theory is dead.

Fire Haired14
08-05-17, 02:39
Interesting stuff.

bicicleur
08-05-17, 08:44
ok, but what happened after the Trialeti?
how do you know these Trialeti tribes and their language survived till today?

Maciamo
08-05-17, 10:12
I am not a specialist of Caucasian archaeology, but the quoted passage provides ample evidence (cattle, horses, high social stratification, wealthy elite burials) that Steppe Indo-Europeans had indeed started to settled in the Caucasus toward the end of the Early Bronze Age (Kura-Araxes culture), from about 2200 BCE. This corresponds to the transition from the Catacomb to the Srubna culture in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, and to the appearance of the Oxus civilisation (BMAC) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactria%E2%80%93Margiana_Archaeological_Complex) in southern Central Asia (2300–1700 BCE).

The Catacomb culture may have been the last predominantly R1b Steppe culture, and would have been invaded by the predominantly R1a northern IE tribes. It is not implausible that some of these R1b steppe nomads were pushed south to the Caucasus region. That would explain the relatively high percentage of R1b in southern Daghestan (Lezgins) and Ossetia, but perhaps also in Armenia. I have proposed several years ago that the Hittites might have come straight from the Steppe across the Caucasus. According to Wikipedia, it is generally assumed that the Hittites came into Anatolia some time before 2000 BCE. This is exactly the period of interest, at the time of the collapse of the Catacomb and Kura-Araxes cultures (EBA to MBA transition).

The Oxus civilisation is thought to have been Proto-Indo-Iranian and predominantly R1a-Z93. However R1b tribes did live in Central Asia before that, at least since Afanasievo. Nowadays R1b is more common in Turkmenistan than anywhere else in Central Asia, while R1a is higher around Kyrgyzstan. Yet the Oxus civilisation ranged from Turkmenistan to Kyrgyzstan via Tajikistan, so it's not clear if R1a tribes founded that culture in an area where R1b was already present, or if they came together. What we do know is that the Proto-Indo-Iranians continued west to Iran, Armenia and northern Mesopotamia, where they appear as the Mitanni from 1500 BCE.

It has also been suggested that the Gutians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutian_people), who lived in the Zagros around 2200 BCE and were described as fair-skinned and blond, were of Indo-European stock. Even their name reminds of that of other ancient IE people like the Goths (aka Gauts or Gut-þiuda) and the Gauls/Gaels/Celts. Since the Indo-Iranian called themselves Aryans and came to the Middle East with chariot-riders from 1500 BCE, the Gutians might have been an earlier R1b tribe that had migrated to the Zagros from Turkmenistan. If they belonged to R1b-L584, they might have been the ancestors of modern Armenians.

The Gutians eventually conquered Sumer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutian_dynasty_of_Sumer) and ruled over Mesopotamia for a bit less than a century. They may also be responsible for the relatively high frequency of R1b in central-northern Iraq and in Kermanshah (west-central Iran), where R1b reaches 15-20% of the population, the highest in the Middle East after Armenia.

IronSide
08-05-17, 10:41
This is the continuation from the book, it's too long, but whatever:

During the Middle Bronze III period, Caucasia appears to have fragmented into several distinct material culture horizons. If the earlier Trialeti-Vanadzor sites present a relatively homogeneous formations in burial style for the Middle Bronze II phase, transformations in burial construction and the forms and styles of painted and black ornamented pottery during the succeeding period indicate the differentiation of the region into at least three contemporary, overlapping ceramic horizons: Karmir-Berd, Sevan-Uzerlik, and Karmir-Vank. Karmir-Berd materials largely prevail in the highlands of central-southern and northern Caucasia. The Sevan-Uzerlik horizon tends to predominate in the western steppe of Azerbaijan, the Nagarno-Karabakh highlands, and the Sevan and Syunik regions of Armenia. The Karmir-Vank horizon is best known from the Nakhichevan region of Azerbaijan and the site of Haftavan Tepe in northwestern Iran. These general regional divisions cannot be taken as rigid geographic mosaics. Sevan basin sites have yielded evidence of Karmir-Vank and Karmir-Berd painted pottery; Ararat plain sites have included both Karmir-Berd and Sevan-Uzerlik materials; and Sevan sites contain both Karmir-Berd and Sevan-Uzerlik ceramics. In Georgia, the Trialeti-Vanadzor horizon persists into the Middle Bronze III phase at sites such as Treli, Tsavgli, Natakhtari, and Pevrebi; however, it is also possible to detect the infuence Sevan-Uzerlik complexes as well, represented by black pottery with dotted lines.

During the Middle Bronze III phase, the wealth of the burial inventories seen in the preceding phase begins to diminish such that, in the complexes represented by Karmir-Berd or Karmir-Berd/Sevan Uzerlik pottery, relatively few bronze artefacts have been recorded. Furthermore, in the complexes that signify the end of Middle Bronze Age, the distinctive painted pottery becomes increasingly rare, yielding to the incised gray and blackware ceramics that came to predominate under the Lchashen-Metsamor horizon of the Late Bronze Age.

The first clear evidence for sociopolitical complexity in southern Caucasia appears in the Late Bronze Age. The Late Bronze Age is marked most conspicuously by the reappearance of numerous permanent settlements in the form of variably sized stone-masonry fortresses built atop hills and outcrops. These fortified settlements are often associated with large cemeteries, such as Treligorebi located on the outskirts of modern Tbilisi, Georgia. The transition between the Middle and Late Bronze Age is also marked by the gradual introduction of new ceramic forms and decorative styles--most notably the disappearance of painted pottery and punctate designs in favor of suites of black, gray, and buff wares with incised decorations--as well as new approaches to metallurgical production.

Examinations of Late Bronze and Early Iron Age sites in Caucasia began in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, when archaelogists and architectural historians embarked on a series of non systematic surveys to document the settlement history of the region. To date only a handful of Late Bronze or Early Iron Age settlements, including Metsamor in the Ararat plain and Tsakahovit on the northern slopes of mount Aragats, have hosted intensive archaeological investigations. Evidence of unfortified settlements remains scarce, even in regions, such as the Tsakahovit plain, that have hosted intensive archaeological surveys. Archaeological have focused more resolutely on late-second- to early-first-millennia B.C. cemeteries. Large mortuary complexes at Lchashen (on the northwestern coast of lake Sevan), Lori-Berd (on the Lori-Pambakh region ofn northern Armenia), and Artik and Horom (both on the lower western slopes of mount Aragats) have provided the most extensive orientation to the material culture of the era as well as the primary bases for periodization.

