137 ancient human genomes from across the Eurasian steppes

The thing that brought most military victories to the Huns was mounted archery,my hypothesis is that they also used the stirrups which enabled them to be very stable on their horses while shooting.According to Roman general Belisarius cited by Procopius mounted archery and use of bow was why Romans lost many wars,they later hired Hun mercenaries in the Gothic wars, Goths are said to fight on horseback but with sword and spear.
While is certain that Avars introduced the stirrups to Europe,for the Huns has yet to be proven.

636px-Avars_hungary_7-8th_cAD_iron_stirrups_IMG_1186.JPG


The stirrup, which gives greater stability to a rider, has been described as one of the most significant inventions in the history of warfare, prior to gunpowder.

Same tradition and military tactics followed by the Turks and Mongols proved very superior for that time.
 
So there may have been Steppe Ancestry (but possibly it is just EHG because of an absence of CHG) as early as the late 4th millennium in Namazga Tepe but it does not appear in the rest of BMAC until more than a thousand years later? Also BMAC was rejected as an ancestral source of modern South Asians but Namazga isn't? I wonder if they had used the samples from Narasimhan et al it would have been rejected in favor of Indus Periphery and other populations
 
There is an I2c2 in the list, DA31, he is not from the Steppe but from the Caucasus !!! Lchashen Metsamor culture, I2c2 today is predominantly Caucasian and Aegean.

And the Y-full age estimates have changed !! the subclade used to date from 4000 ybp, but now its 3300 ybp, DA31 is actually 3200 years old, maybe that's my ancestor :)

Information on Lchashen Metsamor culture.

This is awesome. Good for you!
 
Huns most probably do not descent from the Xiongnu,which are Turkic or Mongolic most likely,as i mentioned Huns were rather a confederation of Iranic Xionites and Finno-Ugric peoples,like the Avar "Varchionites" later were confederation of Uar (Finno-Ugric) and Xionites (Chionites) that's why were labeled Varchionites by ancient authors,known as Sveta Huna in India.Even Procopius connects European Huns with Huns that conquered northern India.

They were definitely a confederation, but I have a list of names of Hunnic chiefs and they definitely contain Turkic speakers. So I do think that "Huns" were at least in part a result of mixing with Xiongnu, which I'm pretty sure the paper also shows.
 
Also, still no "steppe" in Bronze Age Anatolia, and a different view of the impact of "steppe" peoples in India.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it really a "different view", one incompatible with that presented by the Reich et al. South Asian paper? I mean, this new study states that the Yamnaya "proper" migrations didn't affect South Asia, but there were West Eurasian-related migrations before and after Yamnaya. Doesn't that correlate perfectly well with the hypothesis presented by "the" South Asian preprint that there was West Siberian ancestry (I assume it had more West Eurasian affinity, right?) before the arrival of "BA steppe" ancestry, and that this steppe ancestry only came much later than the Yamnaya period, probably with later eastern offshoots Andronovo? As far as I understood the basic claims in both studies, I think both views fit each other well.
 
DA125, T1a3a1a1-Y13279, is the oldest or one of the two oldest samples 1738 yBP belonging to the Kang-Sogdians.

Kang-Sogdians belongs to T1a3a1a1-Y13279 (1 sample) + R1a-S23592 (2 samples)

View attachment 10107

View attachment 10108


T1a3a1a1-Y13279 is found in modern Kazakhstan (Predicted) and among Pathans (Predicted)as well as in Europe (Confirmed)and Irak (Confirmed).

Results for this sample above
.
Gedrosia K12 Oracle
.
Admix Results (sorted):
.
# Population Percent
1 SINTASHTA_STEPPE_HERDERS 36.17
2 EARLY_EUROPEAN_FARMERS 20.93
3 CAUCASUS 16.27
4 BALOCHI 13.25
5 INDO_TIBETAN 3.56
6 SUB_SAHARAN 2.73
7 SW_ASIAN 2.59
8 E_SIBERIAN 1.82
9 S_INDIAN 1.62
10 W_SIBERIAN 1.07
.
.
Finished reading population data. 87 populations found.
12 components mode.

