Tuesday, October 27, 2020

We have discussed here many times that based on genetics the most important ( since Neolithic ) migrational event into Armenia occured at MBA (circa 2400-2200bc).

We have discussed here many times that based on genetics the most important ( since Neolithic ) migrational event into Armenia occured at MBA (circa 2400-2200bc). The supposedly source of migration is the Catacomb culture in the North then via Daghestan.

According to this paper they introduced also brand new horse haplotypes in South Caucasus and Anatolia.


PS Horses were present in Armenia before MBA but they had fewer haplotypes. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abb0030

We have another J2b2a L283 from a Bronze Age site Mokrin in North Serbia.

 We have another J2b2a L283 from a Bronze Age site Mokrin in North Serbia. It is dated at 2000-1800 bc ( Maros culture ) . It was found alongside of three R1b-Z2103 -s and I2a-s. It has some 40 percent of Steppe ancestry like others from the same site. 

The other J2b L283 was found in Croatia MLBA. Also with a lot off Steppe ancestry. Other younger cases were found in Italy some in Sardinia without Steppe. Those are published in different papers.


So why this is an important finding? The reason is that the L283 do not give impression to be a classic Neolithic or even post Neolithic lineage that moved from Anatolia to Europe were it is prevalent today. In the current stage of our knowledge it looks like it was a South Caucasian lineage that crossed the Caucasus and moved to Balkanes via Steppe in Bronze Age. Indeed the two other cases of L283 are found in ancient Armenia and in MBA Kabardino Balkaria (North Caucasus).

Here the modern data were You can see an Armenian on the root of branch.


https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-L283/


Here the pre print.


https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.18.101337v1

I will post soon about Arslantepe, but before that You can read this text about Isuwa.

 I will post soon about Arslantepe, but before that You can read this text about Isuwa. Isuwa was the name of the country where Melid ( Arslantepe) was situated.


https://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsMiddEast/AnatoliaIshuwa.htm


Notice the migration at 3200-3000BC really occured. They were Kur Araxians. Wether they introduced IE languages in that region is less clear for me.

Also the genetic impact of this migrants was not as strong as one would imagine based on archaeology.

Late Chalcolithic 4500-3600 BC in Armenia and around.

 Late Chalcolithic 4500-3600 BC in Armenia and around.

Chaff faced ware period. Also known as Leyla tepe in South Caucasus. 

Possible origins somewhere in the southern part of historic Armenia close to North Mesopotamia.


Remarkable features. Jar burials. Rectangular houses. Textile. Use of wool. Pot wheel. Advanced metal knowledge. Wine making 


Haplogroups L1a1 in Areni. G1 in SE Azerbaijan. 

Played an important role in the genesis of Maykop. Other haplotypes from Maykop of possible CFW origin. L2, T1a3, J2b2a-L283 ( prominent in Europe today) .

Other possible haplotypes E-V22, E-M84 ( found in Arslantepe LC) from N Mesopotamia , R1b V1636. CFW was present in Arslantepe also but I don't have access to supplements to know what was those Arslantepe samples archaeologic context.

One unsolved puzzle of CFW is the presence of Kurganic burials. Origins of those Kurganic burials are disputed. Some commentators link them with IE people. 

CFW was replaced by Kur Araxians who came from Northern parts of historic Armenia.


PS Notice not all arrows represent migrations.


J2-L25 is the second most frequent type of J2 in Armenia (~5%).

 J2-L25 is the second most frequent type of J2 in Armenia (~5%). It is found from Central Asia, Iran to Europe, North Africa. It is rare in Caucasus. The age of L25 is 9100 year old. It seems all modern L25 descend from one Neolithic farmer who lived in NW Iran. The oldest L25 we have is from Tepe Hissar (5000 year ago) in North Iran. L25 was prominent among Iran related farmers but was completly absent among Anatolian and Levantine related farmers. It has three important subclades. Lets see their histories. 


PF4888, L243 A relatively rare branch found in Near East and Europe. No ancient DNA yet.


