Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 177

Thread: Genetic History of Anatolia during Holocene

  1. #1
    Regular Member Anfänger's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-04-18
    Posts
    350

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U7a4

    Ethnic group
    Iranian
    Country: Germany



    5 members found this post helpful.

    Genetic History of Anatolia during Holocene

    Genetic History of Anatolia during Holocene

    Anatolia has been a key region in Eurasian history, acting as a bridge for cultural exchanges between Europe and Asia during the Holocene. However, the demographic transformation of Anatolian and neighbouring populations during these ten millennia is largely unknown. This work has two main research foci: 1) to investigate the role of gene flow in cultural interactions during the Neolithic period between Central Anatolian and Aegean communities and to evaluate the possibility of large-scale human movements during Neolithization of the Aegean, 2) to assess population continuity in Anatolia and its surrounding regions. For this aim, we produced 49 new ancient genomes and analysed this data in conjunction with published aDNA datasets. We first investigated whether early Aegean Neolithic populations were established by farmer colonization from Central Anatolia or by local hunter-gatherers. Our results showed that the Aegean Neolithic populations may have been descendants of local hunter-gatherers who adapted farming. We then tackled the question of how populations interacted in time and space from the Epipaleolithic period to the present-day. We found that genetic diversity within each region in Southwest Asia and East Mediterranean steadily increased through the Holocene. We further observed that the sources of gene flow shifted in time. In the first half of the Holocene, regional populations homogenised among themselves. Starting with the Bronze Age, however, they diverged from each other, driven most likely by gene flow from external sources. This expanding mobility in time was accompanied by growing male-bias in admixture events. This work sheds new light on fine-scale population structure in Anatolian demographic history, filling a gap in our understanding of the nature of prehistoric and historic population interactions, not only among Anatolian populations but also with their neighbouring societies.

    Link:https://open.metu.edu.tr/handle/11511/99472

    I1NZe5c.jpg

    P0PyGQU.jpg




  2. #2
    Regular Member Anfänger's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-04-18
    Posts
    350

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U7a4

    Ethnic group
    Iranian
    Country: Germany



    6 members found this post helpful.
    Might be interesting for our Southern European(Greek/Italian) members:

    The Aegean

    Recent studies showed the Neolithic Aegean populations were genetically highly similar to Anatolian Ceramic Neolithic populations, especially to the Western Anatolian Neolithic pop- ulation represented by Barcın Höyük [55, 46, 88]. During the transition from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age (BA) the Aegean received eastern (South Caucasus/Iran-related) gene flow, in parallel with Anatolia, but further received a variable degree of EHG/Steppe-related ances- try [88, 85]. Accordingly, in our qpAdm analyses we could describe Bronze Age Aegeans via two- or three-way mixture models of Aegean Neolithic-related populations (60-83%), South Caucasus/Iran-related populations (12-20%), and EHG-related populations (0-25%). Notably, there was no evidence for EHG-related ancestry in Early BA individuals, including our earliest samples from Perachora (Figure 10, 12). Later BA individuals, however, includ- ing the new samples from Sarakinos and from Theopetra, as well as published Aegean MBA individuals, showed strong genetic affinity to EHG/Steppe populations and carried 17-25% EHG-related ancestry (Figure 10, 12). This confirms the earlier observation of a gradual and partial diffusion of EHG-related ancestry in present-day Greece [85] and further informs the current discussion about the timing of the first arrival(s) of people of Steppe-related ancestry in the Greek Mainland. Based on our new data, this appear to have started by c.4200 BP, thus pushing these arrivals back into the late Early Bronze Age, i.e. before the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age as hitherto known.

    Anatolia
    Earlier work had shown that Central Anatolia Ceramic (i.e., late) Neolithic groups, compared to those from the earlier Aceramic Neolithic period, carried additional southern (Levant- related) and eastern (Zagros/Caucasus-related) ancestry components [49, 46, 47]. Here, we report the earliest Anatolian Neolithic genomes that carry these admixture signals in Musu- lar_N. Musular is an Aceramic site, but its genetic ancestry profile appears similar to mid-9th millennium BP Çatalhöyük of the Ceramic period. This suggests that putative eastern and southern gene flow events into Central Anatolia had occurred prior to the 10th millennium BP (Figure 10).
    In the post-Neolithic period, our qpAdm results show that the Central Anatolia’s gene pool can be described as a two-way admixture between Anatolian Neolithic ancestry and additional South Caucasus/Iran-related ancestry. Little to no Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (EHG)/Steppe- related ancestry is detected in Anatolia, as opposed to that in Europe, including neighboring mainland Greece [88, 85]. The only exception to this pattern was the Kaman Kalehöyük IA individual, that carried EHG-related ancestry, which could be related to historically known interactions between Central and West Anatolia and Southeast Europe that continued during the Iron Age [99, 100]. However, this individual does not appear to have left a legacy in the gene pool, at least given the lack of EHG ancestry in Bog ̆azköy Roman individuals from Central Anatolia (n=3) (Figure 10, Figure 11).
    Finally, the genomes of Ottoman individuals from Bog ̆azköy and Kaman Kalehöyük carried variable levels of additional Baikal Neolithic-related alleles (0-50%), most likely representing heterogeneous levels of Turkic admixture in the 1st millennium BP, a signature detectable in the present-day Anatolian gene pool (Figure 10, 11, see also [101]).