With the dawn of the Late Bronze Age, the social inequalities visible in the kurgans of the early second millenium appear to have been formalised into a tightly integrated sociopolitical apparatus where critical controls over resources--economic, social, sacred--were concentrated within the cyclopean stone masonry walls of powerful new centers. These political centers projected authority well into the hinterlands. Large-scale irrigation facilities first appear in the region in association with Late Bronze Age fortress complexes, suggesting significant centralised control over the agricultural productivity of the region. In addition, vast cemeteries appear coincident with the emergence of Late Bronze Age polities.

In the Tsakahovit region, an archaeological survey conducted in the 1998 and 2000 recorded a very high density of Late Bronze Age cemeteries (4.6 per square kilometre) in the mountain highlands immediately surrounding a series of adjacent fortresses. Given the lack of non-fortified settlements in the region, it is quite likely that non-elite populations may have continued the highly mobile ways of life that arose in the Middle Bronze Age, even as elites settled within fortified complexes. It is possible that the explosion in tombs and cemeteries in the Late Bronze Age was part of an effort by emergent socio-political authorities to increase the commitments of their subjects to a specific place (through ties between ancestral and descendent families and groups) and thus make them a more stable foundation for the demands of the extractive political economy.

Many of the material culture forms and styles developed in the Late Bronze Age continued into and through the Early Iron Age. Pottery from Early Iron Age levels is typologically distinct from Late Bronze III wares but is quite clearly continuous with Late Bronze Age formal and decorative traditions. The same holds true for fortress architecture, which, while distinct in several morphological features, remains within the building traditions established in the Late Bronze Age. Thus the Early Iron Age is marked archaeologically by the emergence and expansions of Iron implements but appears to have been socio-culturally continuous with the preceding era. Examinations of materials recovered from mortuary contexts suggests that the Early Iron Age can be divided into two distinct phases: a transitional Early Iron I, dated conventionally to the late twelfth century and eleventh century B.C., and an Early Iron II phase during the tenth and ninth centuries B.C.

Arame
08-05-17, 11:03
Maciamo

We have L584 adna from NW Iran. And there is 0% percent indication that it came from BMAC. Quite contrary it looks that it had Anatolian Kum6 shift and closest modern pops to him were the Caucasians. Abkhazians, Georgian and Armenians. Also Kurds in Gedmatch. They were not included in Broushaki et al.

The most obvious explanation is that his ancestors are from Trialeti.
---
Furthermore, our male Iron Age genome (F38; 971-832 BCE; sequenced to 1.9x) from Tepe Hasanlu in NW-Iran shares greatest similarity with Kumtepe6 (fig. S21) even when compared to Neolithic Iranians (table S20). We inferred additional non-Iranian or non-Anatolian ancestry in F38 from sources such as European Neolithics and even post-Neolithic Steppe populations (table S20). Consistent with this, F38 carried a N1a sub-clade mtDNA, which is common in early European and NW-Anatolian farmers (3). In contrast, his Y-chromosome belongs to sub-haplogroup R1b1a2a2, also found in five Yamnaya individuals (17) and in two individuals from the Poltavka culture (3). These patterns indicate that post-Neolithic homogenization in SW-Asia involved substantial bidirectional gene flow between the East and West of the region, as well as possible gene flow from the Steppe.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2016/07/13/science.aaf7943.full

bicicleur
08-05-17, 11:49
Trialeti indeed seems IE steppe-derived.
But, I'm not a linguist, but I often read Greek and Armenian language are related.
Myceneans spoke Greek or proto-Greek, there was no language shift between Myceaneans and classical Greeks.
Myceneans came with both charriots and swords.
Charriots came to the northern Levant with Mittani, that was 100 years after arrival of Mycenians in Greece, before there were no charriots in western Anatolia.
Swords were invented on the steppe in western Ukraine 100 years before arrival of Myceneans.
Before arrival of Myceneans only western steppe and the Carpathian basin had swords.
It is very, very unlikely that Myceneans came through Aantolia.

In Urartu, proto-Armenia the official language was a Hurrite language, but Urartu was a multi-ethnic and multi-linguistic confederation.
The Armenian language came to the surface very late, when there was a switch of dynasty in Urartu.
It was not the destruction of Urartu, it was continuation, but the new ruling elite was a tribe that belonged to the Urartu confederation before and who spoke Armenian.
We don't know when this Armenian-speaking tribe arrived and joined the Urartu federation.
They may be the Trialeti people, they may have been the Mushki who entered Anatolia ca 3.2 ka and were fighting the Assyrians then.
We don't know whether the Z2103 or L584 spoke proto-Armenian, but if Armenian is related to Greek, I doubt it.

IronSide
08-05-17, 12:23
Proto-Armenians were present in Armenian highlands during Urartu, I use this as reference: (The problem of the proto Armenians and Armenian ethnogenesis (http://armscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/The-Problem-of-Identification-of-the-Proto-Armenians-A-Critical-Review1.pdf)) it's a good read if you are interested, so I recommend you read it all :)

''Many scholars have written about the linguistic traces of the Armenian ethnic element in Ancient Near East. The most significant are Djahukyan‘s works, where he examines the borrowings of the Armenian language from ancient cuneiform languages, shows that it is possible for some cuneiform languages to have borrowings from Proto Armenian and that numerous ancient names of the Armenian Highland and adjacent regions can be etymologized in Armenian. Furthermore, the arguments adduced by Diakonoff are important, as he, more than any other scholar, was familiar with the ancient history, cultures and languages of the region (Djahukian 1986; Djahukian 1987: 312-321, 417-474; Djahukian 1988: 148-161, Djahukian 1988a; Djahukian 1992; Djahukian 1992a: 34-38, 53-59; Diakonoff 1967: 135; Diakonoff 1985: 602-603; Diakonoff 1992).Even the most credible reciprocal borrowings of Armenian and cuneiform languages cannot localize Proto-Armenians more precisely than ―not far from the
speakers of those languages.‖ In order to localize them in the Armenian Highland first of all we need to examine the onomastics of the Highland. Until the first millennium BC, our data are poor and concern only the southern and western regions. It is the Urartian sources that mention a large number of proper names throughout the Highland (names of men, deities, tribes, cities, lands, rivers, mountains). Unlike, for example, the Hayasian names, a significant number of the Urartain place names are localized fairly accurately, and moreover, many of them present early versions of the well known Armenian toponyms.

