Ancient genomes from Caucasus inc. Maykop

That study shows no mesopotamian signals both in Kura-Araxes and Maikop. R1b and IE's are still no Japhetic.
 
Probably not, that's a very complicate hypothesis you present here. I mean people have already difficult to assume that R1b have conquered most of western europe from eastern europe in millenia, so your hypothesis looks like a Master Race Rampage over the world. It also sound a little bit, correct me if im wrong, that you would like middle-eastern to have culturally and genetically conquer europe isn it ?

This isn't some kind of Jewish fantasy I'm having of West Asians being the master race, and their descendents completely outclassing the Europeans they invaded. I just think these R1b guys picked up some CHG on the way to the Steppe - I don't think they originally were, or at the very least it doesn't make sense that they originally were given I'm set on R1b stemming from the Anatolian highlands.
 

Probably Ubaid rather than Uruk, but it has to stand for some genetic change. I can see R1b moving up from Mesopotamian settlements to Leyla Tepe, then to Maykop. These Chalcolithic Mesopotamian cultures trace back to the Halaf culture originally. I think that R1b guys acted as the ruling class over advanced but peasant farmers (based on the Swastika in these cultures but also phylogeny and evidence of clear social divisions based between farmers and patriarchal herders, not to mention the clear link between R1b and advanced metallurgy, and where that would put you on a social level), and that they moved down Mesopotamia (forming cultures like the Hassuna and Samarra cultures along the way). Then, they would have moved up to Leyla Tepe from during the Ubaid-Uruk transition, but the Halaf-Ubaid transition is also an interesting thing to examine (was there population replacement and population displacement here too? - if I had to guess, I'd say the Halaf-Ubaid transition was simply of the mixing of Western and Eastern farmers, who would have done most of the pottery in this kind of hierarchical society)
 
Don't know why this link is on Dutch Google as the book is in English, but this book makes for great reading in understanding Halaf, Hassuna and Samarra, Ubaid, and Uruk culture. The first four seem to stem from Halaf, which according to the book has very clear links with Anatolia (not much of a surprise considering how close it is to Anatolia, but the link being there nonetheless strengthens my theory (well, I say my theory - most of it is Maciamo's)). Uruk, on the other hand, seems to be much more concentrated in Southern Mesopotamia, which to me (along with the fact that they said it themselves!) says the Sumerians invaded the Ubaidians (perhaps invasion through assimilation though, I'm not sure).

Sometime during this Ubaid-Uruk transition is when the R1b guys I imagine as the ruling class moving down Mesopotamia supported by farmers actually pack their bags and head for Leyla Tepe. Through what means I'm not sure, but I can see them being replaced by J2, which I see as having been around in the Caucasus and Zagros regions during the early Chalcolithic at least.

https://books.google.nl/books?id=kl...ce=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Also worth mentioning that of course the segregation would not be total at all and intra-class mixing would occur all the time, the only thing being I think it would be mostly from mating women from the lower class - as happened in almost all societies.
 
In Iran Assyrians and Zoroastrians are interesting in terms of R1b. Abrahamic religion took a lot from Zoroastrians:

ub7rG3E.jpg
 
Also this Ydna void from the Caucasus seems almost like a set up for the next moment to come.

It feels as if the authors are aware of something and withholding and setting it up so that the next paper that comes out is almost like a final act in a narrative.
 
From Wiki : "The appearance of the Ubaid folk has sometimes been linked to the so-called Sumerian problem, related to the origins of Sumerian civilisation. Whatever the ethnic origins of this group, this culture saw for the first time a clear tripartite social division between intensive subsistence peasant farmers, with crops and animals coming from the north, tent-dwelling nomadic pastoralists dependent upon their herds, and hunter-fisher folk of the Arabian littoral, living in reed huts."

Hunters, farmers, herders... living side by side. Did they mix, or ignore/exploit each other ? Did some of them move on ?

An unusual social structure anyway - which leaves plenty of options open...
 
Also this Ydna void from the Caucasus seems almost like a set up for the next moment to come.

It feels as if the authors are aware of something and withholding and setting it up so that the next paper that comes out is almost like a final act in a narrative.
Johane, agree.
And most people do not seem to "get it" (mostly in other forums). this paper is about setting straight the record of who Maykop were. Nothing else. Now we know.

So, the paper has nothing to do with PIE, or R1B, etc. Just look at the staggering number of Y dna L in there. Like the ones found in Kura araxes and pretty clear the NEW component that made the south caucasus mix AFTER 4.900B.C. , after the disappearance of the Shulaveri. - Its obvious, that the last chapter will be about the Shulaveri and their dispersal to Steppe and Southeastern Balkans.
 
Thanks, John Derite, for the table of Y-haplo's in iran - the question is: very too small sample for Assyrians here!
 
Thanks, John Derite, for the table of Y-haplo's in iran - the question is: very too small sample for Assyrians here!

Yes I totally agree, it annoyed me quite a bit also. But I wasn't able to find any other study that did all of Irans different peoples neatly like this. The paper is from 2012, so its very old now, maybe someone
has done something more in depth.

