Ancient genomes from Caucasus inc. Maykop

Makes sense. Leaps of thousands of years and linguistics always problematic.
I asked Mycenean not Greek. but anyways. So, Hittite an isolated (Erzurum or south balkans?) and Armenian derived from Iranic IE.

Note: I still don't understand how LPIE is ascertained as "Steppe", which a large enough component of it I am sure it was, and the evolution of IE into several families and branches not have room for a Balkan IE that was similar to the Steppe IE (not time for big divergence) and most important, all 4th milenia saw movements from balkans to "steppe" and from there to balkans...

See https://r1b2westerneurope.blogs.sapo.pt/otzi-the-ie-speaker-8042

Theoretically, that Balkan IE could have existed, but it could have simply been absorbed by later IE branches well before writing arrived in that region. And of course it isn't still settled where the Anatolian IE branch came from. If it ultimately came from the Balkans, it could theoretically be either a very early (and already heavily diluted in terms of EHG) steppe-via-the-Balkans branch, or... this "Balkan IE" which you hypothesize.

As for Mycenaean vs. Greek, it doesn't matter much. Classical Greek is clearly derived from the same language as Mycenaean Greek and actually most probably its own daughter language. So the story of their origins would be exactly the same. Greek, Armenian and Indo-Iranian probably had a common immediate source, and for now I'd bet it was in the steppes - and also reasonably later than the 1st IE dispersals with Anatolian, Tocharian and very possibly other IE families that were simply not attested because their homelands lacked literacy until when it was too late.
 
....Greek, Armenian and Indo-Iranian probably had a common immediate source, and for now I'd bet it was in the steppes - and also reasonably later than the 1st IE dispersals with Anatolian, Tocharian and very possibly other IE families that were simply not attested because their homelands lacked literacy until when it was too late.

...and I don't get it why, with the tenets and beacons of current "truth" (labs) saying that PIE origin was miles way from Armenia and Iran, you think its origin, au contraire, was actually beyond a great mountain range and a huge desert. Strange.
 
Another good indication in the study that, if PIE came originally from the South Caucasus, it's a very ancient phenomenon of CHG-like > CHG+EHG admixture and more like the origins of pre-PIE or "Early PIE" than a consequence of "the" process of PIE expansion and dispersal/divergence we all talk so much about it:

"Our fitted model recapitulates the genetic separation between the Caucasus and Steppe groups with the Eneolithic steppe individuals deriving more than 60% of ancestry from EHG and the remainder from a CHG-related basal lineage, whereas the Maykop group received about 86.4% from CHG, 9.6% Anatolian farming related ancestry, and 4% from EHG."


Notice they, for some reason, make a clear differentiation between the "CHG-related basal" ancestry of Eneolithic Steppe (and the autosomal makeup didn't seem to change much until later in Yamnaya times) and the plain "CHG" in Maykop. That must mean something.
 
...and I don't get it why, with the tenets and beacons of current "truth" (labs) saying that PIE origin was miles way from Armenia and Iran, you think its origin, au contraire, was actually beyond a great mountain range and a huge desert. Strange.

I honestly didn't understand what you're talking about. I'm not even talking about the PIE origin, but about the source of the dispersal of some late IE dialects that split to form separate IE subfamilies. That, of course, happened centuries or even milennia after the origin of PIE somewhere in Eurasia. Also, you yourself just said, a few answers above, that you also believe that part of the PIE-speaking Shulaveri Shomu dispersed to the steppes and spoke PIE there, not just in the Balkans. So, you seem to be contradicting yourself now. Sometimes it feels like you get confused with the chronology, and suddenly facts that probably - even if you're totally right - happened in 4900 BC BC and circa 3000 BC are lumped together as if they're all the same. Finally, I'm totally sure the Ukrainian and Russian southern steppes are not a huge desert, they're actually excellent land for pastoralism and even, at least with modern techniques, for farming.
 
The pointed shoe is obvious in the guy in the middle of this hittite engraving:

CAogYsz.jpg



Albanians wore these until the 20th century and called them opinga. The pom pom at the front because it absorbs water faster and was good for combat in wet conditions.

