Scythian/Sarmatian DNA, your thoughts.

Mait you loosing it . You are the one that said it was I2a1b found in west Europe (Treilles ) , and now you saying only thing we know it is I -P37.2 , are you arguing with yourself now?

I'm not arguing with myself, you just don't read, this is the first message I put in regards to this Neolithic I2a:

Ohh and one more thing, haplogroup I2a1 was actually found in a Neolithic site in France that dates back to 5000 years ago:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/20...00723108.short

Here's the data:

http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/20...01100723SI.pdf
Then me and sparkey started discussing the possibility of this I2a1, he mentioned that it could be I2a1a based on the STR's, I did a quick search on Y-Search and the closest one was I2a2 (I2a1b), though this person was likely confused about his marker values and modern I2a1a is indeed the closest to this Neolithic I2a1, the problem here is that STR markers mutate, and this is a 5000 year old sample, I've seen bigger differences between 200 years, let alone 5000 years?

In other words, comparing ancient STR markers with modern STR markers is not really a good idea, only SNP's can determine what is and what isn't, and based on that, the samples are I2a1-P37.2, do you understand now?
 
There's no evidence on what the Kassites were so I'll leave them out due to the irrelevance, but the Mitanni were Indo-Aryan speakers, not Iranian, we had already gone through this.

Kassites/kashkay were most probably related to modern day Circassians/Adygs (Georgian name for them is Kashagi)
 
In other words, comparing ancient STR markers with modern STR markers is not really a good idea, only SNP's can determine what is and what isn't, and based on that, the samples are I2a1-P37.2, do you understand now?

Is there a difference between P37 and P37.2? I'm looking at Nordtvedt's I-Tree, and he only has P37 as ancestral to both I2a1a (diverging with M26 ca. 17,000 BP) and I2a1b (diverging with M423 ca. 16,000 BP)
 
Is there a difference between P37 and P37.2? I'm looking at Nordtvedt's I-Tree, and he only has P37 as ancestral to both I2a1a (diverging with M26 ca. 17,000 BP) and I2a1b (diverging with M423 ca. 16,000 BP)

P37 means P37.1 or P37.2... P37.1 and P37.2 are the same mutation but define different haplogroups. P37.1 defines D2, while P37.2 defines I2a1.
 
Is there a difference between P37 and P37.2? I'm looking at Nordtvedt's I-Tree, and he only has P37 as ancestral to both I2a1a (diverging with M26 ca. 17,000 BP) and I2a1b (diverging with M423 ca. 16,000 BP)

They're the same as far as I know.

Kassites/kashkay were most probably related to modern day Circassians/Adygs (Georgian name for them is Kashagi)

Who knows, but considering that the Hurrians were likely connected to the ancient Caucasians, there's a good chance that the Kassites were too, unfortunately we don't have evidence for that to determine.
 
Initially Sarmathians lived north of Caucasus , and for they way of life steppes were the best shelter - they were horsemens living in carts pulled by horses .And horses need grass so no they couldnt lived in forest . Historical sources mentions up to 500.000 Sarmathian archers - that is enourmous numbers for that times . R1a is also lived in steppes even longer then Sarmathians and survived

Historical sources tell us that Sarmatians lived on shores of Black and Caspian sees. If you look at the distribution of I2a1b1 you would see that its frequency rises with the distance from those shores. Why is that - because it spread from Ukrainian forests.

And if you would know recent history of Russian empire you would never say that R1a is on the steppe since antiquity. Great majority of the people settled there following a plan of Russian Emperors in 17th, 18th and 19th century: Zaporizhia; Novorossiya
 
I have been reading this thread and like to comment about the Iranian ancestry of the Kurds. After reading up on some Kurdish DNA such as sites called Dodecad. I have come to realise that Kurds are mostly native west asians, but they show a pull towards Central Asia that is not present among other West Asias (apart from Iranians) which clearly proves that Iranians came from Central Asia. I estimate that Kurds are somewhere in the region 1/4 to 1/3 Iranic, with Kurds from Iran and Iraq been around the 1/3 range and Anatolian Kurds been far less maybe between 1/5 or 1/6.
 
I have been reading this thread and like to comment about the Iranian ancestry of the Kurds. After reading up on some Kurdish DNA such as sites called Dodecad. I have come to realise that Kurds are mostly native west asians, but they show a pull towards Central Asia that is not present among other West Asias (apart from Iranians) which clearly proves that Iranians came from Central Asia. I estimate that Kurds are somewhere in the region 1/4 to 1/3 Iranic, with Kurds from Iran and Iraq been around the 1/3 range and Anatolian Kurds been far less maybe between 1/5 or 1/6.

The dodecad results are all from Kurds of Iran and Iraq. Central Asian means nothing for the genetic make up. It is only a geographic Region which was and is still somehow dominated by West Asian and North European components. The so called South Asian ANI is also added under West Asian because it is obviously a West Asian gene. Just the name South Asian is misleading. And beside this West Asian element we can find a good chunk of North European components in the Urheimat of Indo-Iranians. The East Asian component can be excluded because it is obvious when and how it came there. So West Asian(+ANI)-North European was most probably the original genetic make up of Indo-Iranians who lived in Central Asia around BMAC and Andronovo, which is todays Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kasachstan.