--------------------------------
.
Least-squares method.
.
Using 1 population approximation:
1 Norwegian @ 27.047358
2 Tajik_Pomiri @ 29.613884
3 Greek @ 30.204453
4 Russian @ 30.475681
5 Turkmen_Afghan @ 32.066235
6 Turks_Istanbul @ 33.265747
7 Uzbek @ 33.983425
8 Finnish @ 35.916382
9 Sicilian @ 36.177418
10 Turks_Aydin @ 36.290226
11 Uzbek_Afghan @ 36.405033
12 Tajik_Afghan @ 36.703457
13 Kurds_C @ 37.516556
14 Turks_Balikesir @ 37.872124
15 Kurds_N @ 38.548668
16 Estonian @ 38.995659
17 Pashtun_Afghan @ 40.051208
18 Lithuanian @ 40.209137
19 Kurds_E @ 40.435959
20 Kurds_F @ 40.643627
.
Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Norwegian +50% Tajik_Pomiri @ 7.165861
.
.
Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Norwegian +25% Tajik_Pomiri +25% Turkmen_Afghan @ 6.523515
.
.
Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Estonian + Kurds_E + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.565871
2 Finnish + Kurds_E + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.669582
3 Estonian + Iranian + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.710850
4 Kurds_E + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.742424
5 Estonian + Kurds_N + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.769520
6 Finnish + Kurds_N + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.815739
7 Iranian + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.837358
8 Kurds_E + Norwegian + Russian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.848020
9 Kurds_N + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Uzbek_Afghan @ 5.856154
10 Kurds_E + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Uzbek_Afghan @ 5.862832
11 Kurds_N + Norwegian + Russian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.877268
12 Kurds_SE + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Turks_Istanbul @ 5.915348
13 Kurds_C + Norwegian + Russian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.915402
14 Estonian + Kurds_SE + Norwegian + Turks_Istanbul @ 5.935220
15 Kurds_N + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.940321
16 Estonian + Kurds_C + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.944089
17 Finnish + Kurds_C + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.959805
18 Kurds_SE + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Turks_Aydin @ 5.968935
19 Estonian + Kurds_N + Norwegian + Uzbek_Afghan @ 5.973429
20 Estonian + Kurds_E + Norwegian + Uzbek_Afghan @ 5.999063
 
The thing that brought most military victories to the Huns was mounted archery,my hypothesis is that they also used the stirrups which enabled them to be very stable on their horses while shooting.According to Roman general Belisarius cited by Procopius mounted archery and use of bow was why Romans lost many wars,they later hired Hun mercenaries in the Gothic wars, Goths are said to fight on horseback but with sword and spear.
While is certain that Avars introduced the stirrups to Europe,for the Huns has yet to be proven.

636px-Avars_hungary_7-8th_cAD_iron_stirrups_IMG_1186.JPG


The stirrup, which gives greater stability to a rider, has been described as one of the most significant inventions in the history of warfare, prior to gunpowder.

Same tradition and military tactics followed by the Turks and Mongols proved very superior for that time.

It's hard for me to believe that no one thought of the stirrup before this.

It would be like inventing a motorcycle and not thinking of pegs to rest your feet for thousands of years. I almost can't buy it on this on this analogy. Wtf.
 
There is an I2c2 in the list, DA31, he is not from the Steppe but from the Caucasus !!! Lchashen Metsamor culture, I2c2 today is predominantly Caucasian and Aegean.

And the Y-full age estimates have changed !! the subclade used to date from 4000 ybp, but now its 3300 ybp, DA31 is actually 3200 years old, maybe that's my ancestor :)

Information on Lchashen Metsamor culture.

Congrats Ironside :) and thanks for the link!
 
Results for this sample above
.
Gedrosia K12 Oracle
.
Admix Results (sorted):
.
# Population Percent
1 SINTASHTA_STEPPE_HERDERS 36.17
2 EARLY_EUROPEAN_FARMERS 20.93
3 CAUCASUS 16.27
4 BALOCHI 13.25
5 INDO_TIBETAN 3.56
6 SUB_SAHARAN 2.73
7 SW_ASIAN 2.59
8 E_SIBERIAN 1.82
9 S_INDIAN 1.62
10 W_SIBERIAN 1.07
.
.
Finished reading population data. 87 populations found.
12 components mode.