The following question is essential: were there speakers of Proto-Armenian in the Armenian Highland in the pre-Urartian period (i.e., before the mid-9 th century BC) or did they appear here during the existence or after the fall of Urartu? If we show that there is at least one borrowing in Urartian from Armenian and that some place and personal names mentioned in the Urartian sources have Armenian origin, then we can say that Earliest Armenian was spoken along with Urartian in the Armenian Highland.
Below are presented a few indicative examples from the dozens adduced by various authors.

The Armenian conjunction ew ‗and‘ originates from the Indo-European *epi- (> *ewi > ew). The native origin of the conjunction is beyond all doubt. It is borrowed in Urartian, where it appears as eue, e’a (to read: ewa), eia, eai (the two last forms are the results of a development peculiar to Urartian). They are known from the first Urartian records of the last quarter of the 9th century BC (Arutyunyan 2001: 442). Hence, Urartian was in contact with Armenian prior to this time. In order to show that this conjunction is borrowed from Armenian, Diakonoff notes that it is not known in earlier attested Hurrian and other North-Eastern Caucasian languages (which are considered to be related to Hurro-Urartian). Hurrian is an ergative language and does not use non-affixed conjunctions. There exists a good analogy: another ancient ergative language, Old Sumerian, does not have non-affixed conjunctions, but Neo-Sumerian has acquired a new conjunction u ‗and‘ from Akkadian with which it co-existed (Diakonoff 1992: 52-53).

The river name Arsania, attested in an Assyrian source in the mid-9th century BC,corresponds to Arm. Aracani < *Arcaniyā, Gk. ‘Arsaniva" (Turk. Murat-su, Arutyunyan1985: 44). Notably, there was a homonymic city to the southwest of Lake Van. This 9name has an apparent Armenian etymology: cf. Indo-European *Harg’- ‗bright, white,‘with the reflection arc- peculiar to Armenian (e.g. arcat ‗silver‘), and the suffix -ani < *-a-niyā (for the Indo-European hydronyms from *Harg’- see e.g. Krahe 1962: 8, n. 2, 31-32).The Upper (Western) Euphrates in different languages and in different periods hasbeen called: Hitt. Mala, Urart. Melia(ini), Gk. Mevla" (Arutyunuan 2001: 514); cf. IndoEuropean*mel- ‗black,‘ with the suffix *-iyā, and the Turkish name of the river: Kara-su‗Black water.‘ Significantly, the main tributary of Aracani Mełraget has similarappellations: its ancient name is Meł (cf. *mel- ‗black‘), while currently it is called Karasu(Yeremyan 1963: 70). Evidently, these names reflect certain mythological andcosmological ideas on the black and white contrast, localized along the river Arsania (Petrosyan 2002: 186).

The ―royal city‖ of the first known Urartian king Aramu, Arsašku(nu) may beidentifyed with the Armenian Arčēš (Turk. Erciş) to the north of Lake Van andetymologized from the Indo-European *Harg’esk(h)o- (derivative of *Harg’- ‗bright,white‘) > *Arcesk‘o- > Arčēšo, Gen. Arčišoy (an almost precise rendering of Arcesk‘o isAssyr. -). Arčēš was the denomination of the northern gulf of Lake Van as wellas the whole lake itself (cf. also Gk. ‘Arsh(sh)nhv /Strabo, 11.14.8/, Arab. Arĵiš ‗LakeVan‘); a city to the north of the lake was called Arcak ‗small Arc‘ (later: Arcke = Turk.Adilcevaz); moreover, a small lake to the east of Lake Van is called Arčišak > Arčak‗small Arčēš,‘ Turk. Erçek. Thus, this early Urartian capital could have been named (andonce populated) by the Proto-Armenians (Petrosyan 2002: 71 ff., with bibliography).5Aramu (var. Arame, Arama) coincides with the name of the second Armenianeponym Aram (*Aramo/ā, with the regular disappearance of the final vowel inArmenian). As has been noted, this was the epithetal name of the ‗black‘ thunder god. Inthe ancient states of the region, theonyms were frequently used as anthroponyms, cf. Hitt.Telepinus, Arnuwandas, Luw. Tarhunzas, Yarris, Runtiyas, Assyr. Ašur, Hur. Kumarpi,etc.

Tuarasiniei hubi 'Tuarasian Valley' attested in the second quarter of the 8th century century BC (may correspond to Tuarizu of an Assyrian source of the mid-8th centuryBC), corresponds with the Armenian Tuaracoy tap‘, Tuaracatap‘ ‗plain of tuarac,‘ Located to the north of the upper streams of the river Arsania, north from the district of Hark‗ (Arutyunyan 1985: 185-186). For the etymology of this name cf. Arm. tuarac‗graze cattle,‘ tuaracatap‘ ‗place for grazing bull-calves,‘ consisting of the words tuar‗bull-calf‘ and aracil ‗graze,‘ from which the latter is doubtlessly native Armenian (IndoEuropean*treg’-); tuar is usually etymologized from the Indo-European *dīpHro- (cf.also Semitic *taur-, see Djahukian 1988: 154, n. 52).

Diusini/Tiusini (di can also be read as ti, see Diakonoff 1958: 32): the name of aking, ruler of the federation of Etiuni, which encompassed the northern regions of theArmenian Highland. This name, attested in the middle of the 8th century BC, iscomparable to the Indo-European (especially Balkanic) anthroponymic pattern *deiwo-‗god‘ + *g’en- ‗birth, kin,‘ cf. Gk. Διογένης, Thrac. Διυξενι, Diuzenus, also Gk. Θιογενεις, rom θεός ‗god‘ (Gindin 1981: 42, 77). For the Armenian interpretation, cf. tiw ‗daytime‘(< *deiwo- ‗god,‘ ‗day‘), or dik‗, gen. pl. diwc‘ ‗gods‘ (*dhēs-) and cin ‗birth, kin.‘In these names the presence of the sound /c/ is essential, as it represents thereflection of the Indo-European *g’ peculiar only to Armenian (this sound does not existin other Indo-European languages). In Armeno-Urartian lexical and onomastical parallels Urartian s corresponds only to Armenian c (Diakonoff 1958: 36; Djahukian 1987: 430-431),which in the considered etymologies is indicative of the Armenian language.

These names may substantiate the presence of the Proto-Armenians in the Armenian Highlands particularly in the Area of the Upper streams of arsania, north of Lake Van, the domain of the patriarch Hayk, as well as to the west and north of it beforethe formation of the Urartian Empire.6Judging by the Proto-Armenian etymologies ofAramu and Ar ašku(nu) one cannot rule out the possibility that Aramu was an Armenianruler who fought against the Assyrians in the north of Lake Van and surroundings, i.e., inthe area of Hayk‘s domain. After Aramu, the ruling dynasty of Urartu was changed and the new capital Tuspa (Van) was established (see below, in the discussion of theEtiuni hypothesis).7 Toponyms, especially hydronyms, present the earliest strata oflanguages, and might have existed in pre-Urartian times, many centuries before their firstattestations.''

bicicleur
08-05-17, 16:20
it confirms what I told above : Urartu was a multi-ethnic and multi-linguistic confederation.

IronSide
08-05-17, 18:09
it confirms what I told above : Urartu was a multi-ethnic and multi-linguistic confederation. That is true, and one of these ethnicities were Armenians, if not the most important and numerous, because it caused the Urartian language to adopt Armenian words of Indo-European origin.


I'm not a linguist, but I often read Greek and Armenian language are related.
Myceneans spoke Greek or proto-Greek, there was no language shift between Myceaneans and classical Greeks.
Myceneans came with both charriots and swords.
Charriots came to the northern Levant with Mittani, that was 100 years after arrival of Mycenians in Greece, before there were no charriots in western Anatolia.
Swords were invented on the steppe in western Ukraine 100 years before arrival of Myceneans.
Before arrival of Myceneans only western steppe and the Carpathian basin had swords.

It is very, very unlikely that Myceneans came through Aantolia.
If Greek and Armenian were similar, then that's probably because they had their origin in the Catacomb culture (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/catacomb_culture.shtml), they don't need to have the same migration route, Armenians went south of the caucasus mountains, while Greeks migrated from west of the black sea, if they indeed originated in Catacomb.


We don't know when this Armenian-speaking tribe arrived and joined the Urartu federation.
They may be the Trialeti people, they may have been the Mushki who entered Anatolia ca 3.2 ka and were fighting the Assyrians then.
We don't know whether the Z2103 or L584 spoke proto-Armenian, but if Armenian is related to Greek, I doubt it. We know this: there were Indo-European people that established Trialeti in the Armenian highlands, where did they go ? evaporated ? if not Armenians then who ? There is no Archaeological evidence of a migration from the Balkans, but there is in Trialeti from the north of the Caucasus.

L584 (downstream of Z2103) is the most common form of R1b in the Caucasus and the highest occurring in Armenia, all top level clades are south of the Caucasus mountains, not the Balkans, it's age is 4700 ybp, pause for a moment and think about this, why would a haplogroup 4700 years old, that should have originated in the Balkans according to some, migrate with all top level clades 3200 years ago, not leaving a single clade behind in the Balkans ? even L584*?
The complexity of L584 should have been in the Balkans and not in Caucasus.

consult the ftdna project (R1b basal clades (https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b-basal-subclades/about/background))

LeBrok
08-05-17, 18:16
Here are genomes of BA people from Armenia area. We can see steady rise of NE Euro and American admixtures during Bronze Age, which indicates arrival of Steppe people, most likely IEs. Judging quickly by numbers up to half of population came from Steppe/Yamnaya like.
The last dude is modern Armenian, and it is so much different from most BA guys. Modern Armenians look more like the first guy from EBA, before Steppe invasion. It seems that BA Steppe invaders left Armenia, and population has rebuilt from original local enclaves.




M536324
I1658

M182163
I1656

M930063
RISE423

M691697
RISE407

Modern



Armenia EBA

Armenia MLBA

Armenia MBA

Armenia LBA

Armenian


Run time
8.22

Run time
8.42

Run time
6.24

Run time
3.92

Run time



S-Indian
0.27

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
1


Baloch
25.53

Baloch
26.71

Baloch
23.13

Baloch
28.22

Baloch
18


Caucasian
56.75

Caucasian
42.8

Caucasian
38.66

Caucasian
30.75

Caucasian
57


NE-Euro
4.79

NE-Euro
16.99

NE-Euro
18.57

NE-Euro
24.77

NE-Euro
3


SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
0.54

Siberian
-

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
-

Papuan
0.92

Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
-

American
0.12

American
1.3

American
1.54

American


Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
0.59

Beringian
-

Beringian
-


Mediterranean
5.88

Mediterranean
9.14

Mediterranean
9.34

Mediterranean
6.98

Mediterranean
8


SW-Asian
6.45

SW-Asian
4.23

SW-Asian
4.94

SW-Asian
6.38

SW-Asian
13


San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.33

W-African
-

W-African
1.99

W-African
1.36

W-African

bicicleur
08-05-17, 20:27
If Greek and Armenian were similar, then that's probably because they had their origin in the Catacomb culture (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/catacomb_culture.shtml), they don't need to have the same migration route, Armenians went south of the caucasus mountains, while Greeks migrated from west of the black sea, if they indeed originated in Catacomb.

so both languages would have branched of from Catacomb, Armenian 4.7 ka and Greek 3.6 ka
another branch in the Carpathian Basin 3.7 ka would have gone extinct, and the main steppe branch as well

and all of these would have been Z2103

Promenade
08-05-17, 20:58
Somewhat unrelated, but is it true that the oldest Columns ever discovered were from the Maykop Culture?

