Trialeti–Vanadzor Culture and Its Genetic Legacy in the South Caucasus

Trialeti–Vanadzor Culture and Its Genetic Legacy in the South Caucasus

The possible steppe connection and Indo-European affiliation of the Trialeti-Vanadzor culture have been discussed for a long time. However, its partial presence in regions that later became known as Iberia and Caucasian Albania made this interpretation difficult to accept.

Today, ancient DNA allows us to better understand past population shifts and helps resolve these apparent contradictions.

---

Y-DNA Patterns in Eastern Georgia

The first Y-DNA chart (based on Skourtanioti et al. 2024) excludes one sample from western Georgia.

During the Late Bronze Age–Early Iron Age (1500–800 BCE)—known in eastern Georgia as the Lchashen-Tsitelgori culture—the Y-DNA distribution closely resembles that of Armenia:

• A predominance of R1b and I2, lineages that expanded during the Middle Bronze Age with the Trialeti–Vanadzor horizon
• Two J2 samples from the Bazaleti site (north of Mtskheta), near the foothills of the Greater Caucasus

One of these J2 individuals shows low steppe ancestry, indicating the northern boundary of Trialeti–Vanadzor influence, consistent with the region’s lowland–highland geographic division.

A single G2a1 sample suggests that central Georgian Kura–Araxes-derived populations may have had a different Y-DNA structure compared to Kakhetian groups, which were predominantly J1.

---

Iron Age Transformations

In the Iron Age II (800–600 BCE), data are limited, with only one G2a1 sample available.

The Early Antiquity period (600–300 BCE)—coinciding with the rise of the Achaemenid Empire—shows a major shift:

• Appearance of R1a in both Armenia and Georgia
• Increased importance of G2a1 and J2 lineages (likely subclades of CTS900)

Unlike Armenia, which experienced a southward genetic shift, eastern Georgia likely underwent a different directional change, though current qpAdm models lack sufficient resolution to define it precisely.

---

The Bragdzor Family: Evidence of Migration

A key insight comes from a familial burial at Bragdzor.

Three individuals were closely related:

• The father and his brother shared Y-DNA (J2) and mtDNA (K1a4c)
• The father displayed autosomal DNA very different from local Lchashen populations

He had:

• High CHG (Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer ancestry)
• Virtually no steppe ancestry
• A profile similar to modern West Georgians

This indicates that he was a migrant, arriving in the region around 800 BCE.

This date coincides with the proposed linguistic separation of Kartvelian languages, including the divergence of Georgian and Zan, which typically occurs alongside geographic expansion.

Further evidence of migration:

• His son’s mother (likely his wife, buried in the same grave) was an Etiuni/Lchashen woman, suggesting incoming males without accompanying women

Despite this, the Bragdzor lineage did not leave a lasting genetic impact in northern Lori, as later samples show continuity with earlier populations.

---

Formation of Iberia and Kartvelian Expansion

In contrast, related groups did leave a strong impact in eastern Georgia, contributing to the formation of Proto-Iberia, later known as Iberia in the Hellenistic period.

Additional supporting samples:

• A G2a1 individual from Keti (~650 BCE)
• A Hellenistic-era individual from Samsun, likely linked to Zan populations

These individuals share:

• High CHG ancestry
• A clear distinction from Caucasian Albanian-related samples, which show more Zagros Neolithic ancestry and lower CHG

---

Conclusion

The steppe-derived populations that entered the South Caucasus around 2500 BCE (Trialeti–Vanadzor horizon) had a long-lasting genetic impact, visible until the Iron Age.

However, during the Iron Age:

• Mountain populations expanded into lowlands, contributing to the formation of Iberia and Caucasian Albania
• In historic Armenia, state formation under Urartu and the Orontid dynasty led to different genetic shifts
• The Achaemenid Empire likely also influenced population structure across the region

Due to the limited dataset, these interpretations remain provisional, and further ancient DNA evidence will be necessary for definitive conclusions.

See also

• The possible homeland of Kartvelian languages

Remarks on Skourtanioti 2024 paper on the Genetic History of South Caucasus

Elamites

Amjadi et al. (2025) published ancient DNA from the Chalcolithic period in the South Zagros, dated to around 4600 BC. The sample comes from the Gol Afshan Tepe site and is associated with the Bakun period, which immediately precedes the so-called Lapui period (4100–3500 BC), often linked to the Proto-Elamites.

