FTDNA ancientOrigins

I got 46 Hunter and Gatherer, 42 Farmer and 12 Metal and my double first cousin got 49 Hunter and gatherer, 41 Farmer and 10 Metal. I actually think this is probably totally worthless and tells us nothing about our ancestral origins. Both my grandfathers were R1b ydna -my paternal M222+ A260+ and my maternal SYR2627+ FCG11245+ and my grandmothers were I1a1b and J1b1a1 mt-dna.
 
Is it technically difficult to approximate Haak et al.? Davidski apparently did but hasn't published it on Gedmatch.
 
Interesting initiative, but when I see the results (mine and those posted here), they percentages for the Metal-age invaders seems completely off for everyone.

I agree. This is a little fishy. I am sure they must be much higher for some folks that come from particular geographical regions. Seems like something is missing there.
 
I have seen that Caucasians have highest Metal Age admix of all the results I've seen. I guess Metal Age invaders is a mix of CHG+ANE.
 
55% - Farmer
45% - Metal Age Invader
0% - Hunter Gatherer
0% - Non-European


'Metal Age Invader' seems to be a Caucaso-Gedrosia (Iranian Plateau) marker...
 
In my case the percentage for Metal-age invader is exactly the same as the Gedrosia in Dodecad K12b, so they do not take into account at all the fact that Yamna only had about 30% of Gedrosia, and the rest was mostly Mesolithic European (North_European in K12b). Therefore a good deal of the Hunter-Gatherer reported in FTDNA is of Indo-European origin and should be listed as Metal-age invaders.

I don't understand how a supposedly serious company like FTDNA could publish such misleading (in fact downright wrong) data, when they have the means to compare customers' genomes directly with Yamna samples and other prehistoric samples (Mesolithic Europeans, Near Eastern farmers). That's really a blow to the image of FTDNA, in my opinion.
 
In my case the percentage for Metal-age invader is exactly the same as the Gedrosia in Dodecad K12b, so they do not take into account at all the fact that Yamna only had about 30% of Gedrosia, and the rest was mostly Mesolithic European (North_European in K12b). Therefore a good deal of the Hunter-Gatherer reported in FTDNA is of Indo-European origin and should be listed as Metal-age invaders.

I don't understand how a supposedly serious company like FTDNA could publish such misleading (in fact downright wrong) data, when they have the means to compare customers' genomes directly with Yamna samples and other prehistoric samples (Mesolithic Europeans, Near Eastern farmers). That's really a blow to the image of FTDNA, in my opinion.
Because Hunter Gatherers were just very 'primitive' tribes (some say cannibals) that were just hunting and gathering their food. While Gedrosia from the Iranian Plateau people were highly advanced 'metallurgy' people (Aryans) who build empires and found civilizations (Mesopotamia, BMAC, Indus Valley, Egypt, Greece?? etc..)

Without Gedrosia there would be NEVER metallurgy in the Yamnaya Horizon. That's why Metal Age Invaders are assosiated with Gedrosia (Iranian Plateau) people. It were the Gedrosia (Iranian Plateau) people who Indo-Europized the Yamnaya Horizon. Yamnaya folks were just a SECOND stage Indo-Europeans who invaded Europe. It is just that plain and simple...
 
Because Hunter Gatherers were just very 'primitive' tribes (some say cannibals) that were just hunting and gathering their food. While Gedrosia from the Iranian Plateau people were highly advanced 'metallurgy' people (Aryans) who build empires and found civilizations (Mesopotamia, BMAC, Indus Valley, Egypt, Greece?? etc..)

Without Gedrosia there would be NEVER metallurgy in the Yamnaya Horizon. That's why Metal Age Invaders are assosiated with Gedrosia (Iranian Plateau) people. It were the Gedrosia (Iranian Plateau) people who Indo-Europized the Yamnaya Horizon. Yamnaya folks were just a SECOND stage Indo-Europeans who invaded Europe. It is just that plain and simple...

You are so wrong and it's painful to see that you can't even realise it. I am sure it's useless to explain it again to you as you will never understand and change your mind about pre-Iranian inhabitant of Iran being the source of civilization. But I will explain so that other (new) members don't get confused.

1) Metallurgy (copper, silver and gold smelting) was not invented in Iran or the South Caucasus, but in central Anatolia and in the Balkans. So far there is no way to tell if the two happened independently.

2) Bronze metallurgy was invented in the North Caucasus, in the Maykop culture, which could be considered as a sub-culture of Yamna, given the very close interactions between the two. Bronze quickly spread around all the Pontic-Caspian Steppe where it acquired a military role. The fact is that there was no real metal-age invasion before the expansion of Yamna people. Copper is not robust enough to make swords or large axes, let alone helmets and armours. It is malleable and like other softer metals (gold, silver) it has primarily a decorative use. I do not deny that there was a Neolithic migration from the South Caucasus or Iran to the Steppe, but these were cattle herders, not metal-age warriors.