This is the claim made on wikipedia, yet I can't find any mention of it elsewhere. The source they give is a book from 2000 written in German called- "The Early Bronze Age burial ground of Klady and the Maykop culture in Northwest Caucasus" by a Russian archeologist named Alexej Rezepkin.

I checked the book you shared with us for info IronSide, but unfortantely they did not even mention the Maykop Culture once.

Angela
08-05-17, 21:20
Here are genomes of BA people from Armenia area. We can see steady rise of NE Euro and American admixtures during Bronze Age, which indicates arrival of Steppe people, most likely IEs. Judging quickly by numbers up to half of population came from Steppe/Yamnaya like.
The last dude is modern Armenian, and it is so much different from most BA guys. Modern Armenians look more like the first guy from EBA, before Steppe invasion. It seems that BA Steppe invaders left Armenia, and population has rebuilt from original local enclaves.




M536324
I1658

M182163
I1656

M930063
RISE423

M691697
RISE407

Modern



Armenia EBA

Armenia MLBA

Armenia MBA

Armenia LBA

Armenian


Run time
8.22

Run time
8.42

Run time
6.24

Run time
3.92

Run time



S-Indian
0.27

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
1


Baloch
25.53

Baloch
26.71

Baloch
23.13

Baloch
28.22

Baloch
18


Caucasian
56.75

Caucasian
42.8

Caucasian
38.66

Caucasian
30.75

Caucasian
57


NE-Euro
4.79

NE-Euro
16.99

NE-Euro
18.57

NE-Euro
24.77

NE-Euro
3


SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
0.54

Siberian
-

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
-

Papuan
0.92

Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
-

American
0.12

American
1.3

American
1.54

American


Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
0.59

Beringian
-

Beringian
-


Mediterranean
5.88

Mediterranean
9.14

Mediterranean
9.34

Mediterranean
6.98

Mediterranean
8


SW-Asian
6.45

SW-Asian
4.23

SW-Asian
4.94

SW-Asian
6.38

SW-Asian
13


San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.33

W-African
-

W-African
1.99

W-African
1.36

W-African


Wow! Caucasian went from 31 to 57, back to what it was originally. Either there was resurgence in the original inhabitants or a new population moved in. How little Med they have, too, in all eras.

LeBrok
08-05-17, 22:11
Wow! Caucasian went from 31 to 57, back to what it was originally. Either there was resurgence in the original inhabitants or a new population moved in. How little Med they have, too, in all eras. I was surprised too. Looking at low level of NE Euro and Med admixtures makes it unlikely that Armenians came from Balkans. Genetically they look like Neolithic inhabitants of this area who speak IE language now.

Here is genome of Georgian, and it is very distinct too. Very Caucasian I would say, very local. They had to be very isolated population for ages!



Modern



Georgian



Run time



S-Indian
0


Baloch
17


Caucasian
72


NE-Euro
6


SE-Asian
-


Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-


American


Beringian
-


Mediterranean
1


SW-Asian
1


San
-


E-African
-


Pygmy
-


W-African

IronSide
08-05-17, 22:31
During the Middle Bronze III phase, the wealth of the burial inventories seen in the preceding phase begins to diminish such that, in the complexes represented by Karmir-Berd or Karmir-Berd/Sevan Uzerlik pottery, relatively few bronze artefacts have been recorded. Furthermore, in the complexes that signify the end of Middle Bronze Age, the distinctive painted pottery becomes increasingly rare, yielding to the incised gray and blackware ceramics that came to predominate under the Lchashen-Metsamor horizon of the Late Bronze Age.

The passage above might indicate a migration of some sort ? people leaving, maybe the ones with the high NE European admixture.

Angela
09-05-17, 00:20
I was surprised too. Looking at low level of NE Euro and Med admixtures makes it unlikely that Armenians came from Balkans. Genetically they look like Neolithic inhabitants of this area who speak IE language now.

Here is genome of Georgian, and it is very distinct too. Very Caucasian I would say, very local. They had to be very isolated population for ages!



Modern



Georgian



Run time



S-Indian
0


Baloch
17


Caucasian
72


NE-Euro
6


SE-Asian
-


Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-


American


Beringian
-


Mediterranean
1


SW-Asian
1


San
-


E-African
-


Pygmy
-


W-African


If the Armenian speakers came from the Balkans it must have been a very small group whose language remained but whose genes were diluted to virtual disappearance. I don't know if that's a very likely scenario. However, even if came south through the Caucasus, I don't see much steppe in them today.

Arame
09-05-17, 10:25
Bicicleur

There is no consensus about Greek Armenian clade. For example Clackson made a case that there is no such a clade while Ringe thinks there is.
But if such a link exists then the reason why such a clade exists is because E V13 was indo europeanised by Z2103. The Balkanic branch of Z2103.

If it was indo europeanised by R1a then You will see Greeko Aryan clade or Greeko Balto Slavic clade.

Arame
09-05-17, 10:52
Now let's see the situation with R1b clades in West Asia.
So let's start from R1b-Z2106->CTS7763. Based on STRs from Hollard paper this branch is from Afanasievo.
Not surprisingly only 2% of Armenians have it. But neighboring Talyshs could have a lot.
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/TalyshDNA?iframe=yresults

This mean that there was a migration from Afanasievo to Iran. And North Iranians could have a lot off Z2106-CTS7763.

When this Afanasievo folks came? Here is this branch.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-CTS8966/

Notice the 4600 year old cluster in West Asia.
So they could be this Gutians. Why. Because Henning analysed Gutian names and came to conclusion that they were related to Tocharians.