I agree with you Kurds are genetically probably 1/3 Iranic
 
The dodecad results are all from Kurds of Iran and Iraq. Central Asian means nothing for the genetic make up. It is only a geographic Region which was and is still somehow dominated by West Asian and North European components. The so called South Asian ANI is also added under West Asian because it is obviously a West Asian gene. Just the name South Asian is misleading. And beside this West Asian element we can find a good chunk of North European components in the Urheimat of Indo-Iranians. The East Asian component can be excluded because it is obvious when and how it came there. So West Asian(+ANI)-North European was most probably the original genetic make up of Indo-Iranians who lived in Central Asia around BMAC and Andronovo, which is todays Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kasachstan.

Real South Asian genes do exist on a very minimal level in the Middle East, of course the difference is South-Central Asian vs South India, both exist but the former is the more dominant one, Dienekes had done a K=15 which differentiated ANI from ASI:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ZeGRDdGhtdHRHREE&hl=en&authkey=CMLu_oYC#gid=0
 
Real South Asian genes do exist on a very minimal level in the Middle East, of course the difference is South-Central Asian vs South India, both exist but the former is the more dominant one, Dienekes had done a K=15 which differentiated ANI from ASI:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ZeGRDdGhtdHRHREE&hl=en&authkey=CMLu_oYC#gid=0

My point most of the South Asian could easily be added as West Asian thats why the original study xing et al only recognized 2% South Asian among Iraqi Kurds while the other 7% were seen as West Asian. I assume those 2% ASI came with Gypsy or other South Asian immigrations.
 
My point most of the South Asian could easily be added as West Asian thats why the original study xing et al only recognized 3% South Asian among Iraqi Kurds while the other 6% were seen as West Asian. I assume those 3% ASI came with Gypsy or other South Asian immigrations.

I don't think the South Indian in the middle east is Gypsy, it's most likely a very ancient gene wave (Remember that there was trade between Mesopotamia and the Indus Civilization), not to mention that it could have come through other cultures like a domino effect.
 
this is very much possible.
 
What is interesting about that links results is that Central Asian iranian speakers like the Pathan have large amount of South Indian at higher ratio then Iranians, which I believe is do to them gaining this at a later stage after the Iranian tribes split and some moved West and some moved further south who mixed with south indians and others mixed with West Asians.
 
What is interesting about that links results is that Central Asian iranian speakers like the Pathan have large amount of South Indian at higher ratio then Iranians, which I believe is do to them gaining this at a later stage after the Iranian tribes split and some moved West and some moved further south who mixed with south indians and others mixed with West Asians.

Thats also the only possibility I see. Thats why I think, while ANI is really very close to West Asian and according to Dienekes seems like a small brother of it. The ANI component was most probably West Asian in origin just with a specific mutation. Thats why I think, the original Indo-Iranians West Asian (+ANI) + a chunk of North European. The North European in Tajikistan, Kazakhstan cant be ignored while there is a explain for the occurrence of East Asian.
 
Last edited:
I agree I also do see that the Indo-Iranians likely had low or absent South Asian and gained this at a later stage people like the Pathan who gained high amounts from mixing with native populations in the regions that they settled.
 
I'm not arguing with myself, you just don't read, this is the first message I put in regards to this Neolithic I2a:

Then me and sparkey started discussing the possibility of this I2a1, he mentioned that it could be I2a1a based on the STR's, I did a quick search on Y-Search and the closest one was I2a2 (I2a1b), though this person was likely confused about his marker values and modern I2a1a is indeed the closest to this Neolithic I2a1, the problem here is that STR markers mutate, and this is a 5000 year old sample, I've seen bigger differences between 200 years, let alone 5000 years?

In other words, comparing ancient STR markers with modern STR markers is not really a good idea, only SNP's can determine what is and what isn't, and based on that, the samples are I2a1-P37.2, do you understand now?
Again you showing only partual data :Yes I know you said it was I2a1 in Treilles ; but when I in answer said: that it was I2a1a ; you said in post 500 :"I'm just showing that the father of I2a1b has been found further west in a European Neolithic site" What father of I2a1b ? I2a1b and I2a1a separated 12.000 years ago , and this site is 5.000 years old .
 
Again you showing only partual data :Yes I know you said it was I2a1 in Treilles ; but when I in answer said: that it was I2a1a ; you said in post 500 :"I'm just showing that the father of I2a1b has been found further west in a European Neolithic site" What father of I2a1b ? I2a1b and I2a1a separated 12.000 years ago , and this site is 5.000 years old .

The father of I2a1b is I2a1.
 
Historical sources tell us that Sarmatians lived on shores of Black and Caspian sees. If you look at the distribution of I2a1b1 you would see that its frequency rises with the distance from those shores. Why is that - because it spread from Ukrainian forests.

And if you would know recent history of Russian empire you would never say that R1a is on the steppe since antiquity. Great majority of the people settled there following a plan of Russian Emperors in 17th, 18th and 19th century: Zaporizhia; Novorossiya
Not realy Moldova is on Black sea shore and have more I2a1b than Ukraine . You should read Nestor Chronicler he explain why I2a1b around Charpathians in Ukraine and Bielarus would be elevated .Most of Sarmathians moved west and later some of them pulled back from Balkans .Ofcourse there was certain percent of I2a1b that Slavs get while they were under rule of Sarmathians - we know about Avaric custom to spend winters with Slavic wifes ( so part of Slavic J2 is of Avar origin ), so why wouldnt Sarmathians do the same?
Steppes north of Black sea are proposed LGM refugee for R1a , Andronovo culture is on steppes to and it is R1a to . Even nations that lived on steppes before this emperors plans - Turkic had significant R1a ( Altaic ).
 

This thread has been viewed 477425 times.

Back
Top