Essay on the language of Gutians

The R1b from Bakr Awa (Mesopotamia) is now published in FTDNA. Its confirmed as Z2106 and is positive to Y100087 snp. This branch has strong presence in ancient remains from Ukraine and Russia. Thus the steppe origin of this Bakr Awa R1b is beyond the doubt.

This is the first case of Y100087 from West Asia, while other cases of Z2106 were from the parallel CTS8966 branch found from Armenia and possibly Levant.

As previously mentioned the best candidate for its affiliation is the Gutian connection. Even though its quite possible that over time he and similar people were assimilated in to locals, but their initial identity might be IE.

Its remarkable that Henning and after him Gamkrelidze and Ivanov proposed the IE origins of Gutians. Even though they linked it to Tocharian which is untenable in current stage of our knowledge.

Now with genetic data on hands lets look closer at Gutian names. 

At last three kings have the root Yarla in their name.

• Yarlagab
• Yarla
• Yarlaganda

In most likelihood the 'Yarla' is a Gutian deity name or a dynastic name while the rest are particles or other roots.

Yarla can be compared to Slavic deity Yarilo which has IE origin from *yeh₁r-. Its a Spring deity. The root is present in English in the form of word "year".

Another interesting root is the -gab. Its present in two names

• Sarlagab
• Yarlagab

It fits well with the PIE root ghabh- (also reconstructed as *gʰebʰ-). Which means to give, to hold. A frequent root in names. The English word to give is derived from that root.

Incidently the name Sarlak supports the fact that "Sarl" in Sarlagab is a root. Most probably a deity name. However this name is not from Sumerian king list so we are not sure anout its identity. He could be the same as Sarlagab ( or Zarlagab) 

Another possible root is the -gan present in 

• Tirigan
• Yarlaganda

Can be compared to PIE root *ǵenh₁. To give birth. Multiple names ending with -es or -us also supports the IE classification. The potential root Tir is also remarkable. It can be compared to Armeno-Iranian deity Tir.

Some other names are obvious Mesopotamian influence. Like Puzur-Suen. While the particle -um in some names is probably an Akkadian.

Summing up the scant Gutian onomastic data we see evidence that can support their IE classification. However the potential IE language behind Gutian names seems to be somewhat different from the Proto-Armenian. It seems to be a centum, while Armenian is satem. It also preserved the phoneme [s] while Armenian converted them to [h] and lost them. What is also remarkable is that their Y DNA was widely present deep in steppe which once more could mean that the Gutian language was a (close?) parallel language to Armenian rather than a simple dialect of Proto-Armenian. 

With more ancient DNA we will have more clarity on all aspects of Middle Bronze Age migrations from steppe to West Asia.

A multidisciplinary approach for elucidating Mushki origin

A scientific article by Aram Palyan and Seb Peltkyan about the ancient people known as the Mushki, who probably had a Proto-/Para-Armenian origin.

In this article, the authors use a multidisciplinary approach to the question of the origin of the Mushki, relying, among other things, on paleogenetic data. Soviet researchers had already associated the Mushki with the Proto-Armenians. Thus, Igor Mikhailovich Diakonoff considered them Proto-Armenians who had migrated from the Balkans. This was based largely on the fact that later Assyrian sources used the name Mushki for the Phrygians as well, which gave rise to the theory that they had migrated from the Balkans through Anatolia toward the Armenian Highlands. However, the Mushki are first mentioned by the Assyrians farther east, precisely in the Armenian Highlands. Modern evidence instead supports a migration of the Mushki from the east — that is, from the Armenian Highlands toward Anatolia — where they apparently carried their ethnonym with them, which was later used by the Assyrians to designate the Phrygians.

The main arguments of the paper:

• The homeland of the Mushki was at the headwaters of the Euphrates during the Bronze Age. Their actual endonym was most likely *mosk'.

• Beginning around 1200 BCE, they migrated southward and southwestward, where they came into contact with the Assyrians and possibly with the post-Hittite kingdoms.

• Since the Phrygians are closest to the Greeks and unquestionably originated in the Balkans, the Mushki could not originally have been Phrygians, although by the 8th century BCE the term Mushki referred to the country of Phrygia.

