Monday, January 26, 2026

New ancient DNA from Greece.

 New ancient DNA from Greece. From Corinth region and western Greece. Old samples are similar to other samples from Greece and Balkans but the Roman era samples show a shift to Anatolia. Somewhat similar to Roman imperial events.

One of the Roman era Corinthians has Y DNA R1b-L584 consistent with its eastern shift. Another person from Roman era had J2-M92 plausibly from Anatolian affiliation also. Other Y DNA found in those sites are typical to Balkans. E1b-L618. R1b-Pf7562, J2b-L283, T1a2, G2.
==========
The consensus of our findings (PCA, ADMIXTURE, qpAdm using the “Most_Proximate” set of sources) shows that the Amvrakia and Tenea individuals can be considered as 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, a local genetic continuity is suggested from the LBA/IA Greece to the Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic Greece, as well as in a lower degree to Roman Greece, albeit for the latter the spatial sampling is inadequate to justify such a generalization.

Wednesday, January 21, 2026

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 the definite solution of this question requires dozens of Bronze Age Y DNA from specific locations in plain Anatolia that are neither Greek ( Aegean coast ) neither Hattic or Kaskian ( north of Anatolia ) and neither had a strong presence of Hurrians. Before this data is available I would like to make a summary of already available Y DNA to find some patterns. I will not discuss in this thread the steppe markers R1b and I2. Their affiliation to IE migrations is unambiguous. What is more important about them is the route of migration and possible linguistic affiliation in IE family. I will discuss them in the review about Anatolian IE.
J1-Z1828* found from Harmanören - Göndürle Höyük, dated at ~2400BC. (Lazaridis et al. 2017)
There is no information about the downstream branch but chances are quite high that it is from BY69 branch that was found in Anatolia from later periods.
J2-Z6065>Y9268>Z43664 from Ovaoren dated at ~2750BC. Damgaard et al. 2018.
This branch is parallel to the P81 found in Maykop culture.
Another J2-Z6065 was found in Yediay et al. 2024.
2x J2-M67>Z6273 from Kalehoyuk dated around 2500-1200 BC. Damgaard et al. 2018
This branch can reflect a new post Neolithic migration, however the presence in Neolithic Italy Cardial Ware raise the possibility that it was present in Anatolia from Neolithic period.
Another possible Bronze Age Anatolian lineage is the E-791. However we need to wait the publication of Yediay et al. 2024 for the raw files for full confirmation of this theory.
Indirect data suggest that J2-L70 and upstream level also was a Bronze Age Anatolian lineage that expanded in LBA - IA possibly with Luwians.
I didn't include G2-M406 and T1a2a given that there is strong reasons to believe that they were initially associated with Hattic people expansion.
The main visible pattern is that all this haplotypes have obvious eastern connections. Another remarkable feature is their absence from a large set of Minoan Y DNA. This support the idea that they can't be connected to Proto Minoan migration neither to non-IE Hattic people.
to be continued

Saturday, January 17, 2026

An unusual branch of E1b-M123 from ancient Aghitu

 An unusual branch of E1b-M123 from ancient Aghitu

A E1b-Z21466 was found from ancient Aghitu Hellenistic era. This branch is rare in ancient remains. Only one was known from Imperial Rome periode and now another from ancient Armenia.
You may ask why its important? Well Z21466 is the parallel branch of E1b-L791 (see the chart) which also is not particularly rich with ancient samples. L791 is important because indirect data suggest that its expansion is related to Bronze Age Anatolia. And the presence of samples from the parallel branch may give 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 lack of much ancient DNA from this two branches suggests that they had a compact distribution in the past.
In most likelihood the common ancestor Z841 is related to the spread of so called Central farmers from northern Mesopotamia to north including the historic Armenia and possibly to south Mesopotamia. Later the L791 expanded in Anatolia in Bronze Age. Yediay et al. 2024 has found a E1b-Z830 in Bronze Age Anatolia. In most likelihood it is from M123 branch. When files are uploaded we will know its exact subclade.
Napoleon Bonaparte relatives have been tested and he was from E1b-L791 branch.