In a posthumously-published article, W.B. Henning suggested that the different endings of the king names resembled case endings in the Tocharian languages, a branch of Indo-European known from texts found in the Tarim Basin (in the northwest of modern China) dating from the 6th to 8th centuries CE.[5] Henning also compared the name Guti with Kuči, the native name of the Tocharian city of Kucha, and with the name of the Yuezhi, pastoral nomads described in Chinese records as living to the east of the Tarim in the 2nd century BCE,[5] although the latter name is usually reconstructed with a *ŋʷ- initial in Old Chinese.[6] He also compared Tukriš, the name of neighbours of the Guti, with the name twγry found in Old Turkish manuscripts from the early 9th century CE and thought to refer to the Tocharians.[5] In a posthumously-published article, W.B. Henning suggested that the different endings of the king names resembled case endings in the Tocharian languages, a branch of Indo-European known from texts found in the Tarim Basin (in the northwest of modern China) dating from the 6th to 8th centuries CE.[5] Henning also compared the name Guti with Kuči, the native name of the Tocharian city of Kucha, and with the name of the Yuezhi, pastoral nomads described in Chinese records as living to the east of the Tarim in the 2nd century BCE,[5] although the latter name is usually reconstructed with a *ŋʷ- initial in Old Chinese.[6] He also compared Tukriš, the name of neighbours of the Guti, with the name twγry found in Old Turkish manuscripts from the early 9th century CE and thought to refer to the Tocharians.[5]
-------

R1b-L277 also could be related to this migration. Tocharians could have also R1a (Tarim mummies) but because their branch is unknown so I can't say much.

One of L277 is clearly Armenian.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-M12135/
But I never said that it is THE proto Armenia. So they are joiners.
On the side Yazidi Kurds have a lot off L277. And it is Kurds who claim Gutian ancestry and not Armenians.

In the next post I will say more about L584 and how it relates to Armenian tribes ( Hayassa, Mushki, Urumu/Arme ) . Also Manneans ( the L584 in NW Iran was from Mannean period) and maybe Cappadocians.

Milan.M
09-05-17, 12:04
Bicicleur

There is no consensus about Greek Armenian clade. For example Clackson made a case that there is no such a clade while Ringe thinks there is.
But if such a link exists then the reason why such a clade exists is because E V13 was indo europeanised by Z2103. The Balkanic branch of Z2103.

If it was indo europeanised by R1a then You will see Greeko Aryan clade or Greeko Balto Slavic clade.

There is Greaco-Aryan clade but also known under the name Graeco-Armeno-Aryan.I agree that Armenian did not came from the Balkans,moreover I think that proto Greeks too arrived from that territory somewhere.

Milan.M
09-05-17, 12:50
If the Tarim mummies are really Tocharians which most probably they are,the haplogroup they belong to is R1a,then the label of certain haplogroups or clades of R1a as satem or Easterners(Indo Iranians,Balto-Slavs etc) or R1b as centum doesn't make sense, rather the time of their separation.In my opinion the Tocharians,Hittites(perhaps) and Italo Celts will be the first to separate.Then we have satem innovation which will affect almost all of other daughter languages Indo Iranian,Balto Slavic,Armenian,Albanian,Thracian,Dacian partly Greek with exception of Germanic.Despite this division of Centum/Satem some languages seem to be more close related to each other whether is geographic proximity or shared history, for example in my opinion Germanic(centum) is more closely related to Balto Slavic than to Greek (centum) or the Greek (centum) more closely related to Indo-Aryan and Armenian(satem) than to Italo Celtic or Germanic(centum).

bicicleur
09-05-17, 16:26
If the Tarim mummies are really Tocharians which most probably they are haplogroup they belong to is R1a,then the label of certain haplogroups or clades of R1a as satem or Easterners(Indo Iranians,Balto-Slavs etc) or R1b centum doesn't make sense, rather the time of their separation.In my opinion the Tocharians,Hittites(perhaps) and Italo Celts will be the first to separate.Then we have satem innovation which will affect almost all of other daughter languages Indo Iranian,Balto Slavic,Armenian,Albanian,Thracian,Dacian partly Greek with exception of Germanic.Despite this division of Centum/Satem some languages seem to be more close related to each other whether is geographic proximity or shared history, for example in my opinion Germanic(centum) is more closely related to Balto Slavic than to Greek (centum).Or the Greek (centum) more closely related to Indo-Aryan and Armenian(satem) than to Italo Celtic or Germanic(centum).

AFAIK the Tarim mummies are R1a1a-M198xM417
there is no proof they are Tocharian, neither Afanasievo
but it is possible, of course

Milan.M
09-05-17, 16:54
AFAIK the Tarim mummies are R1a1a-M198xM417
there is no proof they are Tocharian, neither Afanasievo
but it is possible, of course
I agree except if they can test Tocharian speakers we can throw away any doubt,anyway there in Tarim basin where we should find Indo Iranian if any IE speakers we have centum language and not related to Indo Iranians,if they aren't some wandering Celts which is doubtful considering they take this language as archaic,but anything is possible, anyway for now I'm inclined to think Tarim mummies are Tocharians.

Fire Haired14
09-05-17, 19:25
The Tarim mummies are negative for Z93. They haven't been tested for M417.

MarkoZ
09-05-17, 21:14
Swords were invented on the steppe in western Ukraine 100 years before arrival of Myceneans.
Before arrival of Myceneans only western steppe and the Carpathian basin had swords.


The first rather short 'sword' is from the Transcaucasus. The first unambiguous swords appear in Anatolia (Alaca Höyük) and spread into the Caucasus, the Levant and the Aegean with quite some delay.

Afaik Ukraine and the western steppe never hosted particularly advanced metallurgy.

The chariot, too, likely spread into Europe from Anatolia. Littauer & Crouwel have published a very technical analysis of the first Mycenean chariots, which is a bit over my head to be frank. Drews summarizes the evidence in his The Coming of the Greeks (p. 173):


Most important of all is the fact (long acknowledged by specialists) that the chariots of Late Helladic Greece are in all essentials parallel to those of the Near East. Wiesner's thesis—that Indo-Europeans from the north brought the chariot simultaneously to Greece and to the Near East early in the sixteenth century—has been rendered untenable by the evidence that the horse-drawn chariot was known in the Near East well before that time. As both Schachermeyr and Crouwel have plainly said, the chariots used by the firstshaft-grave princes came to Greece from the east.

Promenade
10-05-17, 00:11
If the Tarim mummies are really Tocharians which most probably they are,the haplogroup they belong to is R1a,then the label of certain haplogroups or clades of R1a as satem or Easterners(Indo Iranians,Balto-Slavs etc) or R1b as centum doesn't make sense, rather the time of their separation.In my opinion the Tocharians,Hittites(perhaps) and Italo Celts will be the first to separate.Then we have satem innovation which will affect almost all of other daughter languages Indo Iranian,Balto Slavic,Armenian,Albanian,Thracian,Dacian partly Greek with exception of Germanic.Despite this division of Centum/Satem some languages seem to be more close related to each other whether is geographic proximity or shared history, for example in my opinion Germanic(centum) is more closely related to Balto Slavic than to Greek (centum) or the Greek (centum) more closely related to Indo-Aryan and Armenian(satem) than to Italo Celtic or Germanic(centum).