Interesting, Albanian people has still kept authentic greek cultures.

Anyway the Hittite seems to have dreadlocks like ancient greek, dardic, and maybe Yazidi kurd. And I think Hittite god Teshub, holding a triple thunderbolt and a weapon, would be conceptually connected to mesoamerican creator Votan, western odin, and maybe Jeus.

kurdishhairstyle.png

http://kurdishpeople.org/kurdish-hairstyle/

native.jpg


Spartan_officer.jpg


brokpa1.jpg

http://www.probashionline.com/alexanders-lost-army-the-brokpa-community-of-ladakh/

Senyurek (1951d, pp. 614-15) concludes that "the majority of the Chalcolithic and Copper Age inhabitants of Anatolia were dolichocephals of mainly Eurafrican and Mediterranean types, and that the brachycephals, probably representing the invaders, were rare in these periods. This study has further supported the conclusion that the earliest inhabitants of Anatolia were longheaded, and that the brachycephals came in subsequently. "The craniological evidence indicates that an invasion of brachycephals into Anatolia took place during the Chalcolithic period and that it was followed by a second invasion, bringing in the brachycephalic elements to Alaca Huyuk and other Copper Age sites, probably at about the middle of the Copper Age. The next invasion of brachycephals, which was more important and extensive than the previous ones, occurred at about 2000 B.C. This was made by the Hittites who were predominantly of the classical Alpine type."
 
Another good indication in the study that, if PIE came originally from the South Caucasus, it's a very ancient phenomenon of CHG-like > CHG+EHG admixture and more like the origins of pre-PIE or "Early PIE" than a consequence of "the" process of PIE expansion and dispersal/divergence we all talk so much about it:

"Our fitted model recapitulates the genetic separation between the Caucasus and Steppe groups with the Eneolithic steppe individuals deriving more than 60% of ancestry from EHG and the remainder from a CHG-related basal lineage, whereas the Maykop group received about 86.4% from CHG, 9.6% Anatolian farming related ancestry, and 4% from EHG."


Notice they, for some reason, make a clear differentiation between the "CHG-related basal" ancestry of Eneolithic Steppe (and the autosomal makeup didn't seem to change much until later in Yamnaya times) and the plain "CHG" in Maykop. That must mean something.

Good. Because if I am right the Iran/CHG for Maykop, deriving from lets call it Ubaid/leilatepe mix with some eastern caspian Kura-araxes IranN can not, can not (!) be the same admixture that the shulaveri, at least from Arukhlo, mentesh, Gadichrilli, shulaveri, Shomutepe, etc that by 5000bc , 1300 years later, need to haver admixed with Paluri/Anasueli and Ckhok people (Kotias sons?) that, contrary to IranN, were (i dont know). Isolation in western Georgia, land of Kotias, is the ones we would see admixing with Shulaveri and moving north.
A different story should be said about the Aratashen/Arknashen and how by late 6tn milenia must be heavly admix with Kamiltepe and mil plains, until Hajji firuz.

Shulaveri was also a wide set of people. Arrived and brought agriculture to transcaucasia by 6200bc, but by 4900bc must have different admixtures.
 
"CHG" and "EHG" share a ton of common ancestry from an MA-1 related population, which is relatively recent, and we're trying to separate the two.
 
I agree as a whole, but can we really make it a sort of "historical rule"? Weren't the Cucuteni-Tripolye very successful occupying a large part of the westernmost Pontic-Casian steppe and forest-steppe between the Bug and Dniester?

Cucuteni-Tripol%27ye_Culture_Outline_Map.png

BruceByersConsulting-Ukraine20.jpg
I only see Trypolians extending into two steppe krais... better then to check exact archaeological sites/points instead to wiki maps, maybe they were capable to do some agriculture near rivers or just the map pretends to show a cohesive extension.
 