--------------------------------
.
Least-squares method.
.
Using 1 population approximation:
1 Norwegian @ 27.047358
2 Tajik_Pomiri @ 29.613884
3 Greek @ 30.204453
4 Russian @ 30.475681
5 Turkmen_Afghan @ 32.066235
6 Turks_Istanbul @ 33.265747
7 Uzbek @ 33.983425
8 Finnish @ 35.916382
9 Sicilian @ 36.177418
10 Turks_Aydin @ 36.290226
11 Uzbek_Afghan @ 36.405033
12 Tajik_Afghan @ 36.703457
13 Kurds_C @ 37.516556
14 Turks_Balikesir @ 37.872124
15 Kurds_N @ 38.548668
16 Estonian @ 38.995659
17 Pashtun_Afghan @ 40.051208
18 Lithuanian @ 40.209137
19 Kurds_E @ 40.435959
20 Kurds_F @ 40.643627
.
Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Norwegian +50% Tajik_Pomiri @ 7.165861
.
.
Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Norwegian +25% Tajik_Pomiri +25% Turkmen_Afghan @ 6.523515
.
.
Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Estonian + Kurds_E + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.565871
2 Finnish + Kurds_E + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.669582
3 Estonian + Iranian + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.710850
4 Kurds_E + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.742424
5 Estonian + Kurds_N + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.769520
6 Finnish + Kurds_N + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.815739
7 Iranian + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.837358
8 Kurds_E + Norwegian + Russian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.848020
9 Kurds_N + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Uzbek_Afghan @ 5.856154
10 Kurds_E + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Uzbek_Afghan @ 5.862832
11 Kurds_N + Norwegian + Russian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.877268
12 Kurds_SE + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Turks_Istanbul @ 5.915348
13 Kurds_C + Norwegian + Russian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.915402
14 Estonian + Kurds_SE + Norwegian + Turks_Istanbul @ 5.935220
15 Kurds_N + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.940321
16 Estonian + Kurds_C + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.944089
17 Finnish + Kurds_C + Norwegian + Tajik_Pomiri @ 5.959805
18 Kurds_SE + Lithuanian + Norwegian + Turks_Aydin @ 5.968935
19 Estonian + Kurds_N + Norwegian + Uzbek_Afghan @ 5.973429
20 Estonian + Kurds_E + Norwegian + Uzbek_Afghan @ 5.999063
This guy is everything
 
agree with your #10 post, Maciamo - helas...
 
It's hard for me to believe that no one thought of the stirrup before this.

It would be like inventing a motorcycle and not thinking of pegs to rest your feet for thousands of years. I almost can't buy it on this on this analogy. Wtf.

it's surprising but Celts had no stirrup (according to my readings): they only had specific "horned" saddles; and the Gaulish Celtic cavalry was better than the Roman one; someones say it's only when Romans took with them Germancis cavalry that they won their cavalries oppositions against Celts -
 
They were definitely a confederation, but I have a list of names of Hunnic chiefs and they definitely contain Turkic speakers. So I do think that "Huns" were at least in part a result of mixing with Xiongnu, which I'm pretty sure the paper also shows.
If you have extensive list of names you can post them.One however can not deny or see important cultural trait like cranial deformation which at first was practiced by the Kushans,then we have the Huns who brought this in Europe to the Goths,Gepids etc,however i can not find this to be practiced among the Xiongnu or Turks.

Then as i mentioned my hypothesis for the stirrup was also likely first seen in the Kushans,Kushan divinity with stirrup.
800px-AdshoCarnelianSeal.jpg


Stirrup in my hypothesis was also adopted by Huns,however there might be Turkic peoples in the Hunnic confederation,but this important things should be noticed.

However archeologicaly for now we know that Avars brought stirrup in Europe.
 
This guy is everything

I used Gedrosia K12 because it was done by the person who does the admixtures for geneplaza
 
If you have extensive list of names you can post them.One however can not deny or see important cultural trait like cranial deformation which at first was practiced by the Kushans,then we have the Huns who brought this in Europe to the Goths,Gepids etc,however i can not find this to be practiced among the Xiongnu or Turks.

Actually the deformation culture is really important to understand nomad, which is always ignored in archaeologists. As far as I know, the elongated skull culture started in afanasievo, catacomb, and some okunevo. It continued in scythian, sarmatians and Hun of which only elite group had the deformed heads. Of course they shave their heads except one single long braid which seems to mean sunray like aryan "sikha." So bare head might mean "sun". I think the sihka is R1a-z93 connection.

Genetically the relationship among scythian, Hun and Xioungnu was well explained in the following post;

Overall the two dominant lineages of the Scythians, Huns and Alans appear to have been Q1a and R1a-Z93. These are the only two haplogroups that constantly show up in every culture from every region and period. There is also surprisingly little difference between the Scythians and the Huns. On the other hand, the XiongNu and Mongols carried completely different haplogroups (C2b, O3 and R1b-L278), which means that the Huns were in fact not of XiongNu/Mongol descent as most people thought, but of almost purely (Altaian) Scythian descent.
 
