Southern Ancestry in "Steppe"

There must be something wrong with the modeling. There is no way that these samples don't have any WHG or very little at least. Middle Don is probably picking up all the WHG in these Scandinavian samples, to compensate the lack of WHG in steppe.

Actually, I don't see Middle Don as good proxy for steppe ancestry. These are HGs that already have a small component of CHG/Iran but need additional 35%. What kind of stupid wording is this ? Instead they could have said they have to little CHG/Iran to be the proximal source for Yamnaya, just like Khavlynsk which also has a small component CHG/Iran but not enough.

Don foragers could have some WHG that is "eating" into later populations' WHG ancestry. But Boncuklu was also WHG-shifted compared to Barcin if I remember the PCA from that paper correctly.
 
Don foragers could have some WHG that is "eating" into later populations' WHG ancestry. But Boncuklu was also WHG-shifted compared to Barcin if I remember the PCA from that paper correctly.

I agree, that's also my impression. That's why I think it's not a good proxy for steppe ancestry.
 
Ed. for inappropriate material.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You referenced the neo-nazi youtuber, the OP referenced academic sources, so what are you on about, mate?
STJ is not a "Neo-Nazi" In fact, his views are probably rather tame compared to what 90% of the men who fought the Nazis believed. Not everyone you disagree with is literally hitler
 
"427 We demonstrate that this “steppe” ancestry (Steppe_5000BP_4300BP) can be modelled as a
428 mixture of ~65% ancestry related to herein reported hunter-gatherer genomes from the Middle Don
429 River region (MiddleDon_7500BP) and ~35% ancestry related to hunter-gatherers from Caucasus
430 (Caucasus_13000BP_10000BP) (Extended Data Fig. 4). Thus, Middle Don hunter-gatherers, who
431 already carry ancestry related to Caucasus hunter-gatherers (Fig. 2), serve as a hitherto unknown
432 proximal source for the majority ancestry contribution into Yamnaya genomes. The individuals in
433 question derive from the burial ground Golubaya Krinitsa (Supplementary Note 3). Material culture
434 and burial practices at this site are similar to the Mariupol-type graves, which are widely found in
435 neighbouring regions of Ukraine, for instance along the Dnepr River. They belong to the group of
436 complex pottery-using hunter-gatherers mentioned above, but the genetic composition at Golubaya
437 Krinitsa is different from the remaining Ukrainian sites (Fig 2A, Extended Data Fig. 4)."

So, TWO flows, as Reich said. The Middle Don hunter-gatherers already had Caucasus related ancestry, and then received an additional flow.
 
Members, please stay on topic.
 
How exactly do they determine the age, if all these natural finds should be the same as the planet.
 
Tomorrow it will be proved that Iran is the homeland of Indo-Europeans.

Provinces of Iran:

Azerbaijan
Old Name: Atropates, compare Atrebates, ancient Celtic tribe

Ilam
Old Name: Elam, compare Elymians, ancient Italic tribe

Semnan
Old Name: Semnun, compare Semnones, ancient Germanic tribe

Tehran
Old Name: Tukharan, compare Tokhari, ancient Tocharian tribe

Qazvin
Old Name: Kashupin, compare Kashubian, ancient Slavic tribe

Gilan
Old Name: Gaelin, comapre Gaeli, ancient Celtic tribe

Lorestan
Old Name: Eluria, compare Illuria, ancient Illyrian tribe

Kerman
Old Name: Germani, compare German, ancient Germanic tribe

Fars
Old Name: Parhasi, compare Parrhasian, ancient Hellenic tribe
 
This is my first post and I trust you will forgive my ignorance. I have skimmed through the discussion and hope this is relevant.

Professor Anthony produced a paper in 2019 which commented on and tried to examine a paper by the linguist Bomhard. Anthony's paper followed much the same line as is shown on the video clips but in clearer detail (at least for a novice to understand).

Bomhard's hypothesis is that a close and long contact between a Pre Uralic speaking Steppe population (Samarra) EHG and a Pre Caucasian speaking CHG somewhere on the Steppe morphed into Yamna Pre Indo - European.

Bombard updated his original 2019 paper recently. Thus it is dated 2023.

I attach the files:




I find Anthony's argument fairly convincing, except where he deals with the Anatolian languages.

What are members views.