That's the main problem (except for the Anatolian languages, which would fit an earlier Early PIE dispersal before the later Steppe PIE expansion): as far as I have read from the works of linguists, Anatolian and Hittite more specifically does not look particularly more related to Greek or Armenian at all and, in fact, IIRC some have argued that, among non-Anatolian IE branches, Anatolian could be assumed to be a bit (not much) closer to some Italo-Celtic features. Also, there is the fact that a Hittite-Armenian or Hittite-Greek, or then a tripartite Hittite-Armenian-Greek connection is not very supported by mainstream linguistics. Greek and Armenians are, much more even than Italo-Celtic, noticeably closer to arguably "steppe" IE branches, particularly Indo-Iranian, and in fact an appreciable number of linguists entertained the possibility of a Graeco-Armenian-Aryan dialect continuum in the early development of those subfamilies. Indo-Iranian also has clear connections with Balto-Slavic. So, it doesn't look like Greek and Armenian are "that" ancient - not as much as Anatolian - in terms of divergence form the rest of the PIE family, which would've developed in the steppes.
I think here we have to understand the remnants of their hypothesis. Krause pretty much believe to the Indo-Hittite hypothesis. The point he wants to prove is that Proto-Indo-Iranian and Proto-Armeno-Greek languages wich shares some grammatical relationship, in one side and Proto-Anatolian languages the other side are basically PIE or the first form of PIE evolution that must have happened south of the caucasus, therefore PIE is from south of the caucasus. Here, we dont talk anymore about Yamnaya, about the steppe expansion, this is the past. Of course they try to stay professionnal by referencing the recent Central Asian / South Asian paper to a reference that Proto-Indo-Iranians could have come with steppe MLBA, but this is science and scientific a lot of times dont believe ( in god ) but have convictions, and those convictions dont evicte with a single paper or whatsoever ( see how Renfrew never abandoned any idea of a near-eastern origin, he pass from his own hypothesis, the Anatolian one, to accept a little bit more the Armenian one in recent years ). So basically when we read those paper, we have to keep the Indo-Anatolian hypothesis in mind to try to understand where they want to go with the history the have created. The sample doesn't lie, the history arround can be biased ( or not ).
 
"CHG" and "EHG" share a ton of common ancestry from an MA-1 related population, which is relatively recent, and we're trying to separate the two.

Yes, it's become complicate.
 
Theoretically, that Balkan IE could have existed, but it could have simply been absorbed by later IE branches well before writing arrived in that region. And of course it isn't still settled where the Anatolian IE branch came from. If it ultimately came from the Balkans, it could theoretically be either a very early (and already heavily diluted in terms of EHG) steppe-via-the-Balkans branch, or... this "Balkan IE" which you hypothesize.
As for Mycenaean vs. Greek, it doesn't matter much. Classical Greek is clearly derived from the same language as Mycenaean Greek and actually most probably its own daughter language. So the story of their origins would be exactly the same. Greek, Armenian and Indo-Iranian probably had a common immediate source, and for now I'd bet it was in the steppes - and also reasonably later than the 1st IE dispersals with Anatolian, Tocharian and very possibly other IE families that were simply not attested because their homelands lacked literacy until when it was too late.

the Olalde Bell Beaker paper shows the expansion from Central Europe to the British Isles of R1b-L21 4.5 ka
around the same time R1b-U106 seems to have expanded into the Netherlands, northern Germany and south-Scandinavia
later expansions, as Unetice and urnfield also originated in the Carpathian Basin

my view is that R1b-L151 was in the Carpathian Basin, with 4.8 ka
and that from there the Italo-Celtic languages dispersed
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L151/

in South-Scandinavia R1b-U106 merged with CWC R1a and I1 with TMRCA 4.6 ka from where later on Nordic Bronze Age and ultimately the Germanic tribes developped

as for Armenian, Greek and Albanian, I'd guess it originates from late Yamna which ended when climate deterioriated on the steppe with 4.2 ka climatic event
they would have been in contact with early Sintashta
 
the Olalde Bell Beaker paper shows the expansion from Central Europe to the British Isles of R1b-L21 4.5 ka
around the same time R1b-U106 seems to have expanded into the Netherlands, northern Germany and south-Scandinavia
later expansions, as Unetice and urnfield also originated in the Carpathian Basin

my view is that R1b-L151 was in the Carpathian Basin, with 4.8 ka
and that from there the Italo-Celtic languages dispersed
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L151/

in South-Scandinavia R1b-U106 merged with CWC R1a and I1 with TMRCA 4.6 ka from where later on Nordic Bronze Age and ultimately the Germanic tribes developped

as for Armenian, Greek and Albanian, I'd guess it originates from late Yamna which ended when climate deterioriated on the steppe with 4.2 ka climatic event
they would have been in contact with early Sintashta