If you have extensive list of names you can post them.One however can not deny or see important cultural trait like cranial deformation which at first was practiced by the Kushans,then we have the Huns who brought this in Europe to the Goths,Gepids etc,however i can not find this to be practiced among the Xiongnu or Turks.

Then as i mentioned my hypothesis for the stirrup was also likely first seen in the Kushans,Kushan divinity with stirrup.
800px-AdshoCarnelianSeal.jpg


Stirrup in my hypothesis was also adopted by Huns,however there might be Turkic peoples in the Hunnic confederation,but this important things should be noticed.

However archeologicaly for now we know that Avars brought stirrup in Europe.

Yeah I'm fine with your stirrup theory. And cranial deformation evidence. All good.

Most of these tribes by this time had some East Asian and Siberian admixture along with some Turkic speakers. They were mostly Iranian in the West and increasingly East Asian in the East as we moved into the Middle Ages. Of course the Iranians were the original gangsters. We all know that.

The issue with the Huns is that they were entirely illiterate but we have a ton of names from correspondences with Romans using Roman scribes on both sides.

They were very much a confederation with a bunch of Germanic tribes joining them, so there is of course a bunch of German names but we don't care about those.

Below are the most likely classifications

Iranian Names

something-manos - Iranian - "Massaget" spear man in the Byzantine army, 540 AD

Ama-bazuka - Old Iranian - Hun Chieftain in the Caucasus, 500 AD

Balas - Persian - Commander of six hundred Massaget auxiliaries, all mounted archers, in Belisarius' army in 533 AD

Xorz-aman - Ossetic - "Massaget" bodyguard of Belisarius

Xorz-amond - Ossetic - "Massaget" bodyguard of Belisarius

Sturak - Persian (the Roman scribes had actually changed his name to the Greek Styrax because it sounded better to them) - Caucasian Hun Leader, led the war with Glones against the Sabir, 500 AD

Glones - Persian (Grecized) - Caucasian Hun Leader, led the war with Sturak against the Sabir, 500 AD

Zabergan - Persian - Leader of the Kutrigur Huns, 555 AD

Zarmihr - Persian - "Massaget" in the Byzantine Army, 549 AD

Turkic Names - Apparently these were a ***** to figure out, the few listed are very likely to be Turkic

Altyev - Kazakh - leader of Hun auxiliaries in Byzantine army, 530 AD

Ataqam - Turkish - A Hun of noble birth, 433 AD

Basiq - Some kind of Turkic. Didn't specify. - Hun Leader, 395 AD

Bairika - Didn't specify

Dangiziq (or something like that) All Turkic languages - A son of Atilla - This one Priscus heard pronounced at Atilla's court. Isn't that crazy? That I'm sitting here recounting a Hunnic chieftain name that some Byzantine Diplomat heard before dinner 2000 years ago.

Elmingir - Tunguz

Aruvkahn - Qaraqalpak girl's name - Atilla's wife

Sandal - Mamluk - Ruler of Utigur, 555 AD

Zol-bon - Mamluk - Commander of Hun auxiliaries in Byzantine army, 491 AD


*EDIT* made the main groups bold faced
 
Last edited:
it's surprising but Celts had no stirrup (according to my readings): they only had specific "horned" saddles; and the Gaulish Celtic cavalry was better than the Roman one; someones say it's only when Romans took with them Germancis cavalry that they won their cavalries oppositions against Celts -

It must have had something to do with how they trained the horse, or else it's hard to reason with. Perhaps they used their legs more to manipulate them.
 
if I understand well the Damgaard counterdicts the recent Laziridis paper on the subject of the ASI cline formed in IVC

Laziridis describes ASI cline as AASI + Iranian Farmer + West Siberian HG,
while Damgaard says IVC period in India is AASI + Namazga CA, and Namazga CA as Iranian farmer + EHG (and absence of CHG)
 
so, Anatolian and Aegean bronze age would not come from Iran Neo, but from CHG,
and what about Khvalynsk EN and Yamna? is it EHG + Iran Neo, or is it EHG + CHG, or EHG + Iran Neo + CHG?
 

This thread has been viewed 39639 times.

Back
Top