F3133 This is the biggest subclade of L25. It migrated to East from NW Iran. It was found in ancient South Central Asia. In Bronze Age BMAC culture. It was also found in East Iran, Jiroft culture. In most likelihood it was present in Harappa but still no prove of that. F3133 has good presence in Iraq. Based on that it was suggested that it can be a Sumerian marker, but still no hard evidence of that. After the arrival of Steppe people in Central Asia (Andronovo) the Proto Iranian community formed as a mixture of Andronovo and BMAC which resulted in the integration of some F3133 in Proto Iranian community. Indeed few cases of F3133 were found among ancient Scythians and Saka. But most of Armenian cases of F3133 do not belong to this Scythian branches and their presence in Armenia is probably old.


Z438, Z387, L70 This branch has a very unique history. It is mostly European and East Med. But this is not the result of farmer's migration. Rather a Late Bronze Age migration from Anatolia to Italy and subsequent expansion with Roman Empire. How Z438 appeared in Anatolia is not clear yet. It could have migrated from North Iraq/South Arm. Highland to Anatolia in Late Chl. 

The age of L70 subclade is 3800 but the starcluster starts at 3400 years ago which can be linked with Late Bronze Age collapse in Near East and migrations of various Sea People. A paper from ancient Rome has found a signal of migration from Anatolia (ancient Armenian samples were used as proxy ) in Iron Age during the Early Republican era. But L70 was not present in few aDNA published in this paper. More aDNA is needed to solve the puzzle of L70. The story of L70 almost certainly is not related to the origins of Etruscans.

The Y17949 parallel to L70 is unrelated to Sea People story.


#L25

The idea that Armenians could have serious influx from Levant is not new.

 The idea that Armenians could have serious influx from Levant is not new. It was discussed many times the last 5 - 7 years that I follow all this debates. But the last paper from Skourtationi was a game changer. It demonstrated that the reason why Armenian are shifted toward East Med is not an massive influx from Levant but because Eastern Turkey in ancient times was inhabited by quite southern populations. The same finding inflated the level of Steppe in Armenia bringing it to more realistic numbers.


Here is the opinion of the user DMXX on this subject. He is the admin of Iranian DNA project.


PS. I must add that the presence of Semitic Y dna in Armenia is undeniable ( J1 -Z1884, some J2b1-s, some T-s ) Neverthless their number, their fragmented nature do not speak about any one time mass migration.  


========

In sum, Armenians can be reliably modeled as ~85% E. Anatolian-S. Caucasian ChL-EBA and ~11% EMBA steppe. 

.....

So, I'd tentatively assert that Armenians are ~11% EMBA/~16% MLBA steppe, which is only a couple %age points less than the Kurmanji Kurdish (non-Yazidi) and Azeri averages, and is a touch higher than the average seen in Iranian Lurs. 


The above also corroborates Arame's modelling - Significant differences in the source of Anatolia/Levant_N-rich admix is seen between Armenians and Assyrians. The majority of that admix in Armenians is typified by the SE Turkish EBA datapoint, whereas it's an even split in Assyrians. Levant_EBA in this context is a catch-all indicator for Semitic-related admix in Assyrians.


The overall difference in component scores here is 30% - This is substantially larger than what was inferred via ADMIXTURE many years ago (as highlighted by Alkaevli's post, the % difference was ~13%). 

Ergo, with informal modelling that contains aDNA and not modern pop-modal allele frequency data, Armenians and Assyrians should no longer be considered "variants" of one another. It's analogous to claiming that Brits and Spaniards are "the same". 

....


Either way, in conclusion:

1) Armenians and Assyrians should not be considered synonymous with one another,

2) Armenians do not have "low" (defined arbitrarily by me as <5%) EMBA steppe admix relative to neighbouring pops (they're within range for W. Asia),

3) There's reason to suspect that some of our Assyrian samples in G25 carry cryptic admixture from relatively steppe-rich neighbouring pops, skewing the averages


https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20497-split-Armenians-Origins-amp-Steppe-Admix&p=673078&viewfull=1#post673078


This is one of several examples of where, as a community, the collective perception of a given topic is unduly coloured by formative experiences with the preliminary and/or rudimentary data that were available to us in the 2005-2015 period. 