One possibility for Greek, Armenian, Albanian and maybe even Indo-Iranian is that at the time of the Catacomb even if they were mostly Steppe they get an input from Maikop bigger than the previous culture and that it changes most of their autosomal dna to be way more CHG than their ancestors but also maybe an origin into the creation of the Satem language. Armenians shows the perfect exemple of that possibility full R1b-Z2103 with a satem language.
 
Do anybody have noticed that Catacomb culture is actually R1b-V88 ? Eneolithic Caucasus, Maikop, and some steppe folks have mtdna R1a, modern distribution of mtdna R1a is in Brahmins caste, some tribes of the Caucasus and Eastern Europe. Meaning those wives came from the south and give partial dna to the R1b y-dna steppe. Lola culture have mtdna R1b alongside Q1a2 wich seems completely Afontova Gora 3 related. Steppe Maikop have mtdna U7b wich for what i recall U7 came from Iran. H13 is also found in North Caucasus in a R1b paternal context. U4a2 and U4c1 are found respectivally in Kura-Araxes and Late Maikop. Multiple U1 mtdna lineage such as U1b, U1b1, U1a1a3 are found in a Maikop and North Caucasus context. North Caucasus is predominant y-dna R1b, multiple mtdna I found in a y-dna R1b and North Caucasus context too. Conclusion, R1b and Q1a2 steppe folk have taken mtdna U1, U7, R1a, H13 and maybe I from the southern new comers and Kura-Araxes and surely Maikop too have taken mtdna U4a2, U4c1, U5a1b1 from the steppe. Note that both CHG Satsurblia and Kotias Klde maternal side K3 and H13 are found here in both and respectively Maikop and North Caucasus R1b y-dna context. What an intense time of history, away of PIE hypothesis, steppe and south caucasus have very mingle together here especially with the maternal side, in a female mediated way. I mean it shouldn't be so difficult to be aware of that, a part if we are an hysterical feminist, in ancient times we made friends by giving the hand of his beautiful daughter. I think we can now imagine that Maikop is not indo-european or is indo-european in a southern context, CWC and BB dont have Maikop signals so it's pretty presumable that Maikop was a non-indo-european chalcolithic / bronze age coming from the south caucasus. They probably have influenced a lot the steppe with their cultural package especially Metallurgy. Steppe or more presumably western siberia would influence both Caucasus ( meaning south caucasus too ) and western steppe ( pontic steppe ) with horse package ( even if it have clearly to be proven ). The only thing it left it's to understand why CHG pop in prehistoric Eastern / Northern Europe, is it have something to do with mtdna U4 ?
 
One possibility for Greek, Armenian, Albanian and maybe even Indo-Iranian is that at the time of the Catacomb even if they were mostly Steppe they get an input from Maikop bigger than the previous culture and that it changes most of their autosomal dna to be way more CHG than their ancestors but also maybe an origin into the creation of the Satem language. Armenians shows the perfect exemple of that possibility full R1b-Z2103 with a satem language.

Maciamo has made a great thread on satem and centum, which seems entirely foolproof, except for some speculation on the Anatolians which seems unlikely, yet to me every hypothesis seems unlikely, and one of them is probably true. EDIT: I change my mind every time I think about this due to the spread of the chariot.

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/36117-My-proposed-tree-of-Indo-European-languages
 
Do these results support the hypothesis of R1b moving from Anatolia through the Caucasus and taking CHG women, and then further moving up and taking some EHG women, with the Kura-Araxes expansion resulting in mainly J2 taking the R1b women (yeah, I know, Y DNA is only found in men) from the stage of R1b taking women in the Caucasus?