• The reasons why the term Mushki became a name for the Phrygians are unknown, but there are many examples in history of such transfers of names, including France, Bulgaria, Palestine, etc.

• The Paleo-Balkan term musk, meaning “mule,” was most likely derived from the name of the Mushki. Both archaeological and paleogenetic evidence suggest that mules began to be bred in Anatolia and from there spread into Europe.

• The term Mushki has no clear etymology, but a number of strong arguments suggest that -k' is a suffix. Tribes and toponyms/onomastic forms with such a suffix are attested around the headwaters of the Euphrates and in northern Anatolia.

• The ethnic identity of the Mushki remains unclear. However, the presence of this suffix, together with the fact that during the Iron Age the genetic marker of the Trialeti-Vanadzor culture (I2a2b) migrated westward, supports the possibility that the Mushki may have been an Armenian tribe, although not Proto-Armenian in the sense previously proposed. A connection with the Kaskians, who inhabited northern Anatolia, is also possible.

• The migration of the Mushki and other tribes also left an archaeological trace in the form of grooved pottery (Grooved Ware, c. 1200 BCE).

• A Kartvelian origin is unlikely. However, the Georgian terms Mtskhe and Mtskheta (Samtskhe) may derive from the name of the Mushki. Genetic traces of a migration of the Mushki from the headwaters of the Euphrates northward into present-day Samtskhe in Georgia also do not support the Georgian hypothesis.

• The transition from mosk > mc'xe occurred in two stages and was probably completed by the 5th century CE. First there was the transition mosk' > moc', followed by the addition of the suffix -x. The Byzantine term Mesch is the Greek designation for the Georgian mc'xe.

• Ultimately, the Mushki (Greek Moschoi) ceased to exist as a distinct ethnic group with its own identity and were assimilated among Armenians, Georgians, and Cappadocians, where they left their mark in the form of mythical founding fathers.

Text from the Armenian DNA Telegram channel.

The original paper: An Examination of the Muški Tribe: A Multidisciplinary Approach Including Paleogenomics.

The King Pharnavaz (Փառնավազ)

In Armenian historical tradition, the post-Urartian period — which, incidentally, is also the post-Assyrian period — is marked by the emergence of new elites.

In Movses Khorenatsi’s history, the first crowned king of Armenia (after Assyrian rule) was Paruyr Skayordi. He was an ally of the Medes and, according to Khorenatsi, participated in the destruction of the Assyrian Empire. However, the historian Sebeos reports a different story about the same period [1]. He mentions a certain Pharnavaz who was loyal to the Babylonians and was recognized by Babylon as king of Armenia. Afterward, this Pharnavaz and his descendants controlled lands in the southwestern regions of historical Armenia (Ałdznikʿ and Tsopkʿ).

The Assyrian Empire was destroyed by an alliance of Babylon and the Medes in 614–609 BC. After this, Babylonian sources report three additional campaigns in northern Mesopotamia in which the lands of Urartu are mentioned as targets of attack and plunder. It is quite possible that, after the annihilation of Assyrian political influence, Babylon had interactions with rulers located in the southern parts of historical Armenia and recognized one of the local rulers as king. Thus, the reports of the Babylonian Chronicles fit well with Sebeos’s account of Pharnavaz.

The name Pharnavaz is absent from Urartian texts; however, Assyrian texts mention a certain tribe, the Parnaki, dwelling in a region north or east of Assyria, in the northern Zagros. A derivation of the personal name Pharnavaz from the Parnaki tribe is quite plausible and is supported by historical parallels found in Anatolia, where the satrapal Pharnacid dynasty bore both the names Pharnaces and Pharnabazus. The term Pharnavaz itself is composed of two Iranian words: *farna* (“glory,” “splendor”) and *bāzu* (“arm”), which, according to Armenian phonetic rules, could have developed into Pʿarnawaz (Փառնաւազ).

Assuming that Sebeos’s story has a real historical background, we can reconstruct the following chronology of events:

**8th–7th century BC.** A minor Iranian tribe, not directly affiliated with the Medes or Persians, was dwelling near historical Armenia. They are mentioned by the Assyrians. In the Armenian patriarchal list, the name Pʿarnak is also present in ancient times.

