FTDNA ancientOrigins

I'm not arguing about the SECOND stage of PIEans who invaded Europe. Those people of Yamnaya were already Indo-Europized by Maykop/Iranian Plateau folks. It has been proven that second stage IEans from Yamnaya Horizon invaded Europe. Yamnaya invaded Europe and NOT West Asia. That's why Europeans have more Yamnaya auDNA. But the point is that Yamnaya Horzion was invaded by West Asians at the first place prior to the Yamnaya adventure in Europe.
Why would Yamnaya invade West Asia when West Asians invaded Yamnaya Horizon? That would be useless. Those Yamnaya folks invaded Europe, because they looked for something they couldn't get in West Asia.


I'm just telling you that Yamnaya folks didn't invent bronze at all. They got it from the Iranian Plateau, could be via Maykop. Caucaso-Gedrosia auDNA is the source of the metallurgy in the Yamnaya Horzion. Maybe folks from FTDNA wanted to show only the real true Metal Age auDNA. And that auDNA is native to the Iranian Plateau. That's why people who are related to the Iranian Plateau score more of that Metal Age auDNA than Europeans. Simply because Iranian Plateau folks are direct descedants of those Iranian Plateau "metal age" inventors and have more of their DNA.

The first split from PIE happened ~4000BC in Anatolia , not europe

If people think R1 created PIE in the west urals............then they must have migrated to anatolia in large numbers to get the FIRST split from PIE
 
Leyla-Tepe culture from the Iranian Plateau PRE-DATE Maykop culture. It has been said that Maykop folks came from Leyla Tepe.

Agdam District settlement ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agdam_District ) of Leyla Tepe is dated from 4350 B.C until 4000 B.C


I'm not talking about Ur, Akkadians and other Semites who came from the Levant into the southern parts of the Mesopotamia, but I'm talking about the NATIVE people of the Iranian Plateau.


Leyle-Tepe civilization predate all of them. Maykop culture was born out of the Leyla Tepe kind of culture. There was a migration from the Iranian Plateu into the Maykop Horizon.
Leyla-Tepe metallurgy PREDATE Caucasian metallurgy:

" The appearance of Leilatepe tradition’s carriers in the Caucasus marked the appearance of the first local Caucasian metallurgy. This is attributed to migrants from Uruk, arriving around 4500 BCE.
Leilatepe metalwork tradition was very sophisticated right from the beginning, and featured many bronze items. Yet later, the quality of metallurgy declined with the Kura–Araxes culture. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyla-Tepe_culture


" The culture has also been linked to the north Ubaid period monuments, in particular, with the settlements in the Eastern Anatolia Region (Arslantepe, Coruchu-tepe, Tepechik, etc.).

It has been suggested that
the Leyla-Tepe were the founders of the Maykop culture. An expedition to Syria by the Russian Academy of Sciences revealed the similarity of the Maykop and Leyla-Tepe artifacts with those found recently while excavating the ancient city of Tel Khazneh I, from the 4th millennium BC. "

Other sites belonging to the same culture in the Karabakh valley of Azerbaijan are Chinar-Tepe, Shomulu-Tepe, and Abdal-Aziz-Tepe. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyla-Tepe_culture


Leyla-Tepe = 4350 BC. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyla-Tepe_culture )
Maykop = 3700 BC ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maykop_culture )
Yamnaya = 3500 BC ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamna_culture )


I know all this, and I agree with you that the Gedrosian admixture in Yamna probably came from Leyla Tepe or another culture in Azerbaijan, northwest Iran, Armenia or Kurdistan (such as Korucutepe, as suggested by Philip Kohl).

I was the one who claimed for the first time (in 2009) that R1b-M269 people were cattle herders from that region who crossed the Caucasus and mixed with the R1a HG in the Steppe and that the resulting merger of the two groups became the Proto-Indo-Europeans.

I also mentioned in 2012 that PIE language showed similarities with Hurrian, the ancient language of Mesopotamia, which points to a common origin of the two in the same region. I also proposed in 2013 that the Proto-Indo-Europeans possibly originated from the Uruk expansion.

