101 Ancient Eurasian Genomes Available Online

[Vukodav]

Proto Armenians arrived from the Balkans. Bronze Age Montenegrins were genetically identical to modern Italians. It's not a surprise if 1 or 2 ancient Armenians samples are somewhat similar to Bulgarians, Greeks and Italians.

By the way modern Armenians are Armenized Mesopotamians who migrated North to escape the Semitic and Turkic migrations.

 

[Vukodav]

I will try to explain it.

Look see it that way. From ancient Armenia perspective (in the middle)

Those ancient samples on the more on the left side of the "ancient Armenia" cirlcle will have Italians/Greeks/Bulgarians as their top 10 fit. But the following ten (11-20) are the North Caucasian/Iranic groups.

Those ancient samples who are more on the eastern part of the circle will have NorthCaucasians/Iranic groups as their top 10 fit but the following ten will be the South Euros.

The ancient samples are very similar just that their genetic make up position them in between modern South Euros and North Caucasians/Iranics. And depending on a few percentage more in one or the other component some will have South Euros in their top ten followed by North Caucasus/Iranics and vice versa.

If the table were going further down to top 20 we would see this as in the one Iron Age Armenian sample. Unfortunately I don't have the following 10. The person who made this admixture Oracle did not list the top 20.

North Caucasians and Iranians were more affected than Armenians by Indo European and other steppe migrations. That's why they are so similar to Southern Euros and ancient Armenians. Modern Armenians are very close to Assyrians and Arabs from the Levant, which proves that they are recent incomers and not native of Armenia.

 

[Arame]

Proto Armenians arrived from the Balkans. Bronze Age Montenegrins were genetically identical to modern Italians. It's not a surprise if 1 or 2 ancient Armenians samples are somewhat similar to Bulgarians, Greeks and Italians.

Yeah and the only problem is that Proto-Armenian from Balkans has a age of 3800 years ! Long before the supposed Iron age.
And Alan keeps saying that this guy is a Hurrian despite having a Y DNA R1b-Z2103 from Balkans?!

 

[Arame]

Some stuff about North East Caucasians their real age and their link to Hurrians.

Again, haplogroup J2a4b*-M67(xM92) comprised 51-79% of the Y
chromosomes in the Ingush and three Chechen populations (North-East Caucasus, Nakh
linguistic group), while, in the rest of the Caucasus, its frequency was not higher than 9%
(average 3%). Finally, haplogroup J1*-M267(xP58) comprised 44-99% of the Avar, Dargins,
Kaitak, Kubachi, and Lezghins (South-East Caucasus, Dagestan linguistic group) but was less
than 25% in Nakh populations and less than 5% in the rest of Caucasus.
.....

Therefore, linguistics explained a larger part of Y-chromosomal variation in the Caucasus.
These analyses indicated that linguistic diversity is at least as important as geography in
shaping the Y-chromosomal landscape, and suggested that the pronounced genetic structure of
the Caucasus might have evolved in parallel with the diversification of the North Caucasus
languages.
.....
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/05/13/molbev.msr126.full.pdf+html

also

Chechens are connected with the Middle East on the Y-DNA side, but closer to Europe in terms of mitochondrial DNA.
[I. Nasidze, E. Y. S. Ling, D. Quinque et al., "Mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosome Variation in the Caucasus," Annals of Human Genetics (2004) 68,205–221.]

Clearly linguistics in North Caucasus correlates with Y DNA markers. It was the result of male founder effect. The womens are more Steppe related that is why they are shifted to North Europe.
The most probable reason that this J2 and J1 moved to high mountains of Caucasus is the invasion of another population. Most probably the R1b.

I think the greatest irony of this 'Hurrian' R1b story will be the finding that this R1b-Z2103 came from Balkans. This will nicely explain their Atlantic shift.

...

One can take a look at the J2a-Y3612 subclades and see how young are the TMRCAs of this people. Clearly a Middle Bronze Age ( some after Iron Age) founder effect. They are even branches who start in Current Era.
J2a Hurrians fleeing to Caucasus from R1b invador Hurrians

http://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y3612/

Oh I forget to say that J2a-Y3612 people are Chechens and Ingushes. ( Nakh people )

...

I just can say that Nakh branch is only a subbranch of J2a4b. Most certainly their original homeland was in Nakhchivan or somewhere near lake Urmia a place known as Dzurdzuk.
Armenian historians mention their presence as Nakhchamats. So if they are the remnants of Hurrian populations then most certainly we can say that some branches of J2a spoke Hurrian.
But only a branch and not all J2a.