  3. #3
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    1,864

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Rare e-fgc7391 972AD
    MtDNA haplogroup
    h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    2 members found this post helpful.
    table 3:

    Girmeler gir001 7,738-7,597BCE 0.109 XX K1a -

    Ulucak ulu007 6,800-6,600BCE 0.139 XX K1a -

    Ulucak ulu008 6,800-6,600BCE 0.476 XY H G2a2a1

    Ulucak ulu009 6,800-6,600BCE 0.108 XY K1a1 G2a2b2a1

    Bademagacı ˘bad017 6,400-6,100BCE 3.645 XX H -

    Bademagacı ˘bad019 6,400-6,100BCE 6.317 XY T1a4 H2

    Bademagacı ˘bad022 6,400-6,100BCE 0.228 XY T2b+16362 G2a2a1

    Bademagacı ˘bad023 6,400-6,100BCE 0.095 XY K1a4 Unknown

    Bademagacı ˘bad024 6,400-6,100BCE 0.238 XX T2c1+146 -

    Bademagacı ˘bad025 6,400-6,100BCE 1.443 XY N1a1a1 J2a

    Bademagacı ˘bad026 6,400-6,100BCE 0.318 XY H5 BT

    Bademagacı ˘bad030 6,400-6,100BCE 0.411 XY HV+16311 T1a1

    Bademagacı ˘bad033 6,400-6,100BCE 0.087 XY T2c C1a1

    Bademagacı ˘bad034 6,400-6,100BCE 0.209 XX J1c -




    table 4:



    BOG019 Bogazköy, Turkey 1725 100-350 CE 0.326 XY X2n T1a1a

    BOG020 Bogazköy, Turkey 1790 130-190 CE 2.202 XY X2f BT

    BOG024 Bogazköy, Turkey 1790 130-190 CE 0.484 XY H13c1a J2a1

    BOG028 Bogazköy, Turkey 500 1000 - 1900 CE 1.332 XX HV1b3b -

    CTG025 ÇineTepecik,Turkey 3869 1977-1772 calBCE 0.191 XX W6b -

    GOR001 Gordion, Turkey2116 333 BC -0 7.548 XY H14a J2a1

    GOR002 Gordion, Turkey 2116 333 BC -0 0.074 XX K1a3 -

    mus005 Musular,Turkey 9222 7377-7167 BCE 2.463 XX K1a4 -

    mus006 Musular, Turkey 9060 7180-7039 BCE 0.140 XY N1a1a1b F

    ulu117 Ulucak, Turkey 5450 4000-3000 BCE 0.360 XX J1c11 -

    G23 Theopetra, Greece 4187 2335-2140 calBCE 0.426 XY H5 I2a2a1b

    G37 Sarakinos, Greece 4262 2325-2300 calBCE 0.228 XY H11a2 J

    G31 Perachora, Greece 4400 2700-2200 BCE 0.213 XY J1c2 J

    G62 Perachora, Greece 4400 2700-2200 BCE 0.628 XY J1c G2a2b2a

    G65 Perachora, Greece 4400 2700-2200 BCE 0.271 XX T2c1d+152 -

    G66 Perachora, Greece 4400 2700-2200 BCE 0.112 XX H2a -

    G76a Perachora, Greece 4407 2565-2350 calBCE 0.739 XX T2c1+146 -

    geo005 Didnauri, Georgia 3104 1257-1051 calBCE 0.077 XY U7b NA

    geo006 Didnauri, Georgia 2881 1017-846 calBCE 0.046 XY X2 O1b1a2 ( strange probably mistake of there lab)