The assumption is that Steppe language is the dominant one, but could it be possible that it is the reverse - we have Caucasian as the dominant language?
 
We know from various studies that Yamnaya/Corded ware and Eneolithic Steppe(Progress/Vonyuchka) have a significant amount of southern ancestry, right now called CHG or CHG/Iran but we still don't know where it is exactly from. There are many suggestions, I try to summarize the two main hypothesis that are up to debate.

1.Some argue that the southern ancestry is from the NORTHERN Caucasus and that it mixed with a northern source most closely related to EHGs in the Mesolithic to form the typical steppe ancestry profile of the various steppe groups. Actually this is the hypothesis Davidski and his crowd is favoring.

2.Others argue that the southern ancestry is from the SOUTHERN Caucasus and it moved north where it mixed with a northern source(EHG-related) ON the Pontic-caspian steppe to form the famous steppe ancestry. Actually this is the hypothesis I favour.

Here I want to present some arguments for a southern homeland for CHG/Iran of steppe ancestry:

-The autosomal breakdown of the southern ancestry of Eneolithic Steppe(simulated) looks like this:

View attachment 13171

We can see that it is very much like hunter-gatherers from modern day Georgia(kotias) BUT it has a significant amount of Iran_N and minor Anatolian_N. These three populations probably aren't the real sources because the distance is pretty high, but they give us a hint. So how likely is it that a population living north of the caucasus has significant amount of Iran_N and minor Anatolian_N ? I think the answer is clear, there is zero chance for population with this autosomal breakdown to live just north of Kotias and Satsurblia(CHG).

- We can also observe the same position for this southern ancestry on a PCA:

View attachment 13172

We see a shift of the southern ancestry (ProgressCHG) towards Iran_N (Ganj_Dareh) and away from CHG(Kotias), also it has a minor shift towards Anatolian_N(Tepecik Ciftlik_N). Interestingly, the southern ancestry is exactly between Iran_Hotu and Tepecik Ciftlik_N, with a stronger shift towards Hotu though. Maybe the population we are searching for lived just between Hotu and Tepecik Ciftlik? Anyway, nothing indicates a population just north of CHG, the Caucasus.

- Here are the original (not simulated) samples from the Eneolithic Steppe:

View attachment 13181

Vonyuchka has close to double the amount of Iran_N than Progress. Let´s exclude the EHG-related signal and calculate the amount of Iran_N the southern ancestry of Vonyuchka might have.
Simple math: 14/40,5=0,345=34,5%

So, it's 34,5% Iran_N and maybe including some traces of Anatolian_N.
The southern ancestry of Vonyuchka is approximately: 65,5(CHG)+34.5%(Iran_N)

- Now let's see what David Anthony has to say about the southern ancestry:


The highest amount of southern ancestry is in Berezhnovka just north of the Volga Delta/Estuary not from the northern Caucasus(Progress/Vonyuchka). David Anthony thinks that there was population with "pure" southern ancestry in the Volga Delta/Estuary, this might be true, but we need samples from there to prove it like he also says. Luckily, we know from the Patterson et al. 2022 preprint that the mixture between a southern and northern source population happened at about 4400BC*. So it didn't happened in the Mesolithic like Davidski assumed. I think we can also exclude the southern Caucasus for this mixture event if it happened at about 4400BC because there was too much Anatolian_N in the southern Caucasus in this time period to be the source. The mixture must have happened ON the steppe for the most part.

All these taking together I think we can exclude the first hypothesis favoured by Davidski and his crowd. Personally, i think the best place for this southern ancestry has to be Eastern Turkey/Northern Iran/Armenia/Azerbaijan, before roughly 6500 BC of course.

Edit: *
It seems like people on AG refuted the Date of roughly 4400BC from the Patterson et al. 2022 preprint. I will update this part if the paper is peer-reviewed and a new date is proposed.
Greetings, may I ask how and how you obtained the coordinates for the Caucasian component of the Eniolite progress? did you just perform mathematical operations on the coordinates of G25 Eniolite progress, EHG and so on, or did you work directly with the gene database files?
 
We know from various studies that Yamnaya/Corded ware and Eneolithic Steppe(Progress/Vonyuchka) have a significant amount of southern ancestry, right now called CHG or CHG/Iran but we still don't know where it is exactly from. There are many suggestions, I try to summarize the two main hypothesis that are up to debate.