I've been a spectator (or active interlocutor) to these discussions for most of that period, so forgive me for this unsourced narration regarding why there is resistance to the notion that Armenians don't have a significant (>10%) proportion of P-C steppe-mediated admixture. 


The earliest uniparental studies (I have Weale et al. 2001 in mind) on the Armenians showed what we'd expect in a fairly opaque sense (they broadly clustered with other W. Asians). Later papers demonstrated that Armenians, on the Y-line, were typified by the "quintessentially W. Asian" combination of E1b1b1, G(1+2), J2a, J1(xe in peri-2010 ISOGG nomenclature) and R1b-L23, which was also observed in all populations from central Anatolia through to Iran and south towards Iraq. Later data, such as from Peter Hrechdakian's FTDNA Armenian DNA Project, broadly supported that observation.


By the early 10's, auDNA results from multiple Armenian and Assyrian individuals from the consumer testing circuit began popping up on forums. A similarity between them was readily observed. Further, the uniparental profiles were also broadly similar (per above). Folks began to assume a near-complete convergence in origins based on these factors, which were reinforced by anthropological considerations (e.g. irregular intermarriage between these two minority groups, partially facilitated by their Christian backgrounds). 


The inference that the two populations were almost synonymous with one another from a genetic perspective was seemingly cemented by 2012-14, when ADMIXTURE calculators reined supreme, and the two populations certainly did appear closer with respect to the scores they'd generated. Here, we observed what Alkaevli's table perfectly demonstrates - Armenians generally appeared midway on a pan-component cline between Georgians and Assyrians, with most component scores tending towards the Assyrian end of that axis. Their "N. European" related ADMIXTURE proportions were also significantly below what was observed in groups like non-Trabzon Turks or Iranians across practically all calculators.


Although this general line of argument (an iteration of "Assyrians/Armenians are language-shifted Armenians/Assyrians" or "Assyrians and Armenians are 90+% Urarto-Hurrian-derived and that's it") seemed convincing at the time, one piece of evidence (which was curiously ignored by most, with the notable exception of former colleague and esteemed contributor 'Humanist') impeded me from accepting these hypotheses. Specifically, the surprisingly lacklustre IBD segment sharing between Assyrians and Armenians, which falls quite short of what we can observe from other known related groups in the region (f.ex. numerous Iranian ethnicities and populations that are now described as Kurdish). 


In the sciences, especially when a multi-disciplinarian perspective is employed, it is crucial to validate hypotheses, control for bias and critically appraise discordant data if one of your evidence streams doesn't align with the rest. This appraisal wasn't generally taken up by the community at large, where a seeming majority seemed to implicitly accept earlier conventions without re-appraising old data in the face of new, or back-testing old ideas with new material. 


In retrospect, there were always two problems with the general popular argument up to circa 2014:

1) Despite the high degree of uniparental profile overlap between W. Asian populations, there are significant differences in frequency. Additionally, there are significant differences in the types of subclades seen beyond the stereotypical W. Asian combination (f.ex. Armenians were, from memory, an unusual local hotbed for Y-DNA I2; Iranians and Kurds are broadly the most Y-DNA R1a-M17 containing para-ethnic groups; Y-DNA Q frequencies in the Republic of Azerbaijan and W. Iran, etc.). Discounting these differences in favour of a fixation on the commonality undercuts the very point of establishing contrasts between groups (I personally suspect that some observers were/are so preoccupied by the ADMIXTURE outputs of old that they instinctively looked for the common rather than the differences when it came to the Armenians)

2) ADMIXTURE's design (modal component formation based on allele frequency) makes ancestral signals "bleed into each other" in regions with a longstanding history of demographic settlement or mixing. Ergo, Armenians being 3-6% "N. European" on average in Dodecad K12b doesn't indicate much about the actual degree of admixture from a N. European-like population (in this case, MLBA steppe groups, or EMBA to a lesser degree). 


https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20497-split-Armenians-Origins-amp-Steppe-Admix&p=672080&viewfull=1#post672080

With currently available data we can say that from Neolithic to Late Chalcholithic modern Armenia was inhabited by Armenian like people shifted to East Med

 With currently available data we can say that from Neolithic to Late Chalcholithic modern Armenia was inhabited by Armenian like people shifted to East Med. In LC period the shift toward East Med became even more stronger. You can see LC period sample from Azerbaijan ploting close to Arslantepe LC samples. On the other hand we have Armenia Chl ( marked as LCaucasus_C) which is shifted toward North East ( to left and top) This is because it has some Steppe Piedmont type ancestry which should not be confused with Yamna. If we remove that shift they will also plot close to other LC samples from Turkey and Azerbaijan. This Areni was exceptional and we should not imagine it as a widespread type of ancestry in historic Armenia. They had trade contacts with North.