    geo015 Doghlauri, Georgia 4902 3015-2890 calBCE 0.189 XY K1a J2a1b1

    geo017 Doghlauri, Georgia 3155 1291-1119 calBCE 0.033 XX H4b -

    geo029 Didnauri, Georgia 3077 1219-1036 calBCE 0.092 XY I5c R1b1a2a2

    gur016 Nazarlebi, Georgia 3250 1500-1000 BCE 0.021 XY K2a2 H1b1

    gur017 Nazarlebi, Georgia 3250 1500-1000 BCE 0.215 XY N1a1a1a I

    gur019 Nazarlebi, Georgia 3251 1500-1000 BCE 0.030 XX K1a4b -

    zrj003 Shamakhi, Azerbaijan 1722 133 - 324 calCE 0.273 XY K1a19 J1

    sha003 Shahtepe, Iran 5100 3200 - 3100 BCE 3.346 XX H14 -

    sha004 Shahtepe, Iran 5121 3240 - 3102 calBCE 3.877 XY I1a J1

    sha006 Shahtepe, Iran 5100 3200 - 3100 BCE 2.548 XX J1b1b1 -

    sha007 Shahtepe, Iran 5121 3242 - 3101 calBCE 3.945 XX HV13b -

    sha008 Shahtepe, Iran 5100 3200 - 3100 BCE 1.805 XX K1a12a -

    sha009 Shahtepe, Iran 5165 3344 - 3086 calBCE 0.250 XX U5a2+16294

    sha010 Shahtepe, Iran 5100 3200 - 3100 BCE 1.400 XX HV2 -

    sha012 Shahtepe, Iran 5100 3200 - 3100 BCE 1.075 XY U1a J1a3

    sha014 Shahtepe, Iran5100 3200 - 3100 BCE 1.996 XY HV13b T1a
    Direct paternal line : mizrahi from damascus
    Ftdna path
    E-M96>CTS9083>P147>P177>M215>M35>Z827>CTS10298>PF196 2>M123>M34>L795>S11835>S12033>S11956>S11168>S10483 >BY96055

  4. #4
    Viscount
    Join Date
    10-06-12
    Posts
    723

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-BY593
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2

    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Interesting Anatolia,Iran, Levant have Seditism, Farming, Pottery at upper band of 10000 YBP. Amur river basin, Elshanka, Yamnaya development of pottery without farming and Seditism.With Amur river pottery roughly 6000+/- older than farming pottery in Mesopotamia.

    Suum cuique-ancient ochre elite burial cultures in Seredny Stih phase II, Yamnaya
    - ochre burials with wagons, copper cudgel ,tanged daggers,iron-powder, beads, iron tools -weapons. Turganik Dom2 -horses; horse head shaped scepters, Kernosovkiy idol horse .

  5. #5
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,841

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Anfänger View Post
    Might be interesting for our Southern European(Greek/Italian) members:

    The Aegean

    Recent studies showed the Neolithic Aegean populations were genetically highly similar to Anatolian Ceramic Neolithic populations, especially to the Western Anatolian Neolithic pop- ulation represented by Barcın Höyük [55, 46, 88]. During the transition from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age (BA) the Aegean received eastern (South Caucasus/Iran-related) gene flow, in parallel with Anatolia, but further received a variable degree of EHG/Steppe-related ances- try [88, 85]. Accordingly, in our qpAdm analyses we could describe Bronze Age Aegeans via two- or three-way mixture models of Aegean Neolithic-related populations (60-83%), South Caucasus/Iran-related populations (12-20%), and EHG-related populations (0-25%). Notably, there was no evidence for EHG-related ancestry in Early BA individuals, including our earliest samples from Perachora (Figure 10, 12). Later BA individuals, however, includ- ing the new samples from Sarakinos and from Theopetra, as well as published Aegean MBA individuals, showed strong genetic affinity to EHG/Steppe populations and carried 17-25% EHG-related ancestry (Figure 10, 12). This confirms the earlier observation of a gradual and partial diffusion of EHG-related ancestry in present-day Greece [85] and further informs the current discussion about the timing of the first arrival(s) of people of Steppe-related ancestry in the Greek Mainland. Based on our new data, this appear to have started by c.4200 BP, thus pushing these arrivals back into the late Early Bronze Age, i.e. before the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age as hitherto known.