Armenians are satem speakers with predominantly R1b, I don't see why there can't also be a centum speaking group with R1a.

Sile
10-05-17, 20:26
The Tarim mummies are negative for Z93. They haven't been tested for M417.

are they found with negative Z93 or is it that Z93 was not present in these mummies?

bicicleur
13-05-17, 05:25
The first rather short 'sword' is from the Transcaucasus. The first unambiguous swords appear in Anatolia (Alaca Höyük) and spread into the Caucasus, the Levant and the Aegean with quite some delay.

Afaik Ukraine and the western steppe never hosted particularly advanced metallurgy.

The chariot, too, likely spread into Europe from Anatolia. Littauer & Crouwel have published a very technical analysis of the first Mycenean chariots, which is a bit over my head to be frank. Drews summarizes the evidence in his The Coming of the Greeks (p. 173):

swords are long daggers
around 1700 BC technology appeared to make bronze swords of over 1 meter long
Bronze Age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age) swords (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swords) appear from around the 17th century BC, in the Black Sea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea) region and the Aegean (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegean_Sea), as a further development of the dagger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagger).
when did those swords appear in Alaca Hoyük?

where and when did first horse-drawn charriots with spoked wheels appear in Anatolia?
the charriot was not of practical use for the Myceneans, it was more a ceremonial status symbol

The Coming of the Greeks is dated 1988.
Barry Cunliffe certainly knew about this, but in 'Europe between the Oceans', 2008 page 222-223 he favours the Ural-Volga steppe-forest area for earliest known charriots with an early introduction into the Carpathian Basin.

MarkoZ
14-05-17, 14:51
swords are long daggers
around 1700 BC technology appeared to make bronze swords of over 1 meter long
Bronze Age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age) swords (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swords) appear from around the 17th century BC, in the Black Sea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea) region and the Aegean (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegean_Sea), as a further development of the dagger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagger).
when did those swords appear in Alaca Hoyük?

where and when did first horse-drawn charriots with spoked wheels appear in Anatolia?
the charriot was not of practical use for the Myceneans, it was more a ceremonial status symbol

The Coming of the Greeks is dated 1988.
Barry Cunliffe certainly knew about this, but in 'Europe between the Oceans', 2008 page 222-223 he favours the Ural-Volga steppe-forest area for earliest known charriots with an early introduction into the Carpathian Basin.

According to Ziad Sherazadishvilli the first long sword appears 2,500 B.C. at aforementioned Alaca Höyük. This is after centuries of local experimentation with long daggers, early rapiers and such. The article can be found in the International Symposium on Anatolia-South Caucasus Cultures: Proceedings I.

The spoked is first attested in Anatolia in Kültepe Karum II level in a cylinder seal. The first three-dimensional spoked wheels on a metal toy are found at the Burnt Palace of Acemhöyük dated to the 19th-18th century B.C. . My source is The Earliest Three-Dimensional Evidence for Spoked Wheels ​by Littauer and Crouwel.

bicicleur
14-05-17, 15:29
According to Ziad Sherazadishvilli the first long sword appears 2,500 B.C. at aforementioned Alaca Höyük. This is after centuries of local experimentation with long daggers, early rapiers and such. The article can be found in the International Symposium on Anatolia-South Caucasus Cultures: Proceedings I.

The spoked is first attested in Anatolia in Kültepe Karum II level in a cylinder seal. The first three-dimensional spoked wheels on a metal toy are found at the Burnt Palace of Acemhöyük dated to the 19th-18th century B.C. . My source is The Earliest Three-Dimensional Evidence for Spoked Wheels ​by Littauer and Crouwel.

Swords in Alaca Hoyuk 800 years before they appeared elsewhere, if this is true, it is quite remarkable and we should hear more about this the coming years.

I don't know about the chariots.
Fact is that the Mitanni ca 1500 BC became a military force who got the upperhand over both the Hittites and the Egyptians due to their horse-drawn chariots.
They must have had better chariots or more likely better trained horses. And the horse-trainers they were speaking an Indic language, Sintashta-derived.
The Hittites, and probably also the Egyptians invited Mitanni horse-trainers to their courts in order to fill the technological gap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kikkuli

Yetos
14-05-17, 17:34
the first swords with meaning of sword were made by Minoans

although at Arslan tepe known as Melite Malateia Malatya around 3000 BC
they found shorter bars that might be swords.

IronSide
15-06-17, 00:52
I wanted to share this with you, since it's relevant to the topic of this thread.

https://www.academia.edu/25264019/Royal_tombs_with_horse_sacrifices_in_Nerkin_Naver_ Armenia_middle_bronze_age_ (https://www.academia.edu/25264019/Royal_tombs_with_horse_sacrifices_in_Nerkin_Naver_ Armenia_middle_bronze_age)

Interesting is they found pots with depictions of six wheels, which most probably denoted three chariots linked together.

https://html2-f.scribdassets.com/1g6yod4e8059639l/images/19-784f882492.jpg

IronSide
31-10-17, 20:20
Here are genomes of BA people from Armenia area. We can see steady rise of NE Euro and American admixtures during Bronze Age, which indicates arrival of Steppe people, most likely IEs. Judging quickly by numbers up to half of population came from Steppe/Yamnaya like.
The last dude is modern Armenian, and it is so much different from most BA guys. Modern Armenians look more like the first guy from EBA, before Steppe invasion. It seems that BA Steppe invaders left Armenia, and population has rebuilt from original local enclaves.