Have you not read anything I wrote about it on the forum for the last 7 years? You don't need to convince me that there was a migration across the Caucasus that brought that Gedrosia admixture. I was also the one who proposed that Gedrosia was linked with the diffusion R1b when Dodecad K12b was released in 2012 (can't find the original post, but I explained everything in detail when I made the Gedrosia admixture map and you were the first to reply to me).

Are you trying to take credit for all my theories or did you just forget that I was the one who proposed all of them?

That doesn't change what I am trying to explain here, which is that bronze was only used for the first time on a regular basis deserving to be called 'Bronze Age' in Maykop, was used for military purpose by Maykop and Yamna people and their descendants, and that they were the only real invaders. You need a military elements and battles to be able to invade territories. Neolithic farmers did not invade Europe. They just moved a few kilometres further per year, with hunter-gatherers living side by side. There is no evidence that Leyla Tepe or other South Caucasian people invaded the Steppe. They just migrated and blended with the locals. If you have any evidence to the contrary, I would be very interested to read about it.

You are also forgetting something when you claim that people from the Iranian plateau were the first metal-age invaders. Leyla Tepe was in Azerbaijan, and if they descend from Uruk, the original PIE would actually be Mesopotamian. Neither of them are from the Zagros or the Iranian plateau as you claim. Azerbaijan is mostly lowland located between the North and South Caucasus, and Leyla Tepe was in the lowland, not even in the mountainous area that abut the country. So it's a bit strange when you write that "Leyla-Tepe metallurgy PREDATE Caucasian metallurgy". Leyla Tepe is Caucasian metallurgy, just like Maykop! Perhaps our argument is about mainly about geography and the definition of 'invasion'.
 
Yamnaya Culture was actually found by folks from Leyla-Tepe. Maykop was just a GEOGRAPHIC link (like highway) between Leyla-Tepe and Yamnaya Horizon.

Bronze items were found in Leyla-Tepe culture native to the Iranian Plateau. Academic paper in English: http://www.academia.edu/9535165/Pro...olia._Proceedings_of_International_Conference

" The appearance of Leilatepe tradition’s carriers in the Caucasus marked the appearance of the first local Caucasian metallurgy. It emerged not on the basis and not in the entrails of the Caucasian Neolithic but was brought to this region by Uruk migrants from their ancestral home (Ахундов -Махмудова 2008).

Leilatepe carriers made the first step in the Metal Age in Caucasus, noteworthy straight in the Bronze Age. However, this step in the Southern Caucasus did not receive its further logical continuation, was interrupted without any further development and so was the Leilatepe tradition itself. There were reasons for this. Perhaps, this was connected with the movement of the Kura-Araxes carriers, who cut off all communication links of Leilatepe tradition’s carriers with their Central Asian ancestral home.
"

I haven't had time to read this paper yet, but if there is enough evidence that Leyla Tepe was founded by Uruk migrants, and that indeed Leyla Tepe was the source of Maykop, then it would confirm my suggestion that Uruk people were R1b-M269 people and the first PIE. Why is it so important for you to say that Leyla Tepe was first, and not Uruk or an even earlier culture. People always descend from earlier people. I placed the origin of R1b1 (P25) in Neolithic northern Mesopotamia/eastern Anatolia because this was where cattle were first domesticated, and that both R1b-V88 in Africa and R1b-M269 in Yamna were cattle herders. But cattle domestication happened 6000 years before Uruk. That's longer than from the onset of Maykop or Yamna until now! So, if PIE originated with R1b people, then when do you place its origin on the timeline? The conscensus among linguists is that we only start talking about a true PIE language in the Steppe because PIE includes borrowings from Proto-Uralic language (in addition to similarities with Hurrian and loanwords from Caucasian languages), which could only have happened in the Steppe. So Uruk and Leyla Tepe could have been ancestral to PIE, but they were not yet PIE. An analogy would be to say that the Anglo-Saxons did not colonise North America, but were ancestral to the English who did. Of course in both cases, the older population mixed with others (Leyla Tepe with EHG in the Steppe; the Anglo-Saxons with Romano-Britons, then Danes and Normans) before getting the final population (Proto-Indo-European and English in each part of the analogy).
 