1.Some argue that the southern ancestry is from the NORTHERN Caucasus and that it mixed with a northern source most closely related to EHGs in the Mesolithic to form the typical steppe ancestry profile of the various steppe groups. Actually this is the hypothesis Davidski and his crowd is favoring.

2.Others argue that the southern ancestry is from the SOUTHERN Caucasus and it moved north where it mixed with a northern source(EHG-related) ON the Pontic-caspian steppe to form the famous steppe ancestry. Actually this is the hypothesis I favour.

Here I want to present some arguments for a southern homeland for CHG/Iran of steppe ancestry:

-The autosomal breakdown of the southern ancestry of Eneolithic Steppe(simulated) looks like this:

View attachment 13171

We can see that it is very much like hunter-gatherers from modern day Georgia(kotias) BUT it has a significant amount of Iran_N and minor Anatolian_N. These three populations probably aren't the real sources because the distance is pretty high, but they give us a hint. So how likely is it that a population living north of the caucasus has significant amount of Iran_N and minor Anatolian_N ? I think the answer is clear, there is zero chance for population with this autosomal breakdown to live just north of Kotias and Satsurblia(CHG).

- We can also observe the same position for this southern ancestry on a PCA:

View attachment 13172

We see a shift of the southern ancestry (ProgressCHG) towards Iran_N (Ganj_Dareh) and away from CHG(Kotias), also it has a minor shift towards Anatolian_N(Tepecik Ciftlik_N). Interestingly, the southern ancestry is exactly between Iran_Hotu and Tepecik Ciftlik_N, with a stronger shift towards Hotu though. Maybe the population we are searching for lived just between Hotu and Tepecik Ciftlik? Anyway, nothing indicates a population just north of CHG, the Caucasus.

- Here are the original (not simulated) samples from the Eneolithic Steppe:

View attachment 13181

Vonyuchka has close to double the amount of Iran_N than Progress. Let´s exclude the EHG-related signal and calculate the amount of Iran_N the southern ancestry of Vonyuchka might have.
Simple math: 14/40,5=0,345=34,5%

So, it's 34,5% Iran_N and maybe including some traces of Anatolian_N.
The southern ancestry of Vonyuchka is approximately: 65,5(CHG)+34.5%(Iran_N)

- Now let's see what David Anthony has to say about the southern ancestry:


The highest amount of southern ancestry is in Berezhnovka just north of the Volga Delta/Estuary not from the northern Caucasus(Progress/Vonyuchka). David Anthony thinks that there was population with "pure" southern ancestry in the Volga Delta/Estuary, this might be true, but we need samples from there to prove it like he also says. Luckily, we know from the Patterson et al. 2022 preprint that the mixture between a southern and northern source population happened at about 4400BC*. So it didn't happened in the Mesolithic like Davidski assumed. I think we can also exclude the southern Caucasus for this mixture event if it happened at about 4400BC because there was too much Anatolian_N in the southern Caucasus in this time period to be the source. The mixture must have happened ON the steppe for the most part.

All these taking together I think we can exclude the first hypothesis favoured by Davidski and his crowd. Personally, i think the best place for this southern ancestry has to be Eastern Turkey/Northern Iran/Armenia/Azerbaijan, before roughly 6500 BC of course.

Edit: *
It seems like people on AG refuted the Date of roughly 4400BC from the Patterson et al. 2022 preprint. I will update this part if the paper is peer-reviewed and a new date is proposed.
1700185480149.png

1700185649368.png

and you also say that this signal chg had a Transcaucasian ancestral home, okay, let’s not delve into antiquity, that all people came from Africa, etc., just look at the genetic distances to your simulated coordinate chg to understand that its signal comes from the mountains of the North Caucasus, namely Dagestan (ironically, the Yamnaya component is highest there in the Caucasus)
 
We know from various studies that Yamnaya/Corded ware and Eneolithic Steppe(Progress/Vonyuchka) have a significant amount of southern ancestry, right now called CHG or CHG/Iran but we still don't know where it is exactly from. There are many suggestions, I try to summarize the two main hypothesis that are up to debate.