M536324
I1658

M182163
I1656

M930063
RISE423

M691697
RISE407

Modern



Armenia EBA

Armenia MLBA

Armenia MBA

Armenia LBA

Armenian


Run time
8.22

Run time
8.42

Run time
6.24

Run time
3.92

Run time



S-Indian
0.27

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
1


Baloch
25.53

Baloch
26.71

Baloch
23.13

Baloch
28.22

Baloch
18


Caucasian
56.75

Caucasian
42.8

Caucasian
38.66

Caucasian
30.75

Caucasian
57


NE-Euro
4.79

NE-Euro
16.99

NE-Euro
18.57

NE-Euro
24.77

NE-Euro
3


SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
0.54

Siberian
-

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
-

Papuan
0.92

Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
-

American
0.12

American
1.3

American
1.54

American


Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
0.59

Beringian
-

Beringian
-


Mediterranean
5.88

Mediterranean
9.14

Mediterranean
9.34

Mediterranean
6.98

Mediterranean
8


SW-Asian
6.45

SW-Asian
4.23

SW-Asian
4.94

SW-Asian
6.38

SW-Asian
13


San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.33

W-African
-

W-African
1.99

W-African
1.36

W-African


Their genetics (Middle BA Armenia) are interesting:
1 Caucasian 30.35
2 Baloch 28.51
3 NE-Euro 20.9
4 SW-Asian 7
5 American 6.49
6 W-African 3.48
7 San 3.27

another result:

1 Caucasian 38.66
2 Baloch 23.13
3 NE-Euro 18.57
4 Mediterranean 9.34
5 SW-Asian 4.94
6 W-African 1.99
7 American 1.3
8 Papuan 0.92
9 Beringian 0.59
10 Siberian 0.54

Both have African admixture, the source of this I believe is Northern Europe, since NE Euro and Mediterranean also increased.


The Dodecad K12 calculator revealed a considerable amount of African admixture, which came as a big surprise since no African admixture is found in Scandinavia today. The two Funnelbeaker samples from Sweden tested below, display about 6% and 11% of African admixture respectively. How it got there is still a matter for debate, but the most likely explanation is that it came with Megalithic people from Iberia, who in turn inherited North African admixture from South Levantine Neolithic farmers who reached Iberia via North Africa. Remnants of this African DNA were found in every prehistoric sample in Scandinavia from the Chalcolithic until the Late Iron Age, as well as among the Anglo-Saxons

I find this interesting because it might explain how my haplgroup I2c2 (Mesolithic Sweden), A1b1, C-V20, H2 reached Armenia
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/ArmeniaDNAProject?iframe=yresults

tyuiopman
31-01-20, 05:52
Here are genomes of BA people from Armenia area. We can see steady rise of NE Euro and American admixtures during Bronze Age, which indicates arrival of Steppe people, most likely IEs. Judging quickly by numbers up to half of population came from Steppe/Yamnaya like.
The last dude is modern Armenian, and it is so much different from most BA guys. Modern Armenians look more like the first guy from EBA, before Steppe invasion. It seems that BA Steppe invaders left Armenia, and population has rebuilt from original local enclaves.




M536324
I1658

M182163
I1656

M930063
RISE423

M691697
RISE407

Modern



Armenia EBA

Armenia MLBA

Armenia MBA

Armenia LBA

Armenian


Run time
8.22

Run time
8.42

Run time
6.24

Run time
3.92

Run time



S-Indian
0.27

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
1


Baloch
25.53

Baloch
26.71

Baloch
23.13

Baloch
28.22

Baloch
18


Caucasian
56.75

Caucasian
42.8

Caucasian
38.66

Caucasian
30.75

Caucasian
57


NE-Euro
4.79

NE-Euro
16.99

NE-Euro
18.57

NE-Euro
24.77

NE-Euro
3


SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
0.54

Siberian
-

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
-

Papuan
0.92

Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
-

American
0.12

American
1.3

American
1.54

American


Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
0.59

Beringian
-

Beringian
-


Mediterranean
5.88

Mediterranean
9.14

Mediterranean
9.34

Mediterranean
6.98

Mediterranean
8


SW-Asian
6.45

SW-Asian
4.23

SW-Asian
4.94

SW-Asian
6.38

SW-Asian
13


San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.33

W-African
-

W-African
1.99

W-African
1.36

W-African




I know that I'm a bit late to the party, maybe we can resume it?

Could the MLBA/MBA Steppe-derived "Armenians" actually be Indo-Iranians and not Armenian speakers? For example, the Mitanni ruling class?

tyuiopman
31-01-20, 05:56
Arame, do you still get on here ever? Any updates about the Trialeti genetic samples?

G2ian
24-06-20, 01:23
The Oxus civilisation is thought to have been Proto-Indo-Iranian and predominantly R1a-Z93. However R1b tribes did live in Central Asia before that, at least since Afanasievo. Nowadays R1b is more common in Turkmenistan than anywhere else in Central Asia, while R1a is higher around Kyrgyzstan. Yet the Oxus civilisation ranged from Turkmenistan to Kyrgyzstan via Tajikistan, so it's not clear if R1a tribes founded that culture in an area where R1b was already present, or if they came together. What we do know is that the Proto-Indo-Iranians continued west to Iran, Armenia and northern Mesopotamia, where they appear as the Mitanni from 1500 BCE.

It has also been suggested that the Gutians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutian_people), who lived in the Zagros around 2200 BCE and were described as fair-skinned and blond, were of Indo-European stock. Even their name reminds of that of other ancient IE people like the Goths (aka Gauts or Gut-þiuda) and the Gauls/Gaels/Celts. Since the Indo-Iranian called themselves Aryans and came to the Middle East with chariot-riders from 1500 BCE, the Gutians might have been an earlier R1b tribe that had migrated to the Zagros from Turkmenistan. If they belonged to R1b-L584, they might have been the ancestors of modern Armenians.

The Gutians eventually conquered Sumer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutian_dynasty_of_Sumer) and ruled over Mesopotamia for a bit less than a century. They may also be responsible for the relatively high frequency of R1b in central-northern Iraq and in Kermanshah (west-central Iran), where R1b reaches 15-20% of the population, the highest in the Middle East after Armenia.
Gutian sounds like Gudian which in Kartvelian folklore are ugly men that kidnap children. Mothers scare their kids with Gudians in order to make them behave.


how it relates to Armenian tribes ( Hayassa, Mushki, Urumu/Arme )
Wow I didn't realize how many Armenians push this "Mushki-Armenian" hypothesis. They were Proto-Kartvelian Meskhs that lived in exact place where Meskhetian kingdom sprung up.