It could be also Greek historians also knew them as Gargareans. Ingush's endonym is Galgay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gargareans

 

[Arame]

Vukodav

Just wait some aDNA from Van and Malatya (if only Turkey will agree ) and You will be highly surprised by the data.

Thanks Davidski

No need to get rid off of Han and force them to be more similar to modern Armenians.
I think the situation in Armenia is quite clear and it was expected from Marc Haber study.
A lot off heterogeneity in Armenian highlands during Bronze Age. We will have great surprises from places like Van, Sasun, Erzrum, Malatya etc if we have aDNA from there. We will see a lot off SWA in south west a great deal of ENF in Western parts were G2a is high. Let's not forget that Sasun Armenians have 20% of T and 18% of R2a! Only God knows what we will see there. All this populations was homogenized by IE tribes culturally, and later politically by the iron rule of Urartu. Et voila!

 

[Alan]

Proto Armenians arrived from the Balkans. Bronze Age Montenegrins were genetically identical to modern Italians. It's not a surprise if 1 or 2 ancient Armenians samples are somewhat similar to Bulgarians, Greeks and Italians.

By the way modern Armenians are Armenized Mesopotamians who migrated North to escape the Semitic and Turkic migrations.

@Vukodav Those sample are not "proto Armenian", but look more like a ancient EEF population from the fertile crescent crossed with ANE from North Caucasus and Iranian plateau.

The modern Armenians do have additional Balkan ancestry. Eastmed and Caucasus is their signal (Proto Armenian is a mixture of Phrygian and native ancestry from Transcaucasus).

Now the reasion why Assyrians and Syriacs appear so similar is not because Armenians are a mix of them and Iranics.

It is because Assyrians and Syriacs are like Armenians with a good chunk of more Levantines admixture (Their Semite ancestry).

 

[Alan]

North Caucasians and Iranians were more affected than Armenians by Indo European and other steppe migrations. That's why they are so similar to Southern Euros and ancient Armenians. Modern Armenians are very close to Assyrians and Arabs from the Levant, which proves that they are recent incomers and not native of Armenia.

It's a two way influence from the Steppes to North Caucasus and vice versa.

The South Caucasus was inhabidet by Proto North Caucasic and Iranic type people. Modern Armenians are as close to modern South Europeans as Iranic groups. This image was made with ancient Armenian samples as the middle point. it doesn't show the genetic affinity of modern West Asians to South Europeans in general. It is just meant to show how ancient Armenian samples stay.

Not Armenians have much levantine admixture. Assyrian/Syriacs are a mix of Levantines and Armenians.

The ancient Armenia samples are closer to "West" because they have more of the undeluted Early Farmer ancestry.


Here I made a better map

 

[Alan]

Yeah and the only problem is that Proto-Armenian from Balkans has a age of 3800 years ! Long before the supposed Iron age.
And Alan keeps saying that this guy is a Hurrian despite having a Y DNA R1b-Z2103 from Balkans?!

Where do you see that R1b-Z2103 is from the Balkans? I don't know of many people who claims this. Some claim that R1b came from the Steppes but that is a whole other story.

2000-2500 BC predates any Indo European language and expansion and it is too early for the Proto Armenian language also. R1b has far higher diversity in the region where it is now than in the Balkans. The ancient Armenian samples fits perfectly the other half of Yamna ancestry. So no everything tends to this being native thing.

Most scientist agree that proto Armenian speakers reached Central Anatolia roughly 3200 years ago and hundred years later at the end of the Achamaenid Empire, the Transcaucasus. Of course proto Armenian might have formed 3800 years ago, but that doesn't say 3800 years ago but close to Balkans.
Anatolian speakers are the first attested Indo Europeans. Armenian does not show any sign of stronger resemblence to that. Armenian however looks like something in between Greek and Iranic which means it must have been in a region were it was in close connection to both Greek and Iranic. Central Anatolia around Cappadocia fits perfectly.

The genetic ancestry of those sampels show it. They look North Caucasic/Iranic (basically Hurrian) and they fit the timeframe. If Proto Armenian speakers had brought R1b, by that time they would show stronger affinity to modern Armenians.

 

[Arame]

Where do you see or have any evidence that R1b-Z2103 is from the Balkans?