    Anatolia
    Earlier work had shown that Central Anatolia Ceramic (i.e., late) Neolithic groups, compared to those from the earlier Aceramic Neolithic period, carried additional southern (Levant- related) and eastern (Zagros/Caucasus-related) ancestry components [49, 46, 47]. Here, we report the earliest Anatolian Neolithic genomes that carry these admixture signals in Musu- lar_N. Musular is an Aceramic site, but its genetic ancestry profile appears similar to mid-9th millennium BP Çatalhöyük of the Ceramic period. This suggests that putative eastern and southern gene flow events into Central Anatolia had occurred prior to the 10th millennium BP (Figure 10).
    In the post-Neolithic period, our qpAdm results show that the Central Anatolia’s gene pool can be described as a two-way admixture between Anatolian Neolithic ancestry and additional South Caucasus/Iran-related ancestry. Little to no Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (EHG)/Steppe- related ancestry is detected in Anatolia, as opposed to that in Europe, including neighboring mainland Greece [88, 85]. The only exception to this pattern was the Kaman Kalehöyük IA individual, that carried EHG-related ancestry, which could be related to historically known interactions between Central and West Anatolia and Southeast Europe that continued during the Iron Age [99, 100]. However, this individual does not appear to have left a legacy in the gene pool, at least given the lack of EHG ancestry in Bog ̆azköy Roman individuals from Central Anatolia (n=3) (Figure 10, Figure 11).
    Finally, the genomes of Ottoman individuals from Bog ̆azköy and Kaman Kalehöyük carried variable levels of additional Baikal Neolithic-related alleles (0-50%), most likely representing heterogeneous levels of Turkic admixture in the 1st millennium BP, a signature detectable in the present-day Anatolian gene pool (Figure 10, 11, see also [101]).




    Highly interesting indeed, thank you for sharing!

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-03-12
    Posts
    345


    Ethnic group
    Greek
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Anfänger View Post
    Might be interesting for our Southern European(Greek/Italian) members:

    The Aegean

    Recent studies showed the Neolithic Aegean populations were genetically highly similar to Anatolian Ceramic Neolithic populations, especially to the Western Anatolian Neolithic pop- ulation represented by Barcın Höyük [55, 46, 88]. During the transition from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age (BA) the Aegean received eastern (South Caucasus/Iran-related) gene flow, in parallel with Anatolia, but further received a variable degree of EHG/Steppe-related ances- try [88, 85]. Accordingly, in our qpAdm analyses we could describe Bronze Age Aegeans via two- or three-way mixture models of Aegean Neolithic-related populations (60-83%), South Caucasus/Iran-related populations (12-20%), and EHG-related populations (0-25%). Notably, there was no evidence for EHG-related ancestry in Early BA individuals, including our earliest samples from Perachora (Figure 10, 12). Later BA individuals, however, includ- ing the new samples from Sarakinos and from Theopetra, as well as published Aegean MBA individuals, showed strong genetic affinity to EHG/Steppe populations and carried 17-25% EHG-related ancestry (Figure 10, 12). This confirms the earlier observation of a gradual and partial diffusion of EHG-related ancestry in present-day Greece [85] and further informs the current discussion about the timing of the first arrival(s) of people of Steppe-related ancestry in the Greek Mainland. Based on our new data, this appear to have started by c.4200 BP, thus pushing these arrivals back into the late Early Bronze Age, i.e. before the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age as hitherto known.

    Anatolia
    Earlier work had shown that Central Anatolia Ceramic (i.e., late) Neolithic groups, compared to those from the earlier Aceramic Neolithic period, carried additional southern (Levant- related) and eastern (Zagros/Caucasus-related) ancestry components [49, 46, 47]. Here, we report the earliest Anatolian Neolithic genomes that carry these admixture signals in Musu- lar_N. Musular is an Aceramic site, but its genetic ancestry profile appears similar to mid-9th millennium BP Çatalhöyük of the Ceramic period. This suggests that putative eastern and southern gene flow events into Central Anatolia had occurred prior to the 10th millennium BP (Figure 10).
    In the post-Neolithic period, our qpAdm results show that the Central Anatolia’s gene pool can be described as a two-way admixture between Anatolian Neolithic ancestry and additional South Caucasus/Iran-related ancestry. Little to no Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (EHG)/Steppe- related ancestry is detected in Anatolia, as opposed to that in Europe, including neighboring mainland Greece [88, 85]. The only exception to this pattern was the Kaman Kalehöyük IA individual, that carried EHG-related ancestry, which could be related to historically known interactions between Central and West Anatolia and Southeast Europe that continued during the Iron Age [99, 100]. However, this individual does not appear to have left a legacy in the gene pool, at least given the lack of EHG ancestry in Bog ̆azköy Roman individuals from Central Anatolia (n=3) (Figure 10, Figure 11).
    Finally, the genomes of Ottoman individuals from Bog ̆azköy and Kaman Kalehöyük carried variable levels of additional Baikal Neolithic-related alleles (0-50%), most likely representing heterogeneous levels of Turkic admixture in the 1st millennium BP, a signature detectable in the present-day Anatolian gene pool (Figure 10, 11, see also [101]).