Because that's what I think happened. It could be the other way round, with K-A forcing the R1b guys upwards instead of just expanding from the power vacuum left by R1b moving upwards.

I could also be completely wrong, but I'm just trying to model in two things I see as very likely: R1b coming from (Eastern) Anatolia, and the Kura-Araxes picking up R1b-like ancestry.


I think people didn't notice here the R1b found in Maykop might actually be a late Steppe arrival in the culture. Probably coming to Maykop after Steppe Indo European culture was formed.

Imo it went this way Northwest Iran/Leyla Tepe => North Caucasus => Steppe=> back to Maykop.

Also keep in mind folks no R1b found in Hittites so far. Hittites G2a and J1 more similar to Maykop than Yamnaya.
 
it would seem that the R1b you mentioned came via the north caucasus on the black sea side as none appear with the kurds who came to eastern turkey via Gilan province south caspian sea area
local anomaly. The samples are from the Kordestan province. A region known to have been the capital of the Royal Scythians in Western Asia with their capital City of Saqqez.

Kurds from Kirmashan and Urmiya are heavy in R1b.
 
Yes i know that Davidski have say that there would be EEF in steppe between a long time. Why change EEF for ANF so ? because as far as i know their ANF is the same to south caucasus, so why not say EEF = ANF + WHG ? For the graph its all over the topic, the green component ( CHG ? ) pop in Motala.


Because EEF = ANF. The samples EEF were modeled after (Stuttgart) were basically 95% ANF + 5% WHG.
 
If the scientists managed to find a profound CHG vs. EHG cline in the steppes, with some region concentrating much more CHG and less EHG than others, then I think the apparent lack of EHG in the few samples of arguably Hittite-dominated lands in BA Anatolia can be explained (as I demonstrated above, even an original Pre-Anatolian PIE tribe with a full 40% EHG could easily yield just 2.5% of EHG in BA Anatolia), without needing to resort to an unlikely scenario where PIE was spoken south and north of the Caucasus in the Copper Age circa 4000-3500 BC, but there was no significant autosomal and Y-DNA exchange between the two regions in the same period.

This is a very very unlikely scenario considering the very little time gap between the proposed dispersal of Steppe Indo Europeans and the age of these Hittite Bronze Age samples. if these Hittites really came from a roughly ~40-50% EHG source. You would need at least a century until the EHG get's deluded down to 6,25% per individual. And this is only possible if you assume the "Hittites" exclusively and rapidly mated only with individuals with zero EHG. That even excludes other EHG mixed Hittites. How often do you see it happen that people of the same folk do not even touch each other over the course of 4 generation? Even in societies with high mixing rate you always see more a pattern like this.

1. gen
same + foreign, same + same, same+ same, same+ same
2. gen
1/2 mixed + same, same+ same, same+ same, same + same, same + foreign

3. 1/4 mixed + same, same+ foreign, same+ same, same+ same, same+ same, same + 1/2 mixed

And this is rather the pattern for a mixing society.
And in this scenario allot of the foreign admixture actually get's washed out. And the mixing on basis of DNA is much slower. "Steppe" Hittite with 40% EHG mixes with 1/2 mixed "~20% " EHG result is =30% EHG. That 30% EHG mixes with a "full blooded" Hittite result is 35% EHG. This 35% EHG Hittite mixes with a 20-30% EHG Hittite result is 27,5% to 32,5% EHG. Keep in mind and this is the pattern for a strongly mixing society because it is never linear.




But for your theory above to work you would need to assume something more like this.

1. gen
same+ foreign, same+ foreign, same+ foreign, same+ same

2. gen
1/2 + mixed, mixed+ 1/2 mixed, mixed+1/2 mixed, mixed+ 1/2 mixed

As if they were always exclusively mating with foreigners and killing of those pure "Steppe kids".


So no I don't agree with this. There must be a different reason why BA Hittite samples lack EHG just like the Calcolthic Hajji Firuz sample a little further east. And both being basically a mix of Iran_Neo/CHG and ANF.

I think the authors are holding back something.
 

This thread has been viewed 239410 times.

Back
Top