1.Some argue that the southern ancestry is from the NORTHERN Caucasus and that it mixed with a northern source most closely related to EHGs in the Mesolithic to form the typical steppe ancestry profile of the various steppe groups. Actually this is the hypothesis Davidski and his crowd is favoring.

2.Others argue that the southern ancestry is from the SOUTHERN Caucasus and it moved north where it mixed with a northern source(EHG-related) ON the Pontic-caspian steppe to form the famous steppe ancestry. Actually this is the hypothesis I favour.

Here I want to present some arguments for a southern homeland for CHG/Iran of steppe ancestry:

-The autosomal breakdown of the southern ancestry of Eneolithic Steppe(simulated) looks like this:

View attachment 13171

We can see that it is very much like hunter-gatherers from modern day Georgia(kotias) BUT it has a significant amount of Iran_N and minor Anatolian_N. These three populations probably aren't the real sources because the distance is pretty high, but they give us a hint. So how likely is it that a population living north of the caucasus has significant amount of Iran_N and minor Anatolian_N ? I think the answer is clear, there is zero chance for population with this autosomal breakdown to live just north of Kotias and Satsurblia(CHG).

- We can also observe the same position for this southern ancestry on a PCA:

View attachment 13172

We see a shift of the southern ancestry (ProgressCHG) towards Iran_N (Ganj_Dareh) and away from CHG(Kotias), also it has a minor shift towards Anatolian_N(Tepecik Ciftlik_N). Interestingly, the southern ancestry is exactly between Iran_Hotu and Tepecik Ciftlik_N, with a stronger shift towards Hotu though. Maybe the population we are searching for lived just between Hotu and Tepecik Ciftlik? Anyway, nothing indicates a population just north of CHG, the Caucasus.

- Here are the original (not simulated) samples from the Eneolithic Steppe:

View attachment 13181

Vonyuchka has close to double the amount of Iran_N than Progress. Let´s exclude the EHG-related signal and calculate the amount of Iran_N the southern ancestry of Vonyuchka might have.
Simple math: 14/40,5=0,345=34,5%

So, it's 34,5% Iran_N and maybe including some traces of Anatolian_N.
The southern ancestry of Vonyuchka is approximately: 65,5(CHG)+34.5%(Iran_N)

- Now let's see what David Anthony has to say about the southern ancestry:


The highest amount of southern ancestry is in Berezhnovka just north of the Volga Delta/Estuary not from the northern Caucasus(Progress/Vonyuchka). David Anthony thinks that there was population with "pure" southern ancestry in the Volga Delta/Estuary, this might be true, but we need samples from there to prove it like he also says. Luckily, we know from the Patterson et al. 2022 preprint that the mixture between a southern and northern source population happened at about 4400BC*. So it didn't happened in the Mesolithic like Davidski assumed. I think we can also exclude the southern Caucasus for this mixture event if it happened at about 4400BC because there was too much Anatolian_N in the southern Caucasus in this time period to be the source. The mixture must have happened ON the steppe for the most part.

All these taking together I think we can exclude the first hypothesis favoured by Davidski and his crowd. Personally, i think the best place for this southern ancestry has to be Eastern Turkey/Northern Iran/Armenia/Azerbaijan, before roughly 6500 BC of course.

Edit: *
It seems like people on AG refuted the Date of roughly 4400BC from the Patterson et al. 2022 preprint. I will update this part if the paper is peer-reviewed and a new date is proposed.
1700186276224.png

in fact, the eastern Caucasus is a semi-passable barrier for those who try to get into the depths of the mountains of Dagestan, it is almost impossible and people have been living in isolation for several thousand years since ancient times; one of the highest levels of imbringing in the world is among the Dagestan peoples, so I am sure that they are hunter-gatherers from the mountains of Dagestan or from the Caspian lowland participated in the ethnogenesis of Yamnaya-like cultures along with Eastern European hunter-gatherers
 
It was posted on AG a while ago. Here you go:
Code:
[COLOR=#383838][FONT=Verdana]Progress_CHG,0.099197,0.135949,-0.106789,-0.000937,-0.073897,0.032282,0.032591,0.018422,-0.135691,-0.048098,-0.011338,0.018446,-0.051498,-0.009506,0.055689,-0.021348,-0.002622,-0.011345,-0.00524,0.009119,0.008214,-0.016218,-0.010373,-0.005049,-0.000889[/FONT][/COLOR]
1700285086491.png

It’s interesting that the CHG you modeled, which is north of the Caucasus Mountains and where in fact there should have been more influence of ANE of such people, it turns out that it has less of this ANE than those who lived from the south?
 