    So the Ottoman individuals carried higher Turkic admixture than modern Turks do on average.

    In the Early Bronze Age the EHG levels in Greece were up to 25%. In contrary to the MBA Mycenaeans who had some 15%. Seems like they were more similar to MBA Thessalians Log01 and Log02. Or it could be that this is closer to the standard, but we simply have very few Ancient Greeks to work with. The Anatolians were similar to Aegean people prior to the arrival to of the Early Hunter gatherers. This is as expected. But it seems that Early Hunter gatheres did not take the Anatolia Caucasus route.

  7. #7
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    21,549


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silesian View Post
    Interesting Anatolia,Iran, Levant have Seditism, Farming, Pottery at upper band of 10000 YBP. Amur river basin, Elshanka, Yamnaya development of pottery without farming and Seditism.With Amur river pottery roughly 6000+/- older than farming pottery in Mesopotamia.
    I'm afraid you're mixing up pottery and farming.

    There was very little farming on the steppe, and what little there was arrived very late, and was brought by incomers.

    https://www.google.com/books/edition...20the%20steppe


    The same is true for the Amur River Valley.


    "The Neolithic period (8,000-7,000 BCE) is often taken to signify the start of land cultivation. However, the native peoples living in Siberia at that moment in history did not join in this global movement because of the difficulties associated with its severe climate.[7] Agricultural stirrings did reach Siberia by the second half of the 3rd millennium, when the peoples of the Afanasevo culture of southern Siberia (located, more specifically, in the southern reaches of the Ob River), started to practice agronomy. It was a slow start, however, as these peoples had very rudimentary cultivation skills. They used digging sticks (the previously mentioned mattocks) as their main farming tool, and they were not able to subsist solely on this practice and turned as well toward hunting, gathering, and the domestication of sheep, cows, and horses.[8]

    "
    Only during the Bronze Age, with the advent of bronze scythes, were Siberians able to reach the same agricultural level as had already been achieved in many other areas of the world. This occurred with the rise of the Andronovo culture that inhabited the area between the Tobol River and the Minusinsk Basin. These peoples were sedentary wheat farmers who engaged in barter with the Chinese people to the southeast of their lands, along the periphery of what was to later become Siberia.[9]"




    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Posts
    1,510

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2-M223
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H2A3

    Ethnic group
    Italian-Sicily-South
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Highly interesting indeed, thank you for sharing!
    Jovialis: A few points to consider (which I think are interesting), nothing dogmatic on my part, but just some quick observations/questions.

    1) Are these new samples from Anatolia from this Dissertation (it looks like) not in the Southern Arc papers?
    2) I assume they are not in the Southern Arc papers so these new Anatolian samples also show no Steppe admixture (EHG/CHG) into Anatolia which is one of the main findings of the Southern Arc papers. So the results here are consistent with the Southern Arc.
    3) The Aegean shows some Steppe impact, which was also documented in the Southern Arc papers (Myceneans harbor some Steppe) so these findings seem to be in line with what we know about the Myceneans harboring some Steppe.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-04-22
    Posts
    153


    Country: India



    This confirms the earlier observation of a gradual and partial diffusion of EHG-related ancestry in present-day Greece [85] and further informs the current discussion about the timing of the first arrival(s) of people of Steppe-related ancestry in the Greek Mainland. Based on our new data, this appear to have started by c.4200 BP, thus pushing these arrivals back into the late Early Bronze Age, i.e. before the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age as hitherto known.


    Steppe-related ancestry in the Greek Mainland in 2200 BC?


  10. #10
    researcher eupator's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-07-22
    Posts
    285

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-A12332*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6*

    Country: Greece



    geo029 Didnauri, Georgia 3077 1219-1036 calBCE 0.092 XY I5c R1b1a2a2


    is R-L23, probably Z2103>L584.

  11. #11
    researcher eupator's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-07-22
    Posts
    285

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-A12332*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6*

    Country: Greece



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Caucasus/Iran admixture of up to 20% is in line with Herodotus accords of the existence of kinship between Greeks and Persians.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-04-22
    Posts
    153


    Country: India



    Quote Originally Posted by eupator View Post
    geo029 Didnauri, Georgia 3077 1219-1036 calBCE 0.092 XY I5c R1b1a2a2


    is R-L23, probably Z2103>L584.
    These R1b samples have been found in places where we know Indo-Europeans didn't live there.