I haven't had time to read this paper yet, but if there is enough evidence that Leyla Tepe was founded by Uruk migrants, and that indeed Leyla Tepe was the source of Maykop, then it would confirm my suggestion that Uruk people were R1b-M269 people and the first PIE. Why is it so important for you to say that Leyla Tepe was first, and not Uruk or an even earlier culture. People always descend from earlier people. I placed the origin of R1b1 (P25) in Neolithic northern Mesopotamia/eastern Anatolia because this was where cattle were first domesticated, and that both R1b-V88 in Africa and R1b-M269 in Yamna were cattle herders. But cattle domestication happened 6000 years before Uruk. That's longer than from the onset of Maykop or Yamna until now! So, if PIE originated with R1b people, then when do you place its origin on the timeline? The conscensus among linguists is that we only start talking about a true PIE language in the Steppe because PIE includes borrowings from Proto-Uralic language (in addition to similarities with Hurrian and loanwords from Caucasian languages), which could only have happened in the Steppe. So Uruk and Leyla Tepe could have been ancestral to PIE, but they were not yet PIE. An analogy would be to say that the Anglo-Saxons did not colonise North America, but were ancestral to the English who did. Of course in both cases, the older population mixed with others (Leyla Tepe with EHG in the Steppe; the Anglo-Saxons with Romano-Britons, then Danes and Normans) before getting the final population (Proto-Indo-European and English in each part of the analogy).

watch this, I think it is realy interesting

Armenia BA Steppe CA & BA.jpg

attachment.php


there are 3 Kvalynsk genomes which you can find in above chart

Samara EneolithicRussiaKhvalynsk II, Volga River, Samara [I0122/SVP 35]M4700-4000 BCR1b1M415H2a1Mathieson 2015
Samara EneolithicRussiaKhvalynsk II, Volga River, Samara [I0433/SVP 46]M4700-4000 BCR1a1M459U5a1iMathieson 2015
Samara EneolithicRussiaKhvalynsk II, Volga River, Samara [I0434/SVP 47]M4700-4000 BCQ1aF2676U4a2 or U4dMathieson 2015

2 are mainly EHG (blue) with some WHG (navy blue), basically the same like the Karelia and Samara HG (also on the chart)
they have no teal (CHG)

they are R1a1 and Q1a and mtDNA U4 and U5, U4 and U5 are WHG in origin

the 3rd has 22 % teal (CHG), 71 % EHG and no WHG
he is a newcomer
he is R1b1 and mtDNA H2a1, H2a1 is CHG in origin
he may have been pré-R1b-V88 (but very early V88 then, spliting from the main V88 branch ca 16-17 ka)

the Yamnaya (Pit Grace on the chart) and Afanasievo are a mixture of mainly this newcomer and some the 2 others
Yamnaya and Afanasievo have about 16 % CHG, 82 % EHG and only 1 % WHG

Yamnaya and Afanasievo people probably arrived in the Volga area during Khvalynsk period.
That is way before Maykop.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was the one who claimed for the first time (in 2009) that R1b-M269 people were cattle herders from that region who crossed the Caucasus and mixed with the R1a HG in the Steppe and that the resulting merger of the two groups became the Proto-Indo-Europeans.
They found R1a1 in the Baikal region (just north of Mongolia) from the Early Neolithicera (5500 BC), VERY far away from Europe. http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...-from-Lake-Baikal-Siberia?p=494891#post494891

That means that R1a was already in Central Asia BEFORE Yamnaya! It predate let say Sintashta culture by 3500 years!

R1a in Iran, South Central Asia predate Yamnaya by thousands of years. That means that R1a-Z93 in NATIVE to Iran/SouthCentral Asia.

R1a1 entered the Steppes from IRAN, since they also found some eNeolithic P* in Iran.


So, what am I trying to say??

Also R1a1 has to be linked to Gedrosia auDNA. Gedrosia = at least R1 (R1a & R1b) and R2 ...


R2 and R1 (R1a & R1b) all has to be linked with Gedrosia auDNA. Gedrosia in the Steppes was not ONLY from R1b but also from R1a !!!
 
Metal Age Invader - 63%
Farmer - 23%
Hunter-Gatherer - 0%
non-European - 14%
 
Whatever Metal Age invader is, it is not Yamnaya. It is basically a Caucasian reference population. There is no way that it should be higher in Southern Euros, Ashkenazi jews, and other Middle Eastern populations, than central European populations that were affected by any population movements in northern Europe.
 