3) FTDNA's Metal-age invader admixture really does look like CHG, which is based on Late Palaeolithic–Mesolithic Caucasus hunter-gatherers. It is not even the same as Gedrosia. It is wider than that and may be closer to the West Asian admixture in Dodecad K12. That explains why Northwest Europeans, who have the highest percentage of Yamna ancestry according to Haak 2015, end up with far less 'Metal-age invader than South Italians and Maltese (who have the lowest no Steppe ancestry in Europe along with Sardinians), or even Greeks and Middle Easterners.

4) FTDNA is an American company with mostly Western customers. The ancientOrigins tool was developed with these Western people of European descent in mind. In fact I find it rather shocking, and surprising considering that FTDNA's boss is Jewish, that they did not even specify that 'Hunter-Gatherers' means exclusively European Hunter-Gatherers, not Caucasian HG or Natufian, or North African, or Siberian, or East Asian or whatever else it could have implied. Imagine a person of Chinese descent ordering the FTDNA test and wondering what to do with the results? "100% Others"? What good is that to them? Even Jewish customers, who are much more numerous at FTDNA, would find it useless. If I were Jewish I would like to know my percentage of Natufian ancestry, which is a type of hunter-gatherer. So this ancientOrigins tool is completely useless for people of non-European descent as the labels all implied a European point of view. But they are also useless for Europeans, since they only look at the Caucasian/Gedrosian 30% of Yamna people to determine Metal-age Steppe ancestry.

If you can't even realise that it's very sad, especially considering the number of years you have spend on the forum, apparently just to remind people of your daffy and delusory theories. In fact, I am getting a bit fed up of you, and if I see you mention one more time the kind of ineptitude I quoted here, you are out.
 
2) Bronze metallurgy was invented in the North Caucasus, in the Maykop culture, which could be considered as a sub-culture of Yamna, given the very close interactions between the two. Bronze quickly spread around all the Pontic-Caspian Steppe where it acquired a military role. The fact is that there was no real metal-age invasion before the expansion of Yamna people. Copper is not robust enough to make swords or large axes, let alone helmets and armours. It is malleable and like other softer metals (gold, silver) it has primarily a decorative use. I do not deny that there was a Neolithic migration from the South Caucasus or Iran to the Steppe, but these were cattle herders, not metal-age warriors.
Well, it is your OPINION against the SCIENCE. Don't be angry at me. I'm just reproducing what science is telling us. Be angry at the science that is proving you wrong.


" Arsenical bronze was used by many societies and cultures across the globe. Firstly, the Iranian plateau, followed by the adjacent Mesopotamian area, together covering modern Iran, Iraq and Syria, has the earliest arsenical bronze metallurgy in the world, as previously mentioned. It was in use from the 4th millennium BC through to mid 2nd millennium, a period of nearly 2,000 years. There was a great deal of variation in arsenic content of artefacts throughout this period, making it impossible to say exactly how much was added deliberately and how much came about by accident.[5] Societies using arsenical bronze include the Akkadians, those of Ur, and the Amorites, all based around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and centres of the trade networks which spread arsenical bronze across the Middle East during the Bronze Age.[5] "

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


" The Zagros Mountains are rich in mineral resources, so metal-workers could mix copper with arsenic or iron to harden it. The technique of making arsenical copper bronze spread to the copper-rich Caucasus by 3,700 BC. True bronze (a copper-tin alloy) did not appear until around 3000 BC. "

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/metal.shtml


" More recently, Thornton et al. (2009) proposed that an artificial iron-arsenic alloy, called speiss, was produced in Early Bronze Age Tepe Hissar, North Iran, presumably to be added to copper metal for the production of arsenical copper. Even though finds of speiss are relatively well-known from several EBA copper workshops, suggesting that this material was widely used and traded (see Rehrenet al., 1988; Keesmann and Moreno-Onorato, 1999; Hauptmann et al., 2003; Müller et al., 2004; Doonan et al., 2007), the Tepe Hissar study was based on only a small number of finds from an urban workshope hardly enough to postulate with confidencea regular, intentional speiss production. "

http://www.academia.edu/1563389/Lar...nical_copper_at_Early_Bronze_Age_Arisman_Iran





You are also making huge, huge mistakes on all other points. But since you are threatening me with a ban (because you don't want to hear the truth) I don't have any urge anymore to show you the thruth. You can believe in everything what you want. But don't attack others and other professional sites when they do speak the truth...
 