How You explain the Atlantic shift? And in Your theory from where this R1b-Z2103 comes and who are they?

The genetic ancestry of those sampels show it. They look North Caucasic/Iranic (basically Hurrian) and they fit the timeframe.

What North Caucasic?
North Caucasics are founder effects by J2 and J1. And how they relate to R1b-Z2103? Their mtDNA is full of Steppe women so it's obvious they are so high in ANE and are shifted to Europe. Please read the stuff that I published.

 

[Alan]

As already said, take in mind this graph is only meant to show the relationship of modern populations to ancient Armenia, not necessary modern population to each other. This is only a two dimensional graph and impossible to show the exact relationship between all the groups only by two dimensions.


Armenians don't have more Semite ancestry, Mesopotamia was not Semite to begin with but Sumerian in South and ancient Armenian like in North. Semitic admixture came from Levant.

Armenians just seem to have a more Iron Age East Mediterranean ancestry which is also found in Levant. In connection to the Semitic admixture which came via the Assyrians for example. They might appear "Levant shifted". But in reality they are slightly more West (Balkan ancestry) and South (general Semitic influc) shifted. Assyrians/Syriacs on all the admixture runs I have seen so far look very similar to modern Armenians with the exception with twice as much Levant type ancestry. Makes me assume that the "Semite" influence to Armenians mut be exclusively ancient Aramaic/Assyrian.

Since they ultimately came from Levant.

 

[Alan]

How You explain the Atlantic shift? And in Your theory from where this R1b-Z2103 comes and who are they?

My friend how many times have I actually explained this here and on Eurogenes? Atlantic_Med is an EEF type ancestry. It lacked in Yamna people. So how could they brought it for that matter?

All modern people of the region have less of the Atlantic_Med than ancient, it rather seems the Indo European expansion has deluded the Atlantic_Med ancestry.

What North Caucasic?

Language spoken by modern North Caucasians

North Caucasics are founder effects by J2 and J1.

You said it yourself. founder effect. That a bottleneck effect happened in North Caucasus is almost so known and accepted by scientist as the earth being round. Read some papers on North Caucasian yDNA. All the J1 and J2 lineages do not only look bottlenecked. They are all from the same subclades.

And how they relate to R1b-Z2103? Their mtDNA is full of Steppe women so it's obvious they are so high in ANE and are shifted to Europe. Please read the stuff that I published.

Whoms mtDNA is full of Steppe women? And again not they can't be "shifted to Europe" because of Steppe ancestry because what shifts them towards Europe is EEF/Atlantic Med. Yamna amost lacked Atlantic_Med and Caucasus ancestry.

 

[Vukodav]

As already said, take in mind this graph is only meant to show the relationship of modern populations to ancient Armenia, not necessary modern population to each other. This is only a two dimensional graph and impossible to show the exact relationship between all the groups only by two dimensions.


Armenians don't have more Semite ancestry, Mesopotamia was not Semite to begin with but Sumerian in South and ancient Armenian like in North. Semitic admixture came from Levant.

Armenians just seem to have a more Iron Age East Mediterranean ancestry which is also found in Levant. In connection to the Semitic admixture which came via the Assyrians for example. They might appear "Levant shifted". But in reality they are slightly more West (Balkan ancestry) and South (general Semitic influc) shifted. Assyrians/Syriacs on all the admixture runs I have seen so far look very similar to modern Armenians with the exception with twice as much Levant type ancestry. Makes me assume that the "Semite" influence to Armenians mut be exclusively ancient Aramaic/Assyrian.

Since they ultimately came from Levant.

What's your point? Ancient Armenians had quite a lot of Balkan/Steppe ancestry (ANE+WHG), which modern Armenians totally lack. Obviously they were totally unrelated.

"Semites" are not an homogeneus group. Gulf Arabs are just inbred Levantines with more SSA+ASI and less WHG+ANE (the difference is less than 10%).

 

[Alan]

This here is Yamna

# Population Percent
1 North_European 60.8
2 Gedrosia 27.41
3 Atlantic_Med 5.95
4 Caucasus 2.92
5 Siberian 2.73
6 Sub_Saharan 0.18


Ancient Armenian sample is shifted towards West because they have over 30% Atlantic_Med and around 30% Caucasus. And you are telling me this "European shift" came via Steppes?

That is like saying the blueness of the sky is an effect of the greenhouse effect.