Sunday, January 4, 2026

Y DNA from Hellenistic era Syunik Aghitu (Skourtanioti et al. 2025) are now uploaded to FTDNA and TheYtree. 16 Y DNA were detected by Theytree.

 Y DNA from Hellenistic era Syunik Aghitu (Skourtanioti et al. 2025) are now uploaded to FTDNA and TheYtree. 16 Y DNA were detected by Theytree.

1x E1b֊PF6759
1x G1 low coverage
1x J2-M92
1x I2-L699>S12195
1x R1b-Y4364
9x R1b-L584
2x undetermined R1b-M269
From this list the most interesting is the I2-L699 which is found for the first time in ancient Armenia. Its presence was expected, given that L699 was present in Yamnaya. Few exceptions aside like the Sredni Stog enclave in lower Don Yamnaya it was a rare lineage starting from Early Bronze Age in Steppe so it is not surprising that we have not seen much in ancient Armenia. This I2 is different from I2a2b. This latter had an important founder effect in Trialeti Vanadzor culture and its the main reason of its high frequency in ancient Armenia and Georgia.
This finding shows that dense sampling is needed to find some rare markers. So the owners of R1b-PF7562 and R1b-Z2110 can still expect to find their haplotypes in ancient Armenia.
According Hovann Simonian the haplotype of Andranik Ozanyan also known as Zoravar Andranik or Andranik Pasha was the I2-L699>S12195>Y6998 (Pic 2). His branch do not directly descend from Aghitu I2 but has a common ancestor with it.



Tuesday, December 30, 2025

The administrative division of Achaemenid Persia is still a matter of debates.

 The administrative division of Achaemenid Persia is still a matter of debates.

Most scholars agree that satrapic system was a hierarchic one. There were main and minor satrapies, where the latter was ruled by the former. In Bisitun inscription 23 lands are mentioned, which usually are assumed to be main satrapies during the Darius reign. Herodotus list of 20 satrapies is an incomplete recount of both main and minor satrapies where there is a clear bias toward western regions of empire. While the eastern regions are very little reperesented.
Khorikyan discuss those questions and based on his papers i made a map of main satrapy Armenia mentioned in Bisitun and other subsatrapies mentioned in Herodotus.
Saspeirs, Saspir or Sapirs. According Herodotus was located between Colchis and Media. For this reasin if was placed in modern Armenia. However if modern Azerbaijan was part of Medes main satrapy ( map 3) then a location in Eastern Georgia is also possible. Locating Saspeirs in modern Armenia has no any arguments. Neither in Urartian period or later Armenian period there is no single toponym that can be linked to Saspeir in modern Armenia. While such a toponym exists in Georgia. It is the Iberia. Some scholars had proposed a theory that sa- is a Georgian prefix for land like in Sakartvelo and the true root in Saspeirs/Sapirs is the *speir or *pir which can be the proto form of Greek Iberia and Latin Hiberia.
From genetic point of view we know that Iberian related ancestry had already formed in eastern Georgia in early antiquity. So some early Georgian polity must have existed there in Achaemenid period. Saspeirs can be the precursor of Iberia.
Matiene. Another obscure tribe mentioned with Saspeirs. Matiene existed in many places. In Anatolia and northwestern Iran. Khorikyan cites at last one Greek source where Matiene is mentioned in Caucasian context and based on this he place it in the headwaters of Kur river.
From genetic point of the presence of R1a and Q2 in ancient Samtskhe region is remarkable. It could be related to Persian rule there but can be a different influence from Iranian plateau. The Matiene being a,plausible candidate.
Not much is known about Alarodi. Only two sentences. So its localization will remain speculative.
In sum Khorikyan propose the the 18th satrapy was in north of Armenia rather in East Armenia.
Finally the Pactyuce mentioned alongside Armenians is in most likelihood a corrupted form of Patuka. A Luwian or Hittite term peda meaning "land" from which Katpatuka is derived. Which means lower land. A village Patuk is attested near Kharberd Elyazig city.
The third map shows main satrapies according Jacobs. While the second map shows the temporal expansion of the empire by Mladiov.