Then in EBA (after 3600bc) with Kur Araxian culture we had a serious shift toward CHG. While modern Armenians are in intermediate position between EBA and LC. The most top red circle of Arslantepe LC is the place of modern Armenians. ( It is the ART018 sample)


 How this became possible?


The answer to this question can be found in Kur Araxian samples from Arslantepe. Here how they look.


Target: TUR_Arslantepe_EBA (Kur Arax)

Distance: 1.2158% / 0.01215811

92.2 TUR_Arslantepe_LC

7.8 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kaps


This means that those CHG shifted KurAraxians had quite little genetic impact on southern and western parts of Arm. Highland were mostly the preceding LC type simply borrowed the KA culture without having much genetic ancestry from this people. 


PS. The shift toward CHG do not mean that KA people came from Caucasus. In most likelihood they are from Kars Artahan Javakhk region were isolated highlanders were living. KurAraxian from Kaps (Shirak) is the best proxy for this proto Kur Araxians. From linguistic point of view this also means that KA was a multiethnic place.

Here how Armenians looks in this simple model.

 Here how Armenians looks in this simple model. Arslantepe EBA is used as a proxy for ancient DNA from Western Armenia.


Target: Armenian

Distance: 1.2783% / 0.01278271

54.2 TUR_Arslantepe_EBA

25.4 ARM_LBA

20.4 IRN_Hasanlu_IA

0.0 BGR_IA

0.0 BGR_MLBA

0.0 GRC_Mycenaean

0.0 Levant_Ashkelon_IA1

0.0 Sardinian


No ancestry from Europe or Balkanes. We also note that samples from ancient Eastern Armenia do not represent all ancestry of Armenians which is quite normal because Armenians have ancestry from all parts of Armenian Highlands.


Now if You are obsessed by Balkanian theory. You think Herodotus was telling the truth of last instance and You want at all cost prove that migration from Balkanes occured what You can do? You remove Arslantepe and see what You get.


Target: Armenian

Distance: 2.6295% / 0.02629507

49.0 IRN_Hasanlu_IA

35.8 Levant_Ashkelon_IA1

15.2 ARM_LBA

0.0 BGR_IA

0.0 BGR_MLBA

0.0 GRC_Mycenaean

0.0 Sardinian


Wow mass migration of Sea people that are represented here by Ashkelon IA1 samples. You see how easily can be fabricated a mass migration of Sea People like stuff. You just need to ignore that Western Armenia existed, Urarteans, Shubrians, Isuwians existed, samples from ancient Arslantepe are already published. That modern Armenia do not represent whole Armenia. Etc etc.


PS This post is not about Armenian geneticians but is about those people who are planning to bring back the Balkanian theory.

Few comments on the discussions in the previous thread.

Few comments on the discussions in the previous thread.

+ 2D PCA from Academic papers gives only very approximate picture of population relatedness. G25 on the other hand creates coordinates in 25 (!!!) dimension which is much detailed information. Pops that looks close on 2D can be very different in G25. One such a case are the Imeretian Georgians and Armenians.

+ When comparing ancient samples to modern one must be very cautious in interpreting data. One must also take into consideration archaeological context. Inferring linguistics from such a comparison is even more speculative. I just propose to compare Yamna to modern ones, You will start to think that they were Udmurts. Or compare Sintashta to modern ones You will understand why many Indians hate the idea that Sintasht Andronovo are Indo Iranian. Neverthless this is becoming mainstream in Western Academy. 

+ Here are two tools for making Your own PCA's using G25 sheets.

https://vahaduo.github.io/g25views/#NorthEurope
. .

Custom PCA

https://vahaduo.github.io/custompca/

Linguistics is something that can't be easily ignored. Let's not forget that current mainstream in West is that Armenian and Greek are related. Clackson expressed a different opinion but he's opinion is not widely accepted. The only reason why Andronovo is believed to be an Indo Iranian culture is the linguistics, because a lot off other data are going against that idea.

If someone want to get an usefull data from DNA then he must make some serious efforts.

 If someone want to get an usefull data from DNA then he must make some serious efforts. 


First one important thing is that modern distribution has very little value. For example we know that there was a huge migration from Near East in Roman Empire. Armenians migrated a lot in medieval time toward west. Paulicians were deported to Balkanes in large masses. Some 30% percent of modern Greeks DNA has Slavic origin. Semites of Bronze Age were predominantly J1 and J2b1 while modern Semites in Levant had much more Y dna diversity.


That is why just one ancient DNA is much more important than tons of modern. The same is in linguistic. Just one old sentence can have more value than hundreds of modern words.


Concerning L584. Currently the oldest L584 is found in NW Iran. If someone believes that it came from Balkanes then he must prpvide an older L584 from Balkanes. Also if someone believes that Armenians came from Balkanes at Early Iron Age then he must explain the presence of I2c2 in LBA Armenia in a elite burial with chariots.


I don't even use here autosomal arguments which is a must for making an argument in more serious discussions.

A large number of R1b-V1636 is found in Khvalynsk culture in Volga region (~4500bc)

 A large number of R1b-V1636 is found in Khvalynsk culture in Volga region (~4500bc). This is a from unpublished paper mention by Anthony. Other haplogroups found there are R1a, I2, Q, J1. 

Khvalynsk is a copper age culture, usually considered the earliest pastoralist culture in Pontic Caspian Steppe. It was also the earliest culture in Steppe that had the Caucasian admixture, which later became the most recognizable feature of Yamna.


We have also one R1b-V1636 from ancient Arslantepe (Malatya). ~3000BC. 

This V1636 was also found in Kur Arax culture from Kalavan, Armenia. 2600 bc.


Also two cases of V1636 were found in North Caucasian Steppic part called Piedmont. From Progress and Vonyuchka sites. 4300 BC. They were foragers.


Also we have new case of V1636 in ancient Danemark in a Single Grave Culture (~2500bc) which itself is a subgroup of Corded Ware. Corded Ware is an IE culture. And another possible case in Yamna.


So what is the directionality and origin?. Based on autosomes of Khvalynsk samples it is clear that V1636 herders moved to Volga region from South. Here there can be little doubt. V1636 was in most likelihood an early pastoralustic lineage. But from where it started it's journey?

One possibility is that V1636 learned pastoralism in the vicinity of North Caucasus from neighbouring farmers of Near Eastern origin. Later one branch moved to Volga region. While another branch moved to Near East reaching Arslantepe and maybe Anatolia.

 It should be noted that this migration must have occured earlier than Kur Arax formed, thus earlier than 3600 BC. 

Another possibility is that V1636 was present in South Caucasus since the Neolithic. It became part of local farmers communities and moved on its own to North reaching Volga region. 

 Additional ancient DNA is needed to solve this puzzle, which would be very important for understanding Yamna's origin.


V1636 is rare today. It can be found in few places like Armenia, Turkey, Italy, China also Volga region and in some Arabic countries.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V1636/


Those new ancient samples change the modeling of Armenians.

 Those new ancient samples change the modeling of Armenians. Steppe ancestry increase and comes more closer to what is expected from the level of Z2103, I2c2 and other haplotypes.


Target: Armenian

Distance: 0.9251% / 0.00925141

50.2 TUR_Arslantepe_EBA

36.0 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

10.0 RUS_Catacomb

3.8 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Talin

0.0 RUS_Darkveti-Meshoko_En

0.0 TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA


No Steppe in Imeretia.


Target: Georgian_Imer

Distance: 2.2635% / 0.02263516

65.2 RUS_Darkveti-Meshoko_En

16.0 TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA

9.2 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Talin

9.0 TUR_Arslantepe_EBA

0.6 RUS_Catacomb

0.0 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

Closest ancient DNA

 Closest ancient DNA


Distance to: Armenian

0.03104339 AZE_Caucasus_lowlands_LN

0.03456153 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

0.04017568 IND_Roopkund_B_o

0.04442962 TUR_Arslantepe_EBA

0.04911677 TUR_Arslantepe_LC

0.04920759 ARM_Areni_C

0.04925681 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Talin

0.04954564 IRN_Hasanlu_IA

0.05142391 TUR_Ikiztepe_LC

0.05346867 TUR_Alalakh_MLBA

0.05365388 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kalavan

0.05566419 Levant_Megiddo_MLBA_o1

0.05646336 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kaps

0.05792011 TUR_Titris_Hoyuk_EBA

0.05807041 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_Historic

0.05914986 TUR_Ovaoren_EBA

0.05978435 TUR_Barcin_C

0.05994256 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_IA

0.06006864 RUS_Maykop_Late

0.06068718 SYR_Ebla_EMBA

0.06076711 TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA

0.06133420 Levant_LBN_MA

0.06182855 Levant_LBN_Roman

0.06183801 AZE_Caucasus_lowlands_LC

0.06380430 RUS_Maykop

The history of J2-M67.

 I decided to dedicate about J2-M67 a special thread.


M67 is the most popular type of J2 among Armenians so lets understand it's origin.


M67 is 12.000 year old and has three different subclades each of them has quite different distribution.


1/ Z467 is mostly absent from Caucasus. It is not frequent among Armenians. It was found in Bronze Age Anatolia in possible Hittite period. Autosomaly shifted to East. It was also found in Italian Neolithic which is very surprising because in the rest of Europe it was absent. This means different origin of Cardial ware Italian Neolithic. 


2/ Z500 , M92 This is the most frequent type of M67 among Armenians. It is rare/not frequent among Caucasians. Except in Pontic region and parts of SW Georgia. We don't have much aDNA with M92 but judging it's structure and ages I am expecting to be a Kur-Araxian marker. A type of marker that moved mostly to West South West and not toward Caucasus.


3/ CTS900 Is found mostly among Caucasian people. Reaching the highest levels in the world among Nakh people. This peak is result of young founder effect related to the breakup of proto Nakh community. It was found in Eneolithic Meshoko Darkveti culture. Also in Maykop which succeded him. It migrated there from South which is confirmed by their autosomes. It was also found in LBA Hungary. Most probably it reached there via Steppe.


Conclusion. The M67 homeland was in historic Armenia. More precisely in it's Western / North Western part. Z467 migrated to West. CTS900 migrated to North, the M92 expanded in BA most probably with KA.

North Caucasian genetics - The source of Steppe ancestry

Let's discuss the origins of Steppe ancestry in North West Caucasian ( NWC) people also known as Abkhaz-Adyghean family. Here is a quote from Wang paper.


------ 
First, sometime after the BA present-day North Caucasian populations must have received additional gene-flow from steppe populations that now separates them from southern Caucasians, who largely retained the BA ancestry profile. The archaeological and historic records suggest numerous incursions during the subsequent Iron Age and Medieval times33, but ancient DNA from these time periods will be needed to test this directly. 
------ 


Indeed we have a Dolmen LBA sample which do not have steppe ancestry despite the fact that it is a prime candidate of being Proto NWC culture. Modern NWC do have steppe ancestry (except Abkhazians)  mostly from a Scythian source, this after LBA. The presence of R1a in NWC reinforce this idea. Also they have East Asian ancestry from medieval Turkic populations. In the picture attached it is called MNG_Early_Xiongnu. And some minor Yamna related ancestry which is called Kubano-Tersk. The low level of direct Yamna ancestry in North West Caucasus is not surprising given that R1b Z2103 is less frequent than R1a Abkhaz-Adyghean people. Interestingly NWC people do not have any ancestry from Steppe Maykop, which should not be confused with Mountainous (Caucasus) Maykop.

