| Forum | Europe Travel Guide | Ecology | Facts & Trivia | Genetics | History | Linguistics |
| Austria | France | Germany | Ireland | Italy | Portugal | Spain | Switzerland |
 Eupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
|
https://twitter.com/vagheesh/status/1103456664324395008
Hajji Firuz R1b sample is from Bronze Age. If it is around from 2500 BC this will increase the possibility of steppe origin for Anatolian languages.
Nah, more like ArmenianOriginally Posted by Cpluskx
I've actually seen here 'n' there on the internet that apparently Hajji Firuz was re-dated to the late bronze age. Multiple individualities have let the hint out, but it's not sure until the definitive paper is out. Also very weird that after 2 attempt of dating failed, the 3rd worked?
Edit: said early instead of late bronze age.
Yes looks like it won't be an old enough sample although there is Hajji_Firuz_BA I4243 female with probably around 50% steppe ancestry from 2400-2200 BC. Is there any archaeological sign of an invasion by steppe people to Northern Iran? This female can be a part of an elite group (conqueror) or a daughter of mercenary or slave etc.
There is the fact that the Late Kura-Araxes samples was your lineage V1636 found 1000 years earlier in the Pontic Steppe, while Early Kura-Araxes had G2b, a very Iran_Neolithic lineage and multiple Steppe ancestry and R1b-Z2103 in Hajji Firuz Late Bronze Age, wich coincides with the Late Kura-Araxes one. Both lineage found earlier in the Pontic Steppe. I also think Eurogenes is working on showing that Armenia_MLBA was influenced by Steppe.
We never gonna found any Transcaucasia_Yamnaya if this is what you are thinking about. They probably expand from North and became the elite of already established connections. And they are more likely to be representing very old populations as Anatolians or Gutians shows in early texts, than people like Armenians.
I mean you can't be elite from nowhere, there needs to be some archaeological signs, cultural connections to the Pontic-Caspian if you are part of an elite expansion. (like Sintashta -> Aryan Invasion of India ) East Anatolia-around was a developed place with state-like structures.
Not necessary, because your exemple of Sintashta is related with the local Steppe Cultures, wich weren't local in South of the Caucasus. When Steppe people happened in the Middle-East they encounter already well established cultures, trade roads, economic links. They just had to rip off the local elite and that's it. About the archeological sign, i guess Horses is the strongest sign of Eurasian Steppe Migrations. It's way easier to conquer already established kingdoms than just empty lands. When Hyksos came into Egypt, they didn't came with a particular archeological link, they just had package not found in Egypt like Horses and Chariots, but it didn't change much for the local peoples.
Any reason why V1636 is extremely rare today if it brought Anatolian languages? There were multiple different Anatolian languages distributed in a large area. Y-DNA/language expansion seems correlated.
Surely it makes most sense for these Z2103s (as well as the typical West Asian lineages ofc) to be Kura-Araxes right, I mean what else can it be. They're not too late either. Some of them are before 2000 BC right? Even so the Steppe in Hajji Firuz before 2000 BC is enough. That date is also consistent with a migration from Catacomb though, so I'm not sure what it would represent.
Whatever brought Anatolian, imo at least, won't be as simple as essentially one single haplogroup like tends to be the case in Europe, so I doubt you can just say V1636 brought Anatolian. That said, I do think it spread with K-A.
The history of V1636 is clearly not well known at this point. Inb4 we have multiple case or revised case of it in a prehistoric context. It was in Progress, in Khvalynsk and in Late Kura-Araxes.
But the fact is, that we take R1b-Z2103 or R1b-V1636, and Late KA, or Hajji Firuz, or even Armi hypothesis, or Gutians / Anatolians, all from approximately the same time. It makes a lot of correlation with Steppe and Late Bronze Age South Caucasus. Did anybody compared the Armi Anatolian Names with the Gutian ones?