Monday, December 22, 2025

There are some chances that Kaskean from North Anatolia will not be anymore considered as unrecorded language.

 There are some chances that Kaskean from North Anatolia will not be anymore considered as unrecorded language.

Sasseville published a paper this year where he examines some Hittite cuneiform texts with unknown language and he suggests that those unknown words can be Kaskean lexemes.
The paper is behind the paywall but a small talk with Chatgpt AI gave me an impression that Sasseville is inclined to the theory that Kaskean has some connection with Hattic language.
The current scant archaegenetic data from north Anatolia also supports this theory. Rasuloglu Hoyuk which is linked to Hattic culture yielded G2-M406 and T1a2a. The same haplotypes where found in more northern location where Kaska people were attested.
This year was remarkable for Kaska archaeology also. A site was discovered that was explicitly linked to Kaska people. And a settlement near Samsun was proposed to be the famous Nerik city.

Thursday, December 11, 2025

A remarkable linguistic review from Yediay et al. 2024 written by Kroonen, Thorso and Wigman.

 A remarkable linguistic review from Yediay et al. 2024 written by Kroonen, Thorso and Wigman.

It is in the supplements. Hrach Martirosyan 's paper is also referenced.
The link in the comments.
--------
Armenian is currently spoken in the Republic of Armenia and by a worldwide diaspora, but it has historically formed a patchwork of dialects across large parts of Anatolia and the South Caucasus95. Its first substantial attestation is the Classical Armenian literature appearing from the 5th century CE. Traditionally, it is considered an independent branch of the Indo-European family tree96, but is frequently placed in a higher-order subgroup with Greek72,74. As previously mentioned, our new IBD analyses show that BA individuals from both Greece and Armenia are best modeled as having shared ancestry derived from a population closely related to previously unpublished MBA samples from Moldova, associated with the Late Yamnaya culture (Genetics and Strontium Supplementary Fig. S6.21; S6.42). This contrasts with, e.g., individuals associated with Italic languages, who derive their Steppe ancestry by a vector of Corded Ware and Bell Beaker individuals. These results are consistent with the assumption of a primordial Graeco-Armenian subgroup that started diverging during the middle of the 3rd millennium at the latest. And thus, the rather sudden replacement of the previously widespread Transcaucasian Kura-Araxes culture by the Trialeti culture by the end of the 3rd millennium BCE97, with certain similarities to early Mycenaean culture26, probably represents the first tangible sign in the region of an Indo-European element that can be ancestral to the Armenian branch (Anthony 2024; Lazaridis et al. 2022a).
From the Iron Age, samples with Urartian and pre-Urartian contexts show a similar proportion of ancestry associated with the western Steppe, which is consistent with the existing view that the Urartian population was multiethnic99 and multilingual100,101, and it yields support for the hypothesis that it may have contained an Armenian-speaking component102,103. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, Steppe ancestry emerges in the South Caucasus already in the MBA, with no significant later input, and it is only a marginal ancestry component in Central Anatolia. This means that the traditional hypothesis of a migration of Armenian speakers across Anatolia after 1,200 BCE11,104 is increasingly doubtful.
Many scholars have assumed a particularly close relationship between (Thraco-)Phrygian and Armenian as well94, even closer than that of Greek and Phrygian105,106. However, more recent progress in the study of Phrygian has revealed a poverty of exclusively shared features with Armenian, which makes such a hypothesis difficult to support94. Likewise, our IBD results yield no support for assuming a common migration of Armenians and Phrygians through Anatolia, but rather suggest that the shared innovations of Greek, Phrygian, and Armenian are attributable to a higher-order subgroup (or linguistic area) connected with the Late Yamnaya culture of the 3rd millennium BCE.