Most ancestry in NWC people is from MBA North Caucasus sample from Kudachurt. It has virtually no Steppe ancestry, and genome wide it is close to Eneolithic period Darkveti Meshoko. I couldn't use Dolmen LBA because it is absent in the G25 calculator. In most likelihood the extra Anatolian farmers related ancestry (Bulgaria_Chl) that NWC people had is related to Bronze Age Dolmen culture. The alternative explanation is the Colchian culture. The extra Anatolian shift could be related to high level of G2a2b in North West Caucasus. What is the origin of Y dna G2a2-U1>L1264 prevalent in NWC people is not clear but ancient DNA almost certainly will help to solve this puzzle.





The Hajji Firuz BA sample dated to 2300 bce was found accidently in Eneolithic layers

 The Hajji Firuz BA sample dated to 2300 bce was found accidently in Eneolithic layers. It was published in Naramsimhan paper about South Asia and was recognised as having a steppe ancestry. Indeed she has and a lot. Offcourse this do not mean that this type was widespread. We simply need more samples.


Target: IRN_Hajji_Firuz_BA

Distance: 2.1202% / 0.02120195

55.8 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara

21.2 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

13.2 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N

9.8 RUS_Darkveti-Meshoko_En


This period in that Urmia region is the end of Kur Araxian culture end emergence of new potteries. One is called Urmia ware ( it is equivalent to Karmir Vanq ) which has connection to contemporary sites in South Caucasus. The other one is the Khabur ware from Norrh Mesopotamia.

This paper is in Persian. It has two interesting maps with labels that I can't read. Can any one help to translate this labels on this maps.


https://nbsh.basu.ac.ir/article_2013_c32883fc5aed5df83d471a2f65c1579c.pdf


Below is the abstract in English.


----


Explaining the Middle and Late Bronze Age Cultures of North-Western Iran, Case Study: Urmia Ware and Khabur Pottery

Authors


Rahim velayati 1 saeed mirzaee 2 Hamid khanali 

1 Assistant Professor Department of Archaeology - University of Tehran


2 MA


 10.22084/NBSH.2017.8876.

Abstract


The 2nd and 1st millennium B.C., have a special attraction for archaeologists due to the advent of widespread commercial relations and urbanization parameters, establishing an initial city-state and then the governments and creation of the empires. The 2nd millennium B.C. is known as the Bronze Age in Iranian archaeological literature. The Bronze Age is beginning from 3000 BC to 1500 B.C., divided into three shorter periods of Early, Middle and Late Bronze Ages. Early Bronze Age is known as Kura Araxes in the northwest of Iran. In the 3rd millennium BC, Kura-Araxes culture included vast part of the Caucasus, North-West, Zagros and Northern Plateau of Iran, the east and south of Anatolia, north of Mesopotamia, and Levant’s areas in the east of Mediterranean which suddenly collapsed due to several factors. Following the collapse of these areas in the late 3rd millennium B.C., the Culture of the painted pottery flourished in the 2nd millennium B.C. After destruction of this culture during later phases (Middle and Late Bronze Age, 2nd millennium B.C.), nomadism expanded comprehensively in northwestern Iran, Transcaucasia and Eastern Anatolia. According to chronology of Middle Bronze Age, there are two distinct types of pottery in this area; Urmia and Khabur styles. The first one found in the Haftvan Tepe VI B. Edwards invented for first time Terminology of “Urmia style” after excavation of Haftvan Tepe VI B, however, he said it was Stronach’s suggestion. According to the archaeological findings, the tradition began at ca. 2200 B.C. and ended at northwestern Iran, eastern Anatolia ca. 1300 B.C.; however, some researchers believed it expanded from the Qazvin plain (Sagzabad Tepe) to the southern Caucasia and near Erzurum in Turkey. Characteristically, Urmia pottery is a painted monochrome or polychrome ware on red or dark orange background. The motifs of this culture are generally geometric subdivided into Van-Urmia, Tazehkand (Karmirbird), Sevan-Uzerlik Tepe, Tray mountain and Sagezabad cultures. The latter form, Khabur, first time suggested by Melvin fowler to introduce the pithos with geometric and striped motif and Opaque colored found from Khabur Plain. It is characteristically buff ware with black or dark brown geometric or animal motifs. The Khabur wares expanded in vast area, from West and Northwest of Iran, Northern Mesopotamia, Syria and south of Anatolia, whereas Mardin region is known as the entrance gate of Khabur wares into Anatolia. This type of pottery has been dated between 1900 and 1600 B.C. in northern Mesopotamia and also between 2106 ± 68 and 1684 ± 58 B.C. by Thermoluminescent method in Dinkhah Tepe (Northwest of Iran). Khabur style was discarded and replaced by Nuzi pottery at the beginning ofLate Bronze Age, but the Urmia style continued in the northwest of Iran, the Caucasia and East of Anatolia until the beginning of Iron Age. There is not much difference between Middle and Late Bronze Ages especially in subsistence strategies and the nature of settlements. The only significant difference is the advent and expansion of polychrome technique and new realistic naturalistic animal and human motifs. Some new forms of pottery appeared in Late Bronze Age including thin bowls with vertical bodies, double-angled wares and boot-shaped rhytons. In this article, there is an attempt to study the expansion of Urmia and Khabur Styles, Intra-regional features, and mutual and inter-regional relations during 2nd millennium BC.Conclusions indicate that the Bronze Age cultures, especially Khabur Style is very important due to the expansion of trade during the period, therefore, the cultures of Urmia and Khabur expanded in Caucasia, East of Turkey, North of Iraq, west and northwest of Iran during this period.