 

[Alan]

What's your point? Ancient Armenians had quite a lot of Balkan/Steppe ancestry (ANE+WHG),

Please read above, I explained why this is very unlikely. Ancient Armenian ANE was slightly less as that of modern people of the region. Their WHG is in accordance to their EEF ancestry.

which modern Armenians totally lack. Obviously they were totally unrelated.

Armenians have 15% ANE, thats slightly more than ancient Armenian samples.

"Semites" are not an homogeneus group. Gulf Arabs are just inbred Levantines with more SSA+ASI and less WHG+ANE (the difference is less than 10%).

Modern Levantines have more WHG than modern people of Armenia and surrounding regions. Simply because it is part of the EEF ancestry. Berbers, close relatives of Semites also have 15% WHG.

It is much more complicated than that my friend.

What we see is an ancient population who was simply representing how the native people of that region looked before various incoming waves. The best descrption of those ancient people is, like a "mix of NorthCaucasian/Iranic and Italic people".

 

[Arame]

Alan
Armenians are synthesis from historic Armenia. This is pretty vast area and different autosomal genes. You will find very different autosomal patterns from BA Van, Malatya, Erzrum. This are only pieces of puzzle not the whole puzzle. You will find very high SWA in БА Sasun. Perhaps he will be much closer to Assyrians. In another place You will find a piece that will be closer to Georgians. But You will NOT find a piece that will be closer to modern Armenians because Armenians are the sum of all this components and one piece will never be the same as the whole. The thing that glued all this various stuff are the IE. There is no other candidates for this synthesis. This processus was not imediate. It lasted quite long. And it ended at the start of Iron Age.
The Phrygian signal that You mention is not from Balkans it is just from Armenians from western part , when they became part of all Armenians their 'Balkanic' signal was shared by everybody. The same apply to SWA. You think You find a proof that Semitic influence came late. But it is just an illusion (it came late only to lake Sevan). Because what You see is just the spread of SWA from Sasun like people in South to the rest of Armenians.
The number of true Balkanic Y DNA is ridiculosly low among Armenians.

Now read this

By tradition the Armenians entered Anatolia from the Balkans c1000 BC so they might not seem a good example of ancient Anatolian DNA. But some 100 generations of genetic diusion has resulted in an Armenian distribution of Haplotypes J, G, R1b1a2 closely matching that of all Anatolians, therefore representive of typical Anatolian DNA. We see that Anatolian R1b1a2 arrived after c3300BC, ruling out the Neolithic expansion c6000BC. When dealing with regional haplotypes, e.g. R1b1a2 in Anatolia, the TMRCA is only a upper bound for the arrival times, for the genetic spread
may be carried by movements of whole peoples from some other region

http://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/05/18/019414.full.pdf

He is speaking about M269. The Z2103 branch will be much younger. Perfectly matching the interval of 3000-2000 BC. Thus itself perfectly matches the split of Greek and Armenian somewhere at 2700 BC.
I am not saying that Armenian R1b came from Yamna. Maybe it came from Turkmenistan maybe it came from Balkans ( as Maciamo had proposed ) Who knows?
But it is not from Neolithic as You want to think.

 

[Arame]

Phrygian Armenian comparison
From a small list of 14 Phrygian words the Armenian has cognates only for 4 words ))

http://www.palaeolexicon.com/Phrygian

A good joke.

 

[Johannes]

The idea that the Silures were Iberians is based on one piece of speculation by Tacitus. Placing them as another dark-complexioned people, like the Berbers as you do, doesn't have any precedence as far as I know.

My opinion is that the Silures were definitely Celts. Archaeology in the area settled by the Silures points to very similar patterns to other Brythonic Celts, like the use of British-style roundhouses. Modern Southeastern Welsh are genetically about as we would expect. They may be a local maximum for dark complexion, but IMO don't share many other phenotypic traits with non-British populations. There are also no notes, in Tacitus or otherwise, of the Silures speaking an unusual language, or having unusual cultural patterns (other than being warlike).

I have seen some peculiar Welsh people: one is the singer who had woolly hair like an Afro and was swarthy. What was his name? He did not look British at all.

Of course and I agree with you. I remember reading some classical author whom I forgot stating that Iberians had white skin but curly hair. However, when the Celts expanded to such an enormous area (all of Western Europe!) they absorbed many non-Celts and the adoption of Celtic was similar to what happened when the Romans invaded. What are the subclades of Silures? I am aware that Wales is 80% R1b. Is it all Celtic?