Assuming there was no major population shift between the Bakun and Lapui periods, we can reasonably suggest that the Proto-Elamite language developed among populations with a strong Zagros/Iran Neolithic genetic component. This is supported by autosomal data, as well as the presence of Y-DNA haplogroup R2, which was common among ancient Zagros farmers and today is found mostly in South Asia and parts of West Asia (for example, among some Armenians from Sasun).

The Elamite civilization flourished in the southwest of the Iranian plateau. The Elamite language was widely used as an administrative language in the Achaemenid Empire. The Persians referred to the region as Hujiya > Khuzi, from which the modern name Khuzestan derives. Interestingly, Elamite may have survived into the medieval period—Arab sources mention an incomprehensible “Khuzi” language distinct from Persian in that region.

There is even a linguistic echo in Armenian: the word khuzhan (խուժան), meaning “hooligan” or “wild person,” is derived from that regional name.

---

Possible implications

If future research confirms a strong link between Elamites and Zagros Neolithic populations, several important conclusions may follow:

• Sumerian is likely unrelated to Elamite, suggesting it originated from a different population, often referred to as “Central farmers,” rather than Zagros farmers.
• Northern Iran had a different genetic trajectory.
  A Chalcolithic sample from the Urmia basin (Hajji Firuz) is shifted toward western populations and clusters closer to Central farmers. This suggests eastern migrations diluted Zagros ancestry in northern Iran, where other groups—such as the Kassites—later appeared. Kassites are not clearly linked to Elamites, though connections with Hurrians have been proposed.
• Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis gains some support.
  The idea that Elamite is related to Dravidian languages is still debated, but a Zagros Neolithic origin could strengthen this theory. That said, Dravidian populations also carry strong South Asian-specific ancestry (including Andaman-related hunter-gatherers).
• Language vs. population mismatch in empires.
  The widespread administrative use of Elamite in the Achaemenid Empire shows that a language’s presence in inscriptions does not necessarily reflect the dominant spoken language of a region.
  This is relevant for understanding Urartian (Biainili) as well: inscriptions alone don’t prove linguistic dominance. For example, Elamite inscriptions have been found in Armavir (Armenia), yet that doesn’t imply Elamite-speaking populations lived there in large numbers.

See also

• Ancient Kartvelians and the Formation of Iberia

Two different stories in Anatolia

After the Neolithic period migrations from east changed the genetic landscape of plain Anatolia. Those migrations were not an one time event but two major events dated to different periods. It must be noted that in the current state of archaeologic knowledge there are no Neolithic sites in northern Anatolia. Food producing appear there in the Chalcolithic period which starts after the 5800 BCE. See the dividing line on the map.

Currently we have two Early Chalcolithic samples from Hattusa (Buyukkaya) in the north and Tell Kurdu in the south (the green circles on the map). They are dated to the same period after the 5800 BCE yet they have different shifts to east. The northern sample has a strong shift to east close to the Late Chalcolithic samples from the same place (Camlibel Tarlasi). While the southern site (Tell Kurdu) has a very little shift. In my previous thread dedicated to Aintab history I showed that in southern Anatolia the main migration from the east occurred at Late Chalcolithic, thus more than 1500 years later than in the north. Given that that those two events have a different archaeologic background then it's safe to assume that they are related to different ethnic groups.

Based on the currently available data we can link the Late Chalcolithic migrations in the south to the Minoans and IE Anatolians. While the northern Early Chalcolithic migration can be associated with Hattic people. This theory is supported by the strong presence of G2-M406 in Hattusan sites. While the same M406 was absent or rare in the Crete and Minoan civilization sites.

It's worth to note that in western Caucasus and Georgia the Neolithic settlements appear roughly in the same period. We can assume that the same impulse that introduced the food producing to north Anatolia moved also to western Georgia were a peculiar Neolithic culture emerged, different from the Shulaveri-Aratashen related sites in Kur-Araxian basin. Later those western Georgian farmers moved to north triggering the emergence of mountainous pastoralist culture known as Darkveti-Meshoko (after 4500BCE). We have samples from this latter culture. They are from a subbranch of J2-M67>CTS900. What linguistic group is related to the introduction of food producing to the west Caucasus is a more complex subject, which will be discussed later