Tomorrow it will be proved that Iran is the homeland of Indo-Europeans.

Provinces of Iran:

Azerbaijan
Old Name: Atropates, compare Atrebates, ancient Celtic tribe

Ilam
Old Name: Elam, compare Elymians, ancient Italic tribe

Semnan
Old Name: Semnun, compare Semnones, ancient Germanic tribe

Tehran
Old Name: Tukharan, compare Tokhari, ancient Tocharian tribe

Qazvin
Old Name: Kashupin, compare Kashubian, ancient Slavic tribe

Gilan
Old Name: Gaelin, comapre Gaeli, ancient Celtic tribe

Lorestan
Old Name: Eluria, compare Illuria, ancient Illyrian tribe

Kerman
Old Name: Germani, compare German, ancient Germanic tribe

Fars
Old Name: Parhasi, compare Parrhasian, ancient Hellenic tribe
(y)
 
Tomorrow it will be proved that Iran is the homeland of Indo-Europeans.

Provinces of Iran:

Azerbaijan
Old Name: Atropates, compare Atrebates, ancient Celtic tribe

Ilam
Old Name: Elam, compare Elymians, ancient Italic tribe

Semnan
Old Name: Semnun, compare Semnones, ancient Germanic tribe

Tehran
Old Name: Tukharan, compare Tokhari, ancient Tocharian tribe

Qazvin
Old Name: Kashupin, compare Kashubian, ancient Slavic tribe

Gilan
Old Name: Gaelin, comapre Gaeli, ancient Celtic tribe

Lorestan
Old Name: Eluria, compare Illuria, ancient Illyrian tribe

Kerman
Old Name: Germani, compare German, ancient Germanic tribe

Fars
Old Name: Parhasi, compare Parrhasian, ancient Hellenic tribe
Those are curious and may plausibly reflect PIE endonyms rooted in the Chalcolithic Steppe and carried to disparate locations across the vastness of the Indo-European horizon. Except for Elam, which appears to be clearly associated with the ancient Elamites ("Elam" is an exonym granted to them by the Sumerians and later Akkadians.)
Otherwise at least some of those may easily be coincedental, I'd imagine, but still interesting to point out.
 
Those are curious and may plausibly reflect PIE endonyms rooted in the Chalcolithic Steppe and carried to disparate locations across the vastness of the Indo-European horizon. Except for Elam, which appears to be clearly associated with the ancient Elamites ("Elam" is an exonym granted to them by the Sumerians and later Akkadians.)
Otherwise at least some of those may easily be coincedental, I'd imagine, but still interesting to point out.
Elamites were actually an Italic people who lived in Hidali/Idali (Itali): https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hidali Hatamti people lived in the same region, Akkadians called both of them as Elamites.
 
Elamites were actually an Italic people who lived in Hidali/Idali (Itali): https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hidali Hatamti people lived in the same region, Akkadians called both of them as Elamites.
Still addict to vague phonetic links between old tribes names, seemingly.
Even a genuine remote common origin shared by two peoples names doesn't prove a tight link between them. PIE if old, and the IE descendants knew a lot of different stories since the 3500's BC
 
Still addict to vague phonetic links between old tribes names, seemingly.
Even a genuine remote common origin shared by two peoples names doesn't prove a tight link between them. PIE if old, and the IE descendants knew a lot of different stories since the 3500's BC
Where is Boston? A city in the US or in England? Of course it can't be proved that peoples who live in these two cities have a common origin but we know there were migrations from England to the US and these similar names relate to this migration.
 
Where is Boston? A city in the US or in England? Of course it can't be proved that peoples who live in these two cities have a common origin but we know there were migrations from England to the US and these similar names relate to this migration.
Maybe you should look at rules of historical phonetic shifts between "brother" (or "sister") languages? Have you did it for your last examples?
 
Maybe you should look at rules of historical phonetic shifts between "brother" (or "sister") languages? Have you did it for your last examples?
Proto-Italic was a PIE dialect, sound changes mostly happened after migrations to other lands.
 

This thread has been viewed 36368 times.

Back
Top