**At the end of the 7th century BC.** The destruction of Assyria and the extreme weakening of the Biainean dynasty triggered migrations and the emergence of new elites. The Parnaki tribe most probably settled in the southwestern regions of Armenia, had occasion to interact with the Babylonians, and became part of the local ruling class. It was assimilated by the Armenians, and the memory of King Pharnavaz became part of Armenian historical tradition. 

Another Pharnavaz is also important in Georgian historic tradition. He is the king of Iberia around ~300BC and the founder of Pharnavazid dynasty. I will dedicate a separate post about the possible relation of this two Pharnavaz' and the position of Pharnacid dynasty of Anatolia in all this.

During the same post Assyrian period, or slightly earlier, Paruyr Skayordi was probably ruling in the eastern regions of historical Armenia — in or around the territory of the modern Republic. In that location, Paruyr Skayordi would have had occasion to interact with the Medes, and this memory was recorded by Khorenatsi. It must be noted that Khorenatsi also mentions Pharnavaz as a “grandson” of Paruyr Skayordi, but gives no further information about him. The Urartian cuneiform texts referring to the lands of Išqigulu and to Sagaputra (“son of Saka”) as king may also be interpreted as evidence for a Skayordi domain in the eastern regions.

In conclusion, the end of the Assyrian Empire was also a period of weakening for the Biainean dynasty and of political fragmentation in the Armenian Highlands. New elites appeared, possibly some of Iranian origin, and were assimilated into the Armenian-Urartian cultural milieu. Slightly later, the Orontid (Eruanduni) dynasty emerged and unified the country.

References

[1] Tsakanyan, R., The Versions of Khorenatsi and Sebeos on the Fall of Assyria, VEM, 2017, № 4(60), pp. 230-239, in Arm.

See also

• A tribe Parnaki is attested in Iron Age Assyrian texts

Genetic history of H2-P96

Based on the current stage of our knowledge, the homeland of H2-P96 was in the "core area" of the Fertile Crescent. From the region near modern Urfa - Diyarbekir, it expanded in different directions, carried by the early Neolithic farmers. H2-P96 has been found in ancient Anatolia and Europe, in the Levant and Egypt, and in South Caucasian Neolithic sites. Currently, there is no evidence that H2 moved eastward to Central Asia or South Asia.

This may sound counterintuitive, but the story of H2 is unrelated to H1, which is prominent in South Asia and India. The common ancestor of H2 and H1 lived 45,000 years ago, during the out-of-Africa dispersal wave. The ancestor of H2 remained in West Asia, while the ancestor of H1 appears to have been present in India since the Upper Paleolithic period. Currently, there is no evidence that H1 was related to the Zagros Neolithic farmers.

The three main directions of the Neolithic spread of H2 are somewhat similar to the story of T1a1. Due to poor resolution of many academic papers its impossible currently to reconstruct the story of H2 and its subclades with hugher precision.  That is why we will use just the generic P96 level. Which by the way has a TMRCA more than 16.000 yeaes.

• Anatolia and Europe: H2 moved into Europe from Anatolia with the early farmers. Despite some rumours of H2 presence in Paleolithic Europe—which still require solid confirmation—it is obvious that virtually all H2 found in early Neolithic cultures of Europe came from Anatolia.

• Levant and Africa: H2 was found in the PPNB period of the Levant. From there, it moved to Egypt. An ancient priest's mummy DNA analysis revealed H2 Y-DNA.

• Historic Armenia and the Caucasus: H2 was found at the Shulaveri culture site of Aruchlo in Georgia. It reached the Caucasus via historic Armenia. H2 is quite diverse among modern Armenians. Overall, H2 is rare in modern populations, except in a few cases. One such case is among Armenians, where it is found at non-trace (low but noticeable) levels.

New ancient DNA from Greece.

New ancient DNA from Greece, specifically from the Corinth region and western Greece. The older samples are similar to other samples from Greece and the Balkans, but the Roman-era samples show a shift toward Anatolia, somewhat consistent with Roman imperial events.

One of the Roman-era Corinthians has Y-DNA R1b-L584, consistent with this eastern shift. Another individual from the Roman era had J2-M92, plausibly reflecting Anatolian affiliation as well. Other Y-DNA haplogroups found at these sites are typical of the Balkans: E1b-L618, R1b-PF7562, J2b-L283, T1a2, and G2.

==========

The consensus of our findings (PCA, ADMIXTURE, and qpAdm using the “Most_Proximate” set of sources) shows that the Amvrakia and Tenea individuals can be considered descendants of the LBA and IA populations of the southern Balkans, especially the area of present-day Greece. In addition, the Roman Tenea individuals appear to have an additional minor contribution from the east, represented by BA Levant and Hellenistic Türkiye (Northwest and West, including Halikarnassos) in the “Most_Proximate” qpAdm analysis. Overall, local genetic continuity is suggested from LBA/IA Greece to Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic Greece, and to a lesser degree to Roman Greece. However, for the latter, the spatial sampling is inadequate to justify such a generalization.

An open thread about Bronze Age Anatolian Y DNA

An open thread about Bronze Age Anatolian Y-DNA

I plan to write a review about the origins of IE Anatolians. As stated earlier in this group, I believe that a definitive solution to this question requires dozens of Bronze Age Y-DNA samples from specific locations in central Anatolia that are neither Greek (Aegean coast), nor Hattic or Kaskian (northern Anatolia), nor areas with a strong Hurrian presence. Before such data become available, I would like to summarize the already available Y-DNA in order to identify patterns. I will not discuss in this thread the steppe markers R1b and I2. Their affiliation with IE migrations is unambiguous. What is more important about them is the route of migration and their possible linguistic affiliation within the IE family. I will discuss them in the review about Anatolian IE.

J1-Z1828* found at Harmanören - Göndürle Höyük, dated to ~2400 BC (Lazaridis et al. 2017).
There is no information about the downstream branch, but the chances are quite high that it belongs to the BY69 branch, which was found in Anatolia in later periods.

J2-Z6065>Y9268>Z43664 from Ovaören, dated to ~2750 BC (Damgaard et al. 2018).
This branch is parallel to P81 found in the Maykop culture.

Another J2-Z6065 was found in Yediay et al. 2024.

2× J2-M67>Z6273 from Kültepe (Kalehöyük), dated around 2500–1200 BC (Damgaard et al. 2018).
This branch may reflect a new post-Neolithic migration; however, its presence in Neolithic Italy (Cardial Ware) raises the possibility that it was already present in Anatolia since the Neolithic period.

Another possible Bronze Age Anatolian lineage is E-791. However, we need to wait for the publication of Yediay et al. 2024 and the raw files for full confirmation of this theory.

Indirect data suggest that J2-L70, and possibly upstream levels, was also a Bronze Age Anatolian lineage that expanded in the LBA–IA, possibly with the Luwians.

I did not include G2-M406 and T1a2a, as there are strong reasons to believe that they were initially associated with the expansion of the Hattic people.

The main visible pattern is that all these haplotypes have clear eastern connections. Another remarkable feature is their absence from a large set of Minoan Y-DNA. This supports the idea that they cannot be connected to Proto-Minoan migration or to the non-IE Hattic people.

To be continued.

An unusual branch of E1b-M123 from ancient Aghitu

An unusual branch of E1b-M123 from ancient Aghitu

An E1b-Z21466 was found in ancient Aghitu from the Hellenistic era. This branch is rare in ancient remains. Only one sample was previously known from the Imperial Roman period, and now another has been found in ancient Armenia.

You may ask why this is important. Well, Z21466 is a parallel branch of E1b-L791 (see the chart), which is also not particularly rich in ancient samples. L791 is important because indirect data suggest that its expansion is related to Bronze Age Anatolia. The presence of samples from the parallel branch may provide a hint about the direction from which L791 came to Anatolia. Even though the common ancestor of L791 and Z21466 is quite old (12,000 years), the limited amount of ancient DNA from these two branches suggests that they had a compact distribution in the past.

Most likely, the common ancestor Z841 is related to the spread of the so-called Central farmers from northern Mesopotamia northward, including historic Armenia, and possibly southward into southern Mesopotamia. Later, L791 expanded in Anatolia during the Bronze Age. Yediay et al. 2024 identified an E1b-Z830 in Bronze Age Anatolia. Most likely, it belongs to the M123 branch. When the files are uploaded, we will know its exact subclade.

Napoleon Bonaparte’s relatives have been tested, and he belonged to the E1b-L791 branch.