Last edited:
Well, it is your OPINION against the SCIENCE. Don't be angry at me. I'm just reproducing what science is telling us. Be angry at the science that is proving you wrong.


" Arsenical bronze was used by many societies and cultures across the globe. Firstly, the Iranian plateau, followed by the adjacent Mesopotamian area, together covering modern Iran, Iraq and Syria, has the earliest arsenical bronze metallurgy in the world, as previously mentioned. It was in use from the 4th millennium BC through to mid 2nd millennium, a period of nearly 2,000 years. There was a great deal of variation in arsenic content of artefacts throughout this period, making it impossible to say exactly how much was added deliberately and how much came about by accident.[5] Societies using arsenical bronze include the Akkadians, those of Ur, and the Amorites, all based around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and centres of the trade networks which spread arsenical bronze across the Middle East during the Bronze Age.[5] "

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


" The Zagros Mountains are rich in mineral resources, so metal-workers could mix copper with arsenic or iron to harden it. The technique of making arsenical copper bronze spread to the copper-rich Caucasus by 3,700 BC. True bronze (a copper-tin alloy) did not appear until around 3000 BC. "

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/metal.shtml


" More recently, Thornton et al. (2009) proposed that an artificial iron-arsenic alloy, called speiss, was produced in Early Bronze Age Tepe Hissar, North Iran, presumably to be added to copper metal for the production of arsenical copper. Even though finds of speiss are relatively well-known from several EBA copper workshops, suggesting that this material was widely used and traded (see Rehrenet al., 1988; Keesmann and Moreno-Onorato, 1999; Hauptmann et al., 2003; Müller et al., 2004; Doonan et al., 2007), the Tepe Hissar study was based on only a small number of finds from an urban workshope hardly enough to postulate with confidencea regular, intentional speiss production. "

http://www.academia.edu/1563389/Lar...nical_copper_at_Early_Bronze_Age_Arisman_Iran





You are also making huge, huge mistakes on all other points. But since you are threatening me with a ban (because you don't want to hear the truth) I don't have any urge anymore to show you the thruth. You can believe in everything what you want. But don't attack others and other professional sites when they do speak the truth...


Good post Goga. You seem to know your stuff.
 
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.
 
I am surprised that most here think that the ancients used should fit modern pops and then themselves.....when the program wants to see where YOU fit in the ancient world ...............forget the modern one.
Clearly your line did not originate where you are living now


http://www.ancestorcentral.com/12th-international-conference-on-genetic-genealogy-saturday/


r1b-and-the-people-of-europe-an-ancient-dna-update-30-638.jpg

My 8% non-european eyes can't see right

In mesolithic, one is I*/I2, the small one?

They have killed the chart with mixing backgroup colours and the line colours.
 
" Arsenical bronze was used by many societies and cultures across the globe. Firstly, the Iranian plateau, followed by the adjacent Mesopotamian area, together covering modern Iran, Iraq and Syria, has the earliest arsenical bronze metallurgy in the world, as previously mentioned. It was in use from the 4th millennium BC through to mid 2nd millennium, a period of nearly 2,000 years. There was a great deal of variation in arsenic content of artefacts throughout this period, making it impossible to say exactly how much was added deliberately and how much came about by accident.[5] Societies using arsenical bronze include the Akkadians, those of Ur, and the Amorites, all based around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and centres of the trade networks which spread arsenical bronze across the Middle East during the Bronze Age.[5] "

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

Nothing new here. All the civilisations you mention are more recent than Maykop (from 3700 BCE) and Yamna (from 3500 BCE). It is true that the Kura-Araxes culture in the Caucasus had bronze around the same time as Yamna and Maykop, but they only used bronze for arts and utensils, not weapons. That is why the Steppe PIE managed to invade both Europe and Central Asia, while the people of the Kura-Araxes culture and the Iranian plateau did not expand very far. BTW, the oldest bronze sword in the world comes from the Maykop culture and dates from c. 3250 BCE.

- Ur started using bronze in the third millennium BCE, about 1000 years after the start of Maykop.
- The Akkadian Empire only started from 2334 BCE, i.e. 1350 years after Maykop.
- The Amorites only show up from c. 2050 BCE.