I am mostly Czech.

43% Hunter-Gatherer
41% Farmer
16% Metal Age Invader
0% Non-European
 
Mine
17 metal age invader
44 farmer
39 hunter gatherer
0 non european

Hey Syky the Czech guy we're pretty damn close
 
47% Farmer
38% HG
15% Metal Invader
0% Non European

For whatever this is worth. I keep getting SSA hits between .2 and 1.3 percent on calculators so I'm not sure how that fits this strange way of representing our DNA. The Youtube videos are hilarious if you want a laugh. "15 percent of my ancestors were metal smiths" is a line i heard.
 
My results are
25% Hunter-gatherer
59% Farmer
16% Metal Age invader
0% non european
Metal Age invader is CHG in my opinion, maybe they'll change something in the near future, I don't know. I hope they refine the non-european set, in order to see the ancestral origins of users from outside of Europe.
FTDNA lacks diversity within their database because, as stated, they mostly have European-derived testees!
 
Hunter-Gatherer - 47%
Farmer - 35%
Metal Age Invader - 18%

non-European - 0%
 
For my GrandPa :

19% Metal Age Invader
52% Farmer
29% Hunter- Gatherer
0% Non-European

for me:

18% Metal Age Invader
51% Farmer
31% Hunter-Gatherer
0% Non-European

:)
 
My results

12% Metal Age invader

59% Farmer

29% Hunter Gatherer

0% Non-European.
 
Misleading calculator :( for Europeans it would probably be accurate in some way, except that the metal age component should take some hunter-gatherer ancestry into account, and so, in reality, it should be higher throughout Europe than its current values.

In non-Europeans like my self, the farmer probably refers to Levantine and Anatolian farmers, while metal age is Iranian farmer, that's why it is extremely high in South Asians.

Anyway my results:

Metal Age Invader 26%
Farmer 66%
Hunter-Gatherer 0%
non-European 7%
 
Metal Age Invader 0%
Farmer 0%
Hunter-Gatherer 100%
non-European 0%
Yeah, I know it's fake, I've never even been tested to begin with, but in my state of mind, im hunter gatherer through and through ;)
btw before someone calls me a "nordicist" I meant to say that i identify with all hunter gatherers, including natufians.
I don't expect to score anywhere near this, trust me. Even Russians won't get that much hunter gatherer.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with you Maciamo. How in the world do they really know. I look at the various %'s of my kits, and they very between siblings to an extent the sibs do not even seem related. But it's a fun thing to look at.
 
As someone pointed out upthread:

metal-age = CHG from South Caucasus

Farmer = EEF in Anatolia

hunter-gathers = WHG and EHG

By naming "CHG" the Metal Age Invaders, the creators may be indicating they see not just metallurgy but the entire transformative culture as flowing from south of the Caucasus in all directions.

That said, whether it's this company or all the Davidski calculators, or anyone else's calculators, if it's based on modern populations it's going to be off. The comparison has to be to ancient samples.
 
ftdna ancient origins is based on ancient { they compare your DNA to la -brana, loschbour , motola, oetzi ,lbk farmers,corded ware remains in Germany Hungary and yamnaya remains}
but very different from k12 test of Kurd
in ftdna ancient origins i scored 12% whg and Kurd k12 0% Nada.
but i will give credit to kurd here for his test which is probably more precise...
and those whg alleles are hiding in the west farmers or the steppe ...
kind regards
Adam
 
ftdna ancient origins is based on ancient { they compare your DNA to la -brana, loschbour , motola, oetzi ,lbk farmers,corded ware remains in Germany Hungary and yamnaya remains}
but very different from k12 test of Kurd
in ftdna ancient origins i scored 12% whg and Kurd k12 0% Nada.
but i will give credit to kurd here for his test which is probably more precise...
and those whg alleles are hiding in the west farmers or the steppe ...
kind regards
Adam

I didn't know that; thank-you Kingjohn.

I never had much faith in ftdna autosomal analysis. I remember when they included Ashkenazim in the Near Eastern reference sample, even though we knew even then they were about 50% non-Levantine. Of course, Southern Europeans got inflated Near Eastern as a result.
 

This thread has been viewed 41713 times.

Back
Top