 

[Johannes]

The Iberian language is probably from people who didn't have R1b1a2. R1b-L11 was obviously brought to Iberia from the east(originally Russia/Ukraine). Ancient DNA speaks for itself. If Iron age Iberians had R1b, which they probably did, it still came originally from the east.

I say Iberians are an Iron age people, because that's the only time period we have prove they existed. Iberian is a language. Their language is what defines them. Their language could descend from Neolithic Iberians, or at least earlier than the Iron age. But we have no prove. It's all theory.

I think your conclusions are rather shaky at best. The Iberians were not Iron Age people: the Celts were. The Iberians migrated to "Iberia" around the end of the Neolithic and start of the Bronze Age (4000-2000 BCE). The evidence points more and more to a Proto-Celtic people. Forget the language: Celts never occupied eastern and southern Iberia -- yet its 60-80% R1b -- more than England! During the Muslim occupation many Iberians converted to Islam and were ethnically cleansed and R1b decreased in Andalusia (60%). But since we still have such high R1b DNA in Valencia and Catalonia then the evidence points to Iberians being proto Celts who had R1b DF-27 the most common marker found among Basques. I will go further and state that Basques are also a proto-Celtic people who have a lot of Neolithic DNA from the female side.

Here is what Wikipedia says: [h=3]"Origins[edit][/h]

Neolithic expansion.​

Paleohispanic languages according to inscriptions (except Aquitanian - according toanthroponyms and theonyms used in Latininscriptions).​

Iberian origins are not clear. However it is suggested that they arrived in Spain in the Neolithic period, with their arrival being dated from as early as the fifth millennium BC to the third millennium BC. Most scholars^[who?] adhering to this theory believe from archaeological, anthropological and genetic evidence that the Iberians came from a region farther east in the Mediterranean. Others^[who?] have suggested that they may have originated in North Africa."

 

[Johannes]

You ought to look again at your %s: Iberian Peninsula doesn't show higher %s of Y-R1b than overall France (except Basque country; common to both), at fist. and soemtimes ago in History Celtic languages occupied larger territories than genuine Iberians.

Yes it does -- well at least in Eupedia. Here are the overall results by Edupedia: Spain 70% R1b, England 67% R1b, Germany 45% R1b, and France at 59% R1b. 70% is almost pure or homogeneous. How did this massive R1b get there? I know the Reconquista expelled many Iberians and dramatically changed the genetic structure of Spain and Portugal.But if you bother to check the maps of Iberian settlement you will see they are in eastern and southern Iberia. YET the R1b results are almost identical. ONLY the Basque region is higher.

here is a map to make my point more clear:

 

[Johannes]

we need samples from the Iron Age to see if Germanic tribes invaded and expelled Bronze Age Poles, or never visited that area.

Another possibility is that Bronze Age "Poles" were first Germanized (in the Iron Age), and later Slavicized (in the Dark Ages).

And there was R1a continuity all the time, language changed, but actual migrations of people were not massive.

Anyway - it doesn't look like East Germanic tribes were R1a and later emigrated with that R1a, because there is almost no R1a in North Africa, Iberia, Italy, France, etc. - places to which East Germanic tribes allegedly came from Poland.

So either R1a people were expelled from Poland in the Iron Age, and later returned in the Dark Ages - or there was never actually a massive East Germanic immigration and later emigration from Poland to the Roman Empire.

There were never any "Poles" or Slavs west of the Vistula during the Iron Age. Its clear the Germanics occupied all of Poland west of the Vistula River by about 200 BCE. The Goths, Gepids, Heruli, Rugaii, Burgundians, Lombards, and Vandals all came from Sweden and occupied western Poland and other areas. Why is this skull study so important?? Its obvious the Slavs and Germans had similar skull structure and looked very similar during those days. They began to look different after the Turkic and Mongol invasions. That's were you should study for any difference.

There is almost no "Germanic" DNA in North Africa because the Vandals left it after they were defeated by the Byzantines to settle in Sardinia, Iberia, and Italy. In Iberia there is so little because they have never bothered to study a large sample. All they do is try small samples and make conclusions out of it. I dont know what you mean about France. The Goths lived there for about 100 years and left. And Italy had the Gothic Wars which decimated many Goths and most of the surviving Goths emigrated to Austria or Northern Italy.