I also think and said it multiple times that Yamnaya is maybe not the exact proxy for Anatolians or even Tocharians, but maybe Catacombs and Poltavka respectively, are.
Catacomb is younger than Yamnaya so it can't be the origin of Anatolian languages if European IE's came with Yamnaya descendants.
What Y-dna can it be? Except R1a and R1b maybe J2?
Well that's not important. There is 2000 years between Yamnaya / Catacomb and the first attested European IE scripts. The language could have evolved a lot in continental europe.
Finally. Well looks like it can be traced right back to Yamnaya then. Less interesting, but less confusing too I guess.
Still weird tho. He said previously ( Narasimhan ) that this sample was from an archeological layer and autosomally exactly the same as the other and older samples. Now this sample was redated so it fit exactly a Steppe expansion, but then he is still autosomally and archeologically related with the older and local individuals. Can this even match?
Well it's not necessarily descended from the Yamnaya subclades. It's still possible that there was another non-steppe earlier source ancestral to both, but at this juncture it really looks like like R1 was a North Eurasian thing before the bronze age. It doesn't take many generations to completely dilute out any "steppe" genotype that was there initially.
I'm not necessary referencing the Steppe origin, but the methodology they used. Tested the J2b sample but not the R1b one even tho the latter is the most exotic one to found here if you look at modern and previous prehistoric datas ( or did they tested it but it failed from the beginning and they assume it was contemporary with the J2b one? ) But if so, that's an interesting coincidence that THE important samples C14 failed, but now it's ok, it was redated, how? Did the C14 magically succeeded? Claiming that both are from the same archeological layers, and have the same ancestry, while they have almost 2'000 years of difference, it's the first R1b sample that actually would not show noticable Steppe ancestry comparing to contemporary other samples around the world ( Afanasievo, BB, etc ). Also with the Late Kura-Araxes one. While other samples from the same period do show some Steppe ancestry. I feel this is the perfect scenario to misslead or confirmed one's hypothesis if the community or other scientists didn't press to C14 the R1b samples, because it didn't make sense, the sublade and the age, but why didn't they deduce that themselves tho?
Perhaps at this point it's hard not to view these reports through such a lens of skepticism for ideological/nationalistic motivations.
The most simple answer is that the archaeological context was mistakenly identified and they weren't doing C14s of every sample, but rather of each identifiable layer in the dig, and they randomly chose the J2b sample for C14 spec. I dunno.
Yes, from what I understand the Hajji Firuz site is known for having well preserved archaeological layers on the grave-side of the burial mound. The R1b-M269 sample, labeled I2327, was found in the 'sub'-grave 'K10', which lied buried neatly under well documented layers we can date by looking at pottery and other finds in those layers. Besides, his grave lied in the same burial mound as graves 'F10' and 'F11', which were the graves with the J2b samples(and those 2 are C14 dated). Narasimhan sample now magically dated/redated to the Bronze Age is extraordinarily questionable, as is his ethics.
Thats nothing. Theres a sample in the publicly available Reich dataset which is Carbon dated to 4,500BC Turkmenistan and is PURE STEPPE DNA. It is called Zamababa_N. This sample basically 'crept' into the Harvard dataset because it is a poor quality sample and was originally dated to much later (prior to carbon-dating) so was excluded from all analysis but still made its way into the public dataset.
So now Harvard are writing all these papers about Steppe Migrations starting in the Bronze Age yet their own publicly available dataset has a sample that clearly disproves their theories. You cant make this stuff up.
Just to be clear on the above. The sample is called ZamaNbaba_N not Zamababa_N (typo). It is carbon-dated to 4,500BC not 2,500BC. Details are in the Reich HO_1240K Anno file. I am not sure if it is still there, as that file may have been updated, but it is on the version I have which I downloaded a couple of years ago.
Last I heard Narasimhaan was looking at it.
twitter.com/vagheesh/status/1278332657278103554
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote