Why Zoroastrians (Tehran) have no R1a?

It is interesting to read it: http://indiafacts.org/interview-wit...ri-on-his-new-book-genetics-the-aryan-debate/

The absurdity of Tony Joseph’s genetic claims can be judged from his claims about R1a1, which he describes as the “genetic signature” of the “Aryans”: “how do we know that R1a and its subgroups are linked to Indo-European language speakers in India? There is an easy way to check: look at the distribution of R1a among Indian population groups and see if they are linked to the traditional custodians of the Sanskrit language, the upper castes in general or the Brahmins in particular” (p.167). The Brahmins are the custodians of “Sanskrit” as also of “texts written in Sanskrit“. Ironically, R1a1 is found in much higher or comparatively similar percentage in non-Brahmin castes like Khatris (67%) and Gujarat Lohanas (60%), and even in non-Aryan speakers like the Manipuri people of the east (50%) and purely Dravidian tribes of the South like the Chenchu (26%) and Kota (23%), as compared with most Brahmin communities: the Iyengars have 31%. The endogamous “Aryan” Parsis in India and the endogamous Zoroastrians still in Iran, “the traditional custodians of the Avestan language“, have less than 20% (many Iranian groups going as low as 0-3%), while the non-“Aryan” Semites to their west include the Shammar Arabs in Kuwait (43%) and the Ashkenazi Levites of Israel (52%): the Ashkenazi Levites are “the traditional custodians of the Hebrew Old Testament text and language“!

I think this myth of R1a and Aryans should be forgotten.

Some Mitanni inscriptions have been discovered recently in Iraq, it is possible they say some new things about Indo-Aryan culture in this land.
 
It is interesting to read it: http://indiafacts.org/interview-wit...ri-on-his-new-book-genetics-the-aryan-debate/



I think this myth of R1a and Aryans should be forgotten.

Some Mitanni inscriptions have been discovered recently in Iraq, it is possible they say some new things about Indo-Aryan culture in this land.

Most r1a speak indo european languages though. It’s most ancient samples are around the Pontic caspian steppe and they uphold the most archaic forms of indo European substrate. If they’re not indo Europeans what are they?

also I don’t think anyone calls all R1a as Aryan. The Aryans are tied to the Indo Aryan Z93. It’s inportant to remember here that even this line spread from Eastern Europe and genetically were probably made of of similar genetic origin as Z280 and M458 prior to their expansion east and into India.
 
Dibran said:
Most r1a speak indo european languages though. It’s most ancient samples are around the Pontic caspian steppe and they uphold the most archaic forms of indo European substrate. If they’re not indo Europeans what are they?
also I don’t think anyone calls all R1a as Aryan. The Aryans are tied to the Indo Aryan Z93. It’s inportant to remember here that even this line spread from Eastern Europe and genetically were probably made of of similar genetic origin as Z280 and M458 prior to their expansion east and into India.

R1a is actually the main haplogroup of Uralic and Altaic people, some of them adopted an Indo-European culture but most of them preserved their own culture, Z93 has the highest frequency in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia.
If Indo-Iranian originally lived in the Uralic and Altaic lands, we should certainly find many proto-Uralic and proto-Altaic words in this language but we can't find almost any word from those languages in Indo-Iranian, but there are certainly many Indo-Iranian words in those languages, especially proto-Uralic, it shows either Indo-Iranians migrated from south Asia to modern Russia, not vice versa, or they lived there too earlier than Uralic and Altaic people, probably in the 5th millennium BC.
 
I think this myth of R1a and Aryans should be forgotten.
The only common component in the autosomal DNA of Iranian-speaking populations is
European - principally North East European. If the apparently North East European originators of the Iranian languages were not partly of R1a origin, to which other North East European paternal haplogroup could they have belonged?
 
The only common component in the autosomal DNA of Iranian-speaking populations is
European - principally North East European. If the apparently North East European originators of the Iranian languages were not partly of R1a origin, to which other North East European paternal haplogroup could they have belonged?

Why North East European? The main Haplogroup of western Iranian-speaking people (Cimmerians) was R1b, they certainly migrated from Europe but Central/Southeast Europe, those who lived in East/Northeast Europe were mostly Scytho-Sarmatians.
 
Pip is referring to autosomal DNA, not solely Y-DNA. Conflating the two is going to cause some misunderstandings.
 
Why North East European? The main Haplogroup of western Iranian-speaking people (Cimmerians) was R1b, they certainly migrated from Europe but Central/Southeast Europe, those who lived in East/Northeast Europe were mostly Scytho-Sarmatians.
North East because that's where the samples best fit autosomally (Czech, Polish, Swedish) - all R1a1a1b or associated with R1a1a1b.
Which subclades of R1b are you suggesting? (R1b was very diverse by then) Weren't Cimmerians similar autosomally to Sarmatians? (Too North East Asia influenced to be a substantial contributor to Iranians?)
 
North East because that's where the samples best fit autosomally (Czech, Polish, Swedish) - all R1a1a1b or associated with R1a1a1b.
Which subclades of R1b are you suggesting? (R1b was very diverse by then) Weren't Cimmerians similar autosomally to Sarmatians? (Too North East Asia influenced to be a substantial contributor to Iranians?)
R1a1a1b has a very low frequency in Iran but R1b1a1a2a in the northwest to the southwest of Iran where Cimmerians (Persians) lived, has a high frequency. Sarmatians were an eastern Iranian people, they originally lived in the Central Asia. As said in another thread, Cimmerians (Persians) were originally a Thracian or Illyrian people who adopted an Iranian language, we see very different sound changes in eastern and western Iranian languages, for example Persian bištan and Avestan duuaēθā have the same Iranian origin: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/dwey-
 
R1a1a1b has a very low frequency in Iran but R1b1a1a2a in the northwest to the southwest of Iran where Cimmerians (Persians) lived, has a high frequency. Sarmatians were an eastern Iranian people, they originally lived in the Central Asia. As said in another thread, Cimmerians (Persians) were originally a Thracian or Illyrian people who adopted an Iranian language, we see very different sound changes in eastern and western Iranian languages, for example Persian bištan and Avestan duuaēθā have the same Iranian origin: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/dwey-

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3346985

2 Cimmerians in the North Pontic Steppe were R1a as well though, so why exclude them and pretend they didn't have R1a? Because its not convenient for your agenda?

"Most of the male ancients, including two Cimmerians from the North Pontic steppe, in what is now Ukraine, belong to Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a.Out of the 31 samples of this study, 16 are male, and with sufficient Y-chromosome coverage for haplogroup assignment (Table S2). R1a (43%) and I (27%) are the two most frequent Y- chromosome hgs in present-day Ukrainians [142]. R1a is also the predominant lineage among Cimmerians, Scy_Ukr and ScySar_SU in our data, and present among Scy_Kaz as well. "
 
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3346985

2 Cimmerians in the North Pontic Steppe were R1a as well though, so why exclude them and pretend they didn't have R1a? Because its not convenient for your agenda?

"Most of the male ancients, including two Cimmerians from the North Pontic steppe, in what is now Ukraine, belong to Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a.Out of the 31 samples of this study, 16 are male, and with sufficient Y-chromosome coverage for haplogroup assignment (Table S2). R1a (43%) and I (27%) are the two most frequent Y- chromosome hgs in present-day Ukrainians [142]. R1a is also the predominant lineage among Cimmerians, Scy_Ukr and ScySar_SU in our data, and present among Scy_Kaz as well. "

I really don't know why you insist that Iranian haplogroup is just R1a, whereas this haplogroup has a very low frequency in the lands that we know certain Iranian-speaking people, like Persians, lived. It is not really clear that all ancient Scythians and Cimmerians spoke Iranian or not, but ancient Persians were certainly an Iranian-speaking people, so Iranian haplogroup should be related to them, not some unknown people.
 
I really don't know why you insist that Iranian haplogroup is just R1a, whereas this haplogroup has a very low frequency in the lands that we know certain Iranian-speaking people, like Persians, lived. It is not really clear that all ancient Scythians and Cimmerians spoke Iranian or not, but ancient Persians were certainly an Iranian-speaking people, so Iranian haplogroup should be related to them, not some unknown people.

The Scythians who were in contact with the Greeks were definitely Eastern Iranian speaking tribes, however within the Scytho-Siberian sphere it's not clear exactly how widespread East Iranian languages were. It's pretty clear that R1a has something to with Iranian speaking groups whether you wish to accept that or not is up to you (and clearly you won't accept it because it doesn't support your theory).
 
The Scythians who were in contact with the Greeks were definitely Eastern Iranian speaking tribes, however within the Scytho-Siberian sphere it's not clear exactly how widespread East Iranian languages were. It's pretty clear that R1a has something to with Iranian speaking groups whether you wish to accept that or not is up to you (and clearly you won't accept it because it doesn't support your theory).

These are geneticists, not me, who say Iran is the source of R1a, not its destination, if you believe another thing, please prove it.
 
These are geneticists, not me, who say Iran is the source of R1a, not its destination, if you believe another thing, please prove it.
The source of R1a isn't relevant to this issue, as it originated tens of thousands of years beforehand. Likewise, generalisations about what R1a or R1b was or did in the 1st millennium BC are meaningless, as both had branched out all over the place and were very diverse by then. They didn't divide themselves according to basic DNA haplogroups, and stick to populations bearing only these haplogroups over many tens of thousands of years
 
R1a1a1b has a very low frequency in Iran but R1b1a1a2a in the northwest to the southwest of Iran where Cimmerians (Persians) lived, has a high frequency. Sarmatians were an eastern Iranian people, they originally lived in the Central Asia. As said in another thread, Cimmerians (Persians) were originally a Thracian or Illyrian people who adopted an Iranian language, we see very different sound changes in eastern and western Iranian languages, for example Persian bištan and Avestan duuaēθā have the same Iranian origin: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/dwey-

Yes, specifically R1b-CTS7822 looks to have been present in the same Eastern Baltic area and culture (Eastern Corded Ware) as R1a1a1b, and both almost certainly mixed into the same core population.

It looks likely that Ossetians inherited their Iranian language from people with a branch of East European CTS7822 (Y5587) as one of their dominant paternal haplogroups.

This mixed Eastern Baltic population looks to have been the common component of Iranian-speaking peoples from Ossetia to Iran to Tajikstan, and installed its own language in a number of places despite only contributing about 10% of autosomal DNA to each. To me, they look most likely to be a domineering, colonising minority who were eventually absorbed by their host populations.
 
Eastern Iranian-speakers (as evidenced in Ossetians) also appear to have more in common autosomally with R1b-Z2109 lineages; whereas Western-Iranian speakers appear to have more of a mixed R1a-Z645/R1b-Z2109 profile. Are there any linguistic differences that might reflect this distinction?

As the newcomers introducing the Iranian language to Iran might have been a minority, is it possible that Zoroastrianism could have represented a remnant of an earlier indigenous religious tradition that the newcomers allowed to resurge?

It's difficult assessing the yDNA of Iranians, as the relatively sparse data is so inspecific. As I've said before, identifications like 'R1a' and 'R1b' are general enough to be of little information value.
 
Indo-Iranian migration to Iran is just a myth, it has been also said that haplogroup R1b relates to Indo-Iranians but we see this haplogroup has the highest frequency among Assyrians in Tehran.
mfmn_assyrians.jpg

Yeah, I think we will find R1b-L23 among Elamites.

Some say Elamite was equidistant between Afroasiatic and Dravidian. Both Ashur and Elam are sons of Shem in the Hebrew Bible.

The migration is real in a way, imho, but the homeland, the timeframe, the routes etc. are all wrong.
 
Yes, but which types of L23, all different kinds of which are spread around the world?

I was thinking more of mid 2nd millennium BC Nerkin Getashen with its mix (similar to Zoroastrians) of (i) E1b1b1 (possibly of Elamite or Assyrian origin) and R1b, and (ii) Middle Eastern, Steppic and Caucasian components. The existence of E1b1b1 in Nerkin Getashen and its high proportion in the Zoroastrian samples is as striking as the absence of Zoroastrian R1a.

Perhaps Zoroastrianism was a re-emergence of some traditions of these people, who predated the arrival of the Iranian language in this part of the world?
 
Grugni et al reported 17.6% R1a1a (R1a1a* in the paper) among Yazd Zoroastrians. They also reported some R-L23 (L23* in the paper) in Tehran Zoroastrians. I'm not sure what "absence" means here?
 
Grugni et al reported 17.6% R1a1a (R1a1a* in the paper) among Yazd Zoroastrians. They also reported some R-L23 (L23* in the paper) in Tehran Zoroastrians. I'm not sure what "absence" means here?

Absence means the lack of any R1a in the sampled Tehran Zoroastrians, which is the subject of this thread. Yes, there is R1a in Yazd Zoroastrians.

As is the case with most academic papers, I would advise approaching this one with caution:
1. It finds no R1a1a1 in 938 samples across the whole of Iran - highly unlikely, considering that nearly all R1a samples everywhere are R1a1a1, and that R1a1a* is virtually non-existent (with only a handful of known samples in far NW Europe). Indeed, it is not even clear what R1a1a* means, as it is not defined.
2. The R-L23* readings are not very useful either, as they are probably not what we would now refer to as L23*, but Z2103, of which there are many different subclades spread widely across the whole area between Western Europe and China.

If accurate, however, the more striking results from the paper are:
E-M35 Zoroastrian (all) 19%, Iran (other) 8%
G Zoroastrian (all) 4%, Iran (other) 12%
J-M530 Zoroastrian (all) 17%, Iran (other) 5%
J-page55 Zoroastrian (all) 32%, Iran (other) 12%

This is why Zoroastrians as a distinctive group appear to pre-date Iranian speakers. They seem more heavily drawn from older mixed immigrant populations like Nerkin Getashen, which had both E1b and Middle-Eastern aDNA from the South and Steppic/Caucasian aDNA from the North.
 
The source of R1a isn't relevant to this issue, as it originated tens of thousands of years beforehand. Likewise, generalisations about what R1a or R1b was or did in the 1st millennium BC are meaningless, as both had branched out all over the place and were very diverse by then. They didn't divide themselves according to basic DNA haplogroups, and stick to populations bearing only these haplogroups over many tens of thousands of years

It seems both R1a and R1b came to Iran from the Europe, adopted an Indo-European culture and came back to Europe.
 

This thread has been viewed 39450 times.

Back
Top