Ethnic Diversity in the Zagros Mountains: Part 1

 Ethnic Diversity in the Zagros Mountains: Part 1

Bronze Age Mesopotamian sources mention many ethnic groups and polities in the Zagros region, including the Hamazi, Gutians, Turukki (possibly the same as the Tukris), Lullubi, Kassites, Elamites, and others. Beside those listed, early Indo-Iranians must have also been present there.

In this group, I have already mentioned—based on a single sample—that the Elamites apparently had a high level of Iran/Zagros Neolithic ancestry. Therefore, their language could have originated from the Iran Neolithic. We have also discussed the possibility that the spread of Grey Ware (Dinkha Tepe II, after 1800 BC) in the Middle Bronze Age of northern Iran could be related to the Kassites and those unnamed Aryans.

Figuring out the genetic profile of the other mentioned groups is more problematic due to the absence of data related to their archaeology. However, in one case, a connection seems very likely—practically close to certitude. Some scholars have proposed theories that the Gutians were an Indo-European tribe ancestral to the Tocharians. Current data do not support the Tocharian link, given that the Tocharian origin is better explained by the Afanasievo culture.

Despite this, the idea of the Gutians as an Indo-European tribe is supported by the presence of R1b-Z2103 (Z2106?) in Middle Bronze Age Bakr Awa. R1b-Z2103 is a lineage that expanded in the Yamnaya culture and moved to the South Caucasus around the 2550–2500 BC period. From the South Caucasus, it moved further south toward the Zagros Mountains, and from there, they entered Mesopotamia. Cuneiform sources describe them as barbaric, destructive people who did not respect Mesopotamian gods and rituals. Some have proposed that they probably had light skin (namrum). However, modern scholars translate the meaning of namrum differently: as bright, shining, or healthy, of good quality for people or slaves. There are also reasons to believe that the Gutians elected their kings for specific periods. If true, this sets them apart from other West Asian societies where power was transferred hereditarily, and brings them closer to the ancient Greeks.

Only two dozen names are known from them, and not a single word. Thus, their linguistic classification remains obscure. In addition to these facts, I want to add that the term "Guti" was apparently a frequent endonym among various Indo-European peoples. The Tocharians called themselves Kuči, which could be derived from Guti based on regular phonetic shifts. The names of the Thracian tribe Getae, the Germanic Goths, and the Jats / Jutts in India could be related to this term. All of these parallels further reinforce the possibility that the Gutians could have originally come from the Yamnaya culture. Obviously, more ancient DNA is needed to further reinforce this theory, but at the current stage, the Gutians are clearly the best candidate for explaining the appearance of R1b in Bakr Awa. Note that this does not mean Hurrians completely lack any R1b; they could have had it, but they must have acquired it from neighboring IE tribes, meaning it was not native to them.

Later the term Guti/Quti has transformed in to catch all term denoting various people in North Zagros and Urartu region. The last mention of Guti is from the 6th century BC in Babylonian sources in the context of Persian expansion.

My next post will be about their possible language classification and the question of how it relates to Proto-Armenian, which also formed as a result of the same migration.