" More recently, Thornton et al. (2009) proposed that an artificial iron-arsenic alloy, called speiss, was produced in Early Bronze Age Tepe Hissar, North Iran, presumably to be added to copper metal for the production of arsenical copper. Even though finds of speiss are relatively well-known from several EBA copper workshops, suggesting that this material was widely used and traded (see Rehrenet al., 1988; Keesmann and Moreno-Onorato, 1999; Hauptmann et al., 2003; Müller et al., 2004; Doonan et al., 2007), the Tepe Hissar study was based on only a small number of finds from an urban workshope hardly enough to postulate with confidencea regular, intentional speiss production. "

I am not denying that the Caucasus and Zagros were metal-rich region that developed metallurgy earlier than almost anywhere else (except the Balkans and Anatolia). You do remember that I made a map of Copper Age diffusion three years ago, don't you? Wasn't that clear that copper metallurgy was in Iran before the Steppe? But as far as bronze weapons and bronze-age invaders are concerned, the invaders came primarily from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. The point of this discussion was to determine what admixture represents what FTDNA calls 'Metal-age invaders'. They clearly state on their website that the "Ancient European Origins page displays the percentages of autosomal DNA that you still carry from the three ancient European groups". If that is not clear enough, the Metal-age invader description states:

"The third major wave of migration into the European continent is comprised of peoples from this Bronze Age; specifically, Nomadic herding cultures from the Eurasian steppes found north of the Black Sea. These migrants were closely related to the people of the Black Sea region known as the Yamnaya."

I don't know what you are arguing about, or why. I have been explaining that their Metal-age admixture, despite expressly claiming to represent Yamna Steppe people, does not represent Yamna admixture at all, but rather South Asian + West Asian admixture. We end up with Middle Easterners having three times more presumably Yamna admixture than Northwest Europeans, which is utterly ridiculous.


You are also making huge, huge mistakes on all other points. But since you are threatening me with a ban (because you don't want to hear the truth) I don't have any urge anymore to show you the thruth. You can believe in everything what you want. But don't attack others and other professional sites when they do speak the truth...

Please, do tell. I won't ban you this time.
 
Nothing new here. All the civilisations you mention are more recent than Maykop (from 3700 BCE) and Yamna (from 3500 BCE). It is true that the Kura-Araxes culture in the Caucasus had bronze around the same time as Yamna and Maykop, but they only used bronze for arts and utensils, not weapons. That is why the Steppe PIE managed to invade both Europe and Central Asia, while the people of the Kura-Araxes culture and the Iranian plateau did not expand very far. BTW, the oldest bronze sword in the world comes from the Maykop culture and dates from c. 3250 BCE.

- Ur started using bronze in the third millennium BCE, about 1000 years after the start of Maykop.
- The Akkadian Empire only started from 2334 BCE, i.e. 1350 years after Maykop.
- The Amorites only show up from c. 2050 BCE.




I am not denying that the Caucasus and Zagros were metal-rich region that developed metallurgy earlier than almost anywhere else (except the Balkans and Anatolia). You do remember that I made a map of Copper Age diffusion three years ago, don't you? Wasn't that clear that copper metallurgy was in Iran before the Steppe? But as far as bronze weapons and bronze-age invaders are concerned, the invaders came primarily from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. The point of this discussion was to determine what admixture represents what FTDNA calls 'Metal-age invaders'. They clearly state on their website that the "Ancient European Origins page displays the percentages of autosomal DNA that you still carry from the three ancient European groups". If that is not clear enough, the Metal-age invader description states:

"The third major wave of migration into the European continent is comprised of peoples from this Bronze Age; specifically, Nomadic herding cultures from the Eurasian steppes found north of the Black Sea. These migrants were closely related to the people of the Black Sea region known as the Yamnaya."

I don't know what you are arguing about, or why. I have been explaining that their Metal-age admixture, despite expressly claiming to represent Yamna Steppe people, does not represent Yamna admixture at all, but rather South Asian + West Asian admixture. We end up with Middle Easterners having three times more presumably Yamna admixture than Northwest Europeans, which is utterly ridiculous.




Please, do tell. I won't ban you this time.

Good post. Some interesting stuff in here.
 
Nothing new here. All the civilisations you mention are more recent than Maykop (from 3700 BCE) and Yamna (from 3500 BCE). It is true that the Kura-Araxes culture in the Caucasus had bronze around the same time as Yamna and Maykop, but they only used bronze for arts and utensils, not weapons. That is why the Steppe PIE managed to invade both Europe and Central Asia, while the people of the Kura-Araxes culture and the Iranian plateau did not expand very far. BTW, the oldest bronze sword in the world comes from the Maykop culture and dates from c. 3250 BCE.

- Ur started using bronze in the third millennium BCE, about 1000 years after the start of Maykop.
- The Akkadian Empire only started from 2334 BCE, i.e. 1350 years after Maykop.
- The Amorites only show up from c. 2050 BCE.
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 don't know what you are arguing about, or why.
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.
 
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.
"



Leyla-Tepe = at least 4350 BC. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyla-Tepe_culture ) = FIRST stage PIE
Maykop = 3700 BC ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maykop_culture )
Yamnaya = 3500 BC ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamna_culture ) = SECOND stage PIE
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 41712 times.

Back
Top