We have discussed recently autosomes.

 We have discussed recently autosomes. So let's compare some modern and ancient populations with a very simple tool called vahaduo.


Target: Armenian

Distance: 1.5158% / 0.01515807

60.4 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

17.4 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N

14.0 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Talin

7.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara

1.2 RUS_Darkveti-Meshoko_En


Target: Kurdish

Distance: 1.6204% / 0.01620444

45.8 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

25.8 TKM_Gonur1_BA

17.2 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N

11.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara


Target: Georgian_Imer

Distance: 2.3262% / 0.02326166

64.4 RUS_Darkveti-Meshoko_En

23.0 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Talin

12.6 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N


Target: Assyrian

Distance: 1.8124% / 0.01812432

77.8 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

14.0 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N

7.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara

1.2 TKM_Gonur1_BA


And now some ancient pops.


Target: ARM_LBA (Etiuni)

Distance: 2.2611% / 0.02261111

36.2 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

29.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara

20.8 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Talin

7.8 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N

5.8 RUS_Darkveti-Meshoko_En


Target: ARM_Lchashen (Etiuni)

Distance: 2.1067% / 0.02106658

46.8 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

26.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara

22.4 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Talin

2.4 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N

2.2 RUS_Darkveti-Meshoko_En


Target: IRN_Hasanlu_IA

Distance: 2.7997% / 0.02799672

58.6 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C

17.8 TKM_Gonur1_BA

10.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara

8.6 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N

5.0 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Talin


As one can see despite broad similarities those nations are different. Georgians do prefer Darkveti Meshoko a Caucasian culture. While the main difference between Kurds and Armenians is the strong presence of Central Asian BMAC ancestry among Kurds which is absent among Armenians. In usual ADMIXTURE runs this BMAC ancestry is visible as ASI. And this is the most surprising result of DNA. All talks of massive Iranian ancestry in Armenia are exaggerated!

Now You may say but Armenians have a lot of Iran Hajji Firus Chl. Well that is true but this a 7000 Neolithic farmer sample that came from Fertile Crescent from West (modern Iraqi Kurdistan). That is why Armenians and Assyrians have the highest affinity to this type of ancestry.

The mainstream is that Sintashta culture is a Indo Iranian culture.

 The mainstream is that Sintashta culture is a Indo Iranian culture. So why do You think no single Indo Iranian is close to this Sintashta.


Почему по вашему ни один индо иранский народ не близок к предпологаемой прото индо иранской культуре? Ваше мнение.


Rise395 Eurasian Steppes Sintashta (1860 BC)


1. North_Swedish (7.883)

2. Swedish (11.08)

3. Southwest_Finnish (11.46)

4. Norwegian (11.57)

5. Danish (12.70)

6. German_Central (12.88)

7. West_Norwegian (13.15)

8. North_German (13.30)