Anyway when you dont have much to work with, better to keep working than wait imo.

Pluto 1994 vs Pluto 2018:

Screen_Shot_2018-04-24_at_22.24.25.jpg


LINK: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0041252
 
I think we can all agree that this era in the Caucasus/South Steppe was not one of great migrations of people, but rather of great ideas. Novel technologies such as wagons and knowledge of sophisticated metallurgy were being transported quite rapidly by intrepid individuals, but they were few and did not influence the genetic composition of the steppe as we can see in Steppe and Caucasus samples who do not even share a single y-dna haplogroup and the stability of the autosomal admixture in the steppe. Different cultures of close proximity were also interpreting this technology through separate lenses with steppe people focusing on the wagons and Maykop focusing on the animals that pulled them, interestingly enough neither saw them as status markers at first. We can assume this migration of ideas did not usurp the original language of the steppe either as this technology was spread over the middle east and we still see a rich diversity of languages there centuries later. Maykop has been hypothesized to be both Kartvelian and Northwest Caucasian, considering the NW Caucasians supposed relationship with IE and the distribution of modern NW Caucasian speakers I'd say the latter is more likely. Everyone here has the right idea and looking further back in time to the original source of CHG (and cattle) in the steppe as the progenitors of what would eventually become PIE/LPIE or whatever term you wish to call it, this also gives more time for Anatolian languages if the Indo-Hittite theory is correct.


From Wiki : "The appearance of the Ubaid folk has sometimes been linked to the so-called Sumerian problem, related to the origins of Sumerian civilisation. Whatever the ethnic origins of this group, this culture saw for the first time a clear tripartite social division between intensive subsistence peasant farmers, with crops and animals coming from the north, tent-dwelling nomadic pastoralists dependent upon their herds, and hunter-fisher folk of the Arabian littoral, living in reed huts."

Hunters, farmers, herders... living side by side. Did they mix, or ignore/exploit each other ? Did some of them move on ?

An unusual social structure anyway - which leaves plenty of options open...

It's not too unusual, this is exactly what was going on in South Asia during the IVC, but in India it was a stable system that lasted for much longer. It does give me a farfetched idea though, there have been theories that much of the mideast was a sprachbund where separate languages were used depending on the context of the conversation e.g you use a different language in mercantile, pastoral, religious or urban related situations. Is it possible that the original PIE or so called EPIE was the language of the pastoralists?
 
Also this Ydna void from the Caucasus seems almost like a set up for the next moment to come.

It feels as if the authors are aware of something and withholding and setting it up so that the next paper that comes out is almost like a final act in a narrative.

I don’t know, but the assyians have no M73. So is it possible for only M269 to cross over the caucasus?
We have yamna M269, eneolithic steppe R1b(?) and botai M73 in the steppe.

So I think Bolshemysskaya P297 sample in Altai would be connected the R1b and the M73.
 
From Wiki : "The appearance of the Ubaid folk has sometimes been linked to the so-called Sumerian problem, related to the origins of Sumerian civilisation. Whatever the ethnic origins of this group, this culture saw for the first time a clear tripartite social division between intensive subsistence peasant farmers, with crops and animals coming from the north, tent-dwelling nomadic pastoralists dependent upon their herds, and hunter-fisher folk of the Arabian littoral, living in reed huts."

Hunters, farmers, herders... living side by side. Did they mix, or ignore/exploit each other ? Did some of them move on ?

An unusual social structure anyway - which leaves plenty of options open...

Yup, mentioned this earlier on in a different thread - and this thread too I think.

Expect more R1b, and later J2.
 
Did you even bother reading the paper? This paper burried your Steppes hypothesis finally. Even the authors themselve say this. Embarrassing.

Did you bother to read it? Because this paper doesn't even remotely bury the steppe theory. If anything, it buries the south of the Caucasus theory. Because, if the PIE homeland is there, how did late PIE get in the steppe? Not by males. And that is what this paper's data says.
 
Did you bother to read it? Because this paper doesn't even remotely bury the steppe theory. If anything, it buries the south of the Caucasus theory. Because, if the PIE homeland is there, how did late PIE get in the steppe? Not by males. And that is what this paper's data says.

Is there data from the early Maykop period not in the Steppe?

Also am I right in saying Maykop samples are either from the Steppe or just south in the higher lands?
 
In Iran Assyrians and Zoroastrians are interesting in terms of R1b. Abrahamic religion took a lot from Zoroastrians:

ub7rG3E.jpg

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
 
Well they actually have done it... look at their graph, CWC have more CHG than EHG, Yamnaya have more CHG than EHG. Genetically, everything is going in they way they have meant to, meaning they have the result of those samples between a long time now and that they already have create a story around them. Thats a huge meli-melo, because EHG is ANE + WHG but CHG is Iran_Neolithic + something WHG / EHG. Meaning there is no way to say what is what, Satsurblia is older than Iran_Neolithic, so what's the ancestor of Iran_Neolithic ( that have ANE ) that contribute to the early CHG ? This is really a mind breaker at this point, CHG needs to be clearly defined without any Iran_Neolithic because it is technically older than Iran_Neolithic. The response of CHG can only come from paleolithic samples of eastern europe and iran / armenian plateau. And they have create that new ANF for refute the possibility than anatolian neolithic ancestry in steppe came from EEF, i mean i'm not a complotist really, but in this study everything mingle a little too much good, more than a hundreded yamnaya samples didn't have any anatolian_neolithic at all and now in that study it pops from everywhere, but it didn't came from europe, so frome where, the caucasus ? that study is not clear at all, where in all previous studies it let place to controversy, this one tries to underground the steppe one for good, with newly created genetic notions.

If they did, I missed it. As far as I can see, the very large percentage of CHG that they present are there in the steppe populations since a very early time, it's already present in large proportions in the Eneolithic samples. So, it does not seem like that they found that "extra CHG" that I'm talking about. I'm not talking about an "extra" amount of CHG in relation to other studies, but in terms of comparing the earliest with the latest steppe samples, that is, a diachronic increase in CHG ancestry during the Eneolithic until the Yamnaya expansion, which would suggest that "CHG-led Indo-Europeanization" of the steppe that the South Caucasus hypothesis relies on. That does not seem to have happened. If the influx of CHG happened before those Eneolithic ~4300 BC samples then it wasn't even related to any big economic revolution, like farming and pastoralism, because the bulk of these changes came to the steppes later.

Actually even Eurogenes in his blog had repeatedly posted about Yamnaya samples showing some minor ANF or more specifically EEF-derived ancestry. It's just that the scientists' data were much less numerous and comprehensive until a few years ago. Also, EEF had already been identified years ago in significant proportions in a few Sredny Stog individuals just west of Yamanaya, in the steppes, so it would be really unbelievable if not even the later stages of Yamnaya, when it basically absorbed and superseded Sredny Stog, did not show any EEF ancestry. So, if even knowledgeable amateurs like Davidski noticed that more than two years ago, I'm pretty sure most scientists already believed it was a possible outcome, too.

Also, I don't know where you took this idea that "they have create that new ANF for refute the possibility than anatolian neolithic ancestry in steppe came from EEF". Actually what they say in the study is exactly the opposite, that there was no ANF ancestry in earlier steppe samples and when it appears it comes together with WHG, so it probably came from EEF via the western EEF societies in Ukraine/Bulgaria/Romania. As far as I've understood they don't say most of it came from the Caucasus ANF/CHG mix at all.
 
Ok so i might have been completely wrong with the graph, but what is the green component because it pop as a majority in Iran_Neolithic ? And what is the red " Caucasus " component, because CHG is mainly green ? How i understand the graph is, in southern steppe, the CHG element become dominant over the EHG one and also a new component wich is the orange " Anatolian_Neolithic " pop up. But for what i see the orange component is only relevent for Maikop wich is not steppe but from south caucasus ?

I think those components do not mark more specific post-Neolithic Revolution admixtures like CHG, EHG or Iran_Neolithic. See that even these most ancient admixtures look like mixtures of some of these components, so they're probably indicating Paleolithic genetic structures. I'd say the green component is something ANE-related, because we can see CHG, EHG and Iran_Neolithic had it.
 
If they did, I missed it. As far as I can see, the very large percentage of CHG that they present are there in the steppe populations since a very early time, it's already present in large proportions in the Eneolithic samples. So, it does not seem like that they found that "extra CHG" that I'm talking about. I'm not talking about an "extra" amount of CHG in relation to other studies, but in terms of comparing the earliest with the latest steppe samples, that is, a diachronic increase in CHG ancestry during the Eneolithic until the Yamnaya expansion, which would suggest that "CHG-led Indo-Europeanization" of the steppe that the South Caucasus hypothesis relies on. That does not seem to have happened. If the influx of CHG happened before those Eneolithic ~4300 BC samples then it wasn't even related to any big economic revolution, like farming and pastoralism, because the bulk of these changes came to the steppes later.

Actually even Eurogenes in his blog had repeatedly posted about Yamnaya samples showing some minor ANF or more specifically EEF-derived ancestry. It's just that the scientists' data were much less numerous and comprehensive until a few years ago. Also, EEF had already been identified years ago in significant proportions in a few Sredny Stog individuals just west of Yamanaya, in the steppes, so it would be really unbelievable if not even the later stages of Yamnaya, when it basically absorbed and superseded Sredny Stog, did not show any EEF ancestry. So, if even knowledgeable amateurs like Davidski noticed that more than two years ago, I'm pretty sure most scientists already believed it was a possible outcome, too.

Also, I don't know where you took this idea that "they have create that new ANF for refute the possibility than anatolian neolithic ancestry in steppe came from EEF". Actually what they say in the study is exactly the opposite, that there was no ANF ancestry in earlier steppe samples and when it appears it comes together with WHG, so it probably came from EEF via the western EEF societies in Ukraine/Bulgaria/Romania. As far as I've understood they don't say most of it came from the Caucasus ANF/CHG mix at all.
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.
 

This thread has been viewed 239434 times.

Back
Top