  13. #13
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    1,864

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Rare e-fgc7391 972AD
    MtDNA haplogroup
    h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    1 members found this post helpful.
    This study is great for our T
    Members in the forum (torzio, salento)
    From the table 3 and 4
    i posted above:

    6000 bc southwest turkey ( impressive)

    Bademagacı ˘bad030 6,400-6,100BCE 0.411 XY HV+16311 T1a1

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badema%C4%9Fac%C4%B1

    Also in north iran close to caspian sea
    But in a later date
    sha014 Shahtepe, Iran5100 3200 - 3100 BCE 1.996 XY HV13b T1a

    https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Tepe
    Last edited by kingjohn; 17-10-22 at 14:24.

  14. #14
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    21,549


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Moja View Post
    [/FONT][/COLOR]Steppe-related ancestry in the Greek Mainland in 2200 BC?

    It's just echoing the Southern Arc paper. They appear at the end of the Early Bronze Age, and so, contrary to the story which held sway for so long, Indo-European speakers did NOT bring the Bronze Age to Europe. Greece was already in it.

    Also, interesting how patchy it was, which goes along with their statement that it was very gradual. Hardly a conquest; more an absorption. That also explains why it wasn't structured: no upper class with steppe and lower class without it.

    Amazing how wrong the people who slavishly followed Anthony turned out to be.

  15. #15
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    21,549


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by eupator View Post
    Caucasus/Iran admixture of up to 20% is in line with Herodotus accords of the existence of kinship between Greeks and Persians.
    Goodness knows what Herodotus meant by Persians, though. Persians as in straight from Persia, or Persians as in people in the Persian Empire, which would have included Anatolians?

    Ethnography was not exactly his forte, as we have discovered in his writings about the Etruscans.

    Also, the spread was pretty extreme, from ten or less to a few with 20%, and the Caucasus/Iran Neo in Iranians looks like 80% in some of them, so I guess it depends on what you mean by kinship.

  16. #16
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    21,549


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    I'm not sure why the authors feel so confident that the Aegeans adopted agriculture instead of there being a movement of Anatolian Neolithic people into the area. Genetically, they appear almost indistinguishable, so you'd think they would need isotope analysis to try to clarify the issue.

    Also interesting on the PCA is the movement of Greek Bronze Age samples from a position virtually indistinguishable from Aegean/Anatolian Neolithic to getting pulled away a bit toward EHG, whereas the Anatolian Bronze Age samples make a pronounced movement toward Iran and the Caucasus. Then, there's another movement toward the Caucasus, explained by, for some of the samples, a lot of Siberian, i.e. Turkic ancestry by the Ottoman period.

    All of this would seem to make the statement that Anatolia never changed a bit of an overstatement.

    The relationship of the Anatolian and Levantine Bronze Age samples is also interesting. The Levantine Bronze shows a pronounced pull toward the Caucasus, as well as on the part of some of the Anatolian samples. There's also been what looks to me like a pull of some of the Levantine Bronze toward the Anatolian Bronze.

    We've had quite a bit of discussion about how different the Iron Age Anatolian samples might be from the Bronze Age ones. In the case of these particular samples from these areas, the Bronze and Iron Age are virtually indistinguishable for one sample, but one is definitely pulling toward the Aegean, which makes sense given that the western coast of Anatolia was one area where the Greeks did admix with the locals.

    It would be interesting to see a combined PCA with all of these samples along with the Southern Arc samples from these areas.

  17. #17
    Viscount
    Join Date
    10-06-12
    Posts
    723

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-BY593
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2

    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I'm afraid you're mixing up pottery and farming.

    There was very little farming on the steppe, and what little there was arrived very late, and was brought by incomers.

    https://www.google.com/books/edition...20the%20steppe


    The same is true for the Amur River Valley.


    "The Neolithic period (8,000-7,000 BCE) is often taken to signify the start of land cultivation. However, the native peoples living in Siberia at that moment in history did not join in this global movement because of the difficulties associated with its severe climate.[7] Agricultural stirrings did reach Siberia by the second half of the 3rd millennium, when the peoples of the Afanasevo culture of southern Siberia (located, more specifically, in the southern reaches of the Ob River), started to practice agronomy. It was a slow start, however, as these peoples had very rudimentary cultivation skills. They used digging sticks (the previously mentioned mattocks) as their main farming tool, and they were not able to subsist solely on this practice and turned as well toward hunting, gathering, and the domestication of sheep, cows, and horses.[8]

    "
    Only during the Bronze Age, with the advent of bronze scythes, were Siberians able to reach the same agricultural level as had already been achieved in many other areas of the world. This occurred with the rise of the Andronovo culture that inhabited the area between the Tobol River and the Minusinsk Basin. These peoples were sedentary wheat farmers who engaged in barter with the Chinese people to the southeast of their lands, along the periphery of what was to later become Siberia.[9]"


    Right you are. By the looks of it, pottery in Siberia predates the the pottery listed in the tables by 6000+/- years
    Ancient Siberian Hunters Survived the Ice Age by Inventing Pottery and Eating Fish

    https://www.rug.nl/news/2020/02/anci...g-fish?lang=en

    From around 16,000 years ago, we start to see some of these groups inventing radically new kinds of survival technology - this includes some of the world’s oldest examples of clay cooking pots
    . This ancient pottery starts to appear in small quantities at a number of sites on the Amur River in the Russian Far East between circa 16,000 and 12,000 years ag


    • Finally, the new study also demonstrated that the world’s oldest clay cooking pots were being made in very different ways in different parts of Northeast Asia: this appears to indicate a “parallel” process of innovation, where separate groups that have no contact with each other started to move towards similar kinds of technological solution under times of climate stress.
    • Pottery quickly proved to be highly attractive tool for the processing of aquatic and terrestrial resources and ancient hunter-gatherers adopted it extremely widely, especially after the onset of the warm Holocene period around 11,000 years ago. This was long before any transition to farming.

    Anatolia Historical developments15,000 - 10,000 BP Incipient farming, Semi-sedentism/sedentism10,000 - 8,000 BP Farming, Sedentism, Pottery8,000 - 6,000 BP Pyrometallurgy, Long-distance trade6,000 - 4,000 BP Wheel, Domestic equids, Centralisation/Urbanisation, Kura-Araxes expansion,Indo-European migrations?, Agricultural surplus..


    Levant Historical developments15,000 - 10,000 BP Incipient farming, Semi-sedentism/sedentism10,000 - 8,000 BP Farming, Sedentism, Pottery8,000 - 6,000 BP Pyrometallurgy, Long-distance trade6,000 - 4,000 BP Wheel, Domestic equids, Urbanisation, Writing, Agricultural surplus

    Iran Historical developments15,000 - 10,000 BP Incipient farming, Semi-sedentism/sedentism10,000 - 8,000 BP Farming, Sedentism, Pottery8,000 - 6,000 BP Pyrometallurgy6,000 - 4,000 BP Wheel, Domestic equids, Urbanisation, Writing, Long-distance trade, Indo-Europeanmigrations, Agricultural surplus4,000 - 2,000 BP Inter-regional empires, Greek/Hellenic expansion, I

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    25-06-18
    Posts
    1,681

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-M269 (LDNA)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a1b

    Ethnic group
    Thracian
    Country: Greece



    Am I to understand that there were people in the Aegean area with higher steppe content than the Mycenaeans? And that they came through the Southern route while we think that the Greek tribes were later arrivals through the Balkans?

    EDIT: Never mind about EHG coming through Anatolia. I just reread the summary.

  19. #19
    Regular Member torzio's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,353

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - SK1480
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a

    Ethnic group
    North East Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by kingjohn View Post
    This study is great for our T
    Members in the forum (torzio, salento)
    From the table 3 and 4
    i posted above:
    6000 bc southwest turkey ( impressive)
    Bademagacı ˘bad030 6,400-6,100BCE 0.411 XY HV+16311 T1a1
    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badema%C4%9Fac%C4%B1
    Also in north iran close to caspian sea
    But in a later date
    sha014 Shahtepe, Iran5100 3200 - 3100 BCE 1.996 XY HV13b T1a
    https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Tepe
    not exactly ......our branch split off 13500 years ago .( T1a2 )...........I have not found any Iran sample for our branch, that I can recall ( though some say the Medes had a lot of T ydna )......but have found a lot of T in Kurds and Armenians ......even Turkish lands along the black sea
    Fathers mtdna ...... T2b17
    Grandfather paternal mtdna ... T1a1e
    Sons mtdna ...... K1a4p
    Mothers line ..... R1b-S8172
    Grandmother paternal side ... I1-CTS6397
    Wife paternal line ..... R1a-PF6155

    "Fear profits man, nothing"

  20. #20
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    1,864

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Rare e-fgc7391 972AD
    MtDNA haplogroup
    h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    Quote Originally Posted by torzio View Post
    not exactly ......our branch split off 13500 years ago .( T1a2 )...........I have not found any Iran sample for our branch, that I can recall ......but have found it in Kurds and Armenians ......even Turkish lands along the black sea

    it still a T you should be happy
    i see in this paper again there is no E
    even the southern arc paper had some
    mainly in armenia late bronze age they were hiding there

  21. #21
    researcher eupator's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-07-22
    Posts
    285

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-A12332*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6*

    Country: Greece



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Goodness knows what Herodotus meant by Persians, though. Persians as in straight from Persia, or Persians as in people in the Persian Empire, which would have included Anatolians?

    Ethnography was not exactly his forte, as we have discovered in his writings about the Etruscans.

    Also, the spread was pretty extreme, from ten or less to a few with 20%, and the Caucasus/Iran Neo in Iranians looks like 80% in some of them, so I guess it depends on what you mean by kinship.

    Kinship as in there were blood relations between them.

    20% top end means it's almost 1/4 grandparent. It's quite significant, evident also in the J uniparentals (and G for the Caucasus).

    Anatolia stands in between the Iranian Plateau/Caucasus and the Aegean coastline in Greece, there is a gradient that is visible in autosomals.

    The Pelasgian substratum is of Anatolian (major) + Irano-Caucasian (minor) extraction, then you add the EHG signal from the north, Herodotus is being vindicated almost to a tee in what he wrote about his contemporaries in Greece.

  22. #22
    Regular Member torzio's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,353

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - SK1480
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a

    Ethnic group
    North East Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by kingjohn View Post
    it still a T you should be happy
    i see in this paper again there is no E
    even the southern arc paper had some
    of course .............same as the 28000 year old T's found in western China ..............all count

  23. #23
    researcher eupator's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-07-22
    Posts
    285

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-A12332*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6*

    Country: Greece



    As for who the Persians were, Herodotus mentions that they were comprised of many tribes that were united by Cyrus the Great.

    A lot of them came from the Medes, who were called the Aryans, then the Pasargádai, Maráphioi, Máspioi, Panthialaîoi and Germánioi.

    Cyrus himself, the uniter of the Persian ethnos, was the founder of the Achaemenids, whose patrilineal genealogical trace went back all the way to Perses and his father Perseas, the founding father of the Mycenaeans.


    [1.125.3] ἔστι δὲ Περσέων συχνὰ γένεα, καὶ τὰ μὲν αὐτῶν ὁ Κῦρος συνάλισε καὶ ἀνέπεισε ἀπίστασθαι ἀπὸ Μήδων· ἔστι δὲ τάδε, ἐξ ὧν ὧλλοι πάντες ἀρτέαται Πέρσαι· Πασαργάδαι, Μαράφιοι, Μάσπιοι· τούτων Πασαργάδαι εἰσὶ ἄριστοι, ἐν τοῖσι καὶ Ἀχαιμενίδαι εἰσὶ φρήτρη, ἔνθεν οἱ βασιλέες οἱ Περσεῖδαι γεγόνασι· [1.125.4] ἄλλοι δὲ Πέρσαι εἰσὶ οἵδε· Πανθιαλαῖοι, Δηρουσιαῖοι, Γερμάνιοι·

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-03-12
    Posts
    345


    Ethnic group
    Greek
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by bigsnake49 View Post
    Am I to understand that there were people in the Aegean area with higher steppe content than the Mycenaeans? And that they came through the Southern route while we think that the Greek tribes were later arrivals through the Balkans?

    EDIT: Never mind about EHG coming through Anatolia. I just reread the summary.
    No, the Greek speakers came earlier than assumed. And they did come from the North. Why Mycenaeans had less steppe is also a puzzle to me. Perhaps people with less steppe also arrived in Greece. From the islands perhaps? Or some natives fled to the mountains/islands when the first newcomers arrived, after which some came back after a few centuries. Who knows? Or the the specimens we have so far are not representative for Mycenaean Greeks. The Italian Greeks may have Sicilian admixture. And the Greek from Empuries was intermixed with people from Asia Minor.

    In any case, these new specimens might be more closer to Log 1 and Log 2 further North.

  25. #25
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    21,549


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    ^^Did you look at the PCA? A good number of them still plot with Aegean Neolithic, which is almost indistinguishable from Anatolian Neolithic. They're the ones from the Peloponnese, from which the Mycenaean culture radiated.

    The one sample which pulls away is from Thessaly.

    As with the Slavic admixture, the steppe admixture seems to be on a north/south cline.

    I'm sure we'll see something similar with Classical Greeks.

    The heartland of the illustrious Greek civilization and its accomplishments seems to be more "southern".

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •