New Kura–Araxes Y-DNA Samples from Ghalichi et al. (2024)

New Kura–Araxes Y-DNA Samples from Ghalichi et al. (2024)

Ghalichi et al. (2024) published seven new Kura–Araxes (KA) ancient samples from Georgia, specifically from the Dzedzevbi site near Dmanisi, along with two additional samples from Velikent in Dagestan.

Because of low genomic coverage, it was not possible to determine the deep subclades of these samples. However, the available data suggest that two male individuals from Dzedzevbi belong to haplogroup J2b2, while another appears to belong to J1, most likely from the Z1842 branch. The Velikent sample is also J1.

Current Y-DNA Dataset from Kura–Araxes Layers

At present, we have 16 Y-DNA samples from confirmed Kura–Araxes contexts. Of these:

• 11 belong to J1-Z1842

Most of these J1 cases occur in regions geographically close to the eastern part of the Greater Caucasus range, including:

• Dagestan

• Kakheti

• Berkaber (Tavush)

• one case near Dmanisi

The strong predominance of J1 is almost certainly the result of a founder effect, since J1 appears to have been rare during earlier Neolithic periods.

Other Haplogroups in Kura–Araxes Contexts

When moving away from the eastern Caucasus regions, other haplogroups appear:

• R1b-V1636 — Sevan Basin

• G2b — Kaps, Shirak

• J2-M92 — Doghlauri, central Georgia

• J2b2 — Dzedzevbi (two cases)

According to analyses by Genarchivist researchers, one of the Dzedzevbi individuals belongs to J2b-FT3464, a minor branch found today in West Asia and Europe, while the other belongs to J2b2b-Z2453, an older lineage already present in Neolithic contexts such as the Shulaveri culture and Hajji Firuz Tepe.

Possible Interpretations

What can be inferred from this distribution?

As I have previously suggested, the J1 concentration in the northeastern regions of the Kura–Araxes horizon may be associated with North-East Caucasian (NEC)–speaking populations.

However, the entire Kura–Araxes horizon cannot have been NEC-speaking, because such a scenario would likely have left clear linguistic traces, which are not observed.

The rapid shift in Y-DNA composition when moving away from the eastern Caucasus strongly suggests that another ethnic group (or groups) was also present within the Kura–Araxes cultural sphere.

Possible Candidates

Two main possibilities are usually considered:

• Early Anatolian-speaking populations

• Hurro–Urartian-speaking populations

At present, the available dataset is still too small to establish clear connections between South Caucasus populations and the regions where Anatolian or Hurro–Urartian languages were later spoken (Anatolia, the Levant, and Mesopotamia).

Nevertheless, some patterns are already beginning to emerge.

See also

• Here is an excerpt from the Petrosyan 2023 paper about the origins of Kura-Araxes culture.
• 
  

One possible way to know the language(s) spoken in Kur-Araxian culture is to examine the onomastics in those places where there was continuity

One such place is the Malatya-Elazig (Kharberd/Harpoot) region that I marked with green circle. In this region the KA settlements evolved into more advanced towns were a type of painted pottery was made until 2000BC. In Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600bc) this tradition continued but new influences from South appear with Khabur ware while close to 1600BC influences from West, from plain Anatolia become stronger.

After 1600BC the region was incorporated into Hittite empire and became known as Ishuwa.

The main ethnicity of Ishuwa is unknown. They are no native texts. Three kings are known from last periods, all have Hurrian names and based on that some proposed that it was predominantly a Hurrian place.

Nevertheless, king names are not always a good indication of real ethnic situation. Mitanni had Aryan kings but was a Hurrian kingdom. Hittite empire had kings with Hurrian names, yet it was still Hittite. Babylon was ruled by Amorites, Kassites and Chaldeans yet its main language was East Semitic Akkadian derived. Such examples are numerous.

For this reason, Aram Kosyan (based on Laroche's etymology) examined the names of local Ishuwan chieftains, elders and rebels. Surprisingly the most frequent group consists of Hittite-Luwian names. There is only one Hurrian name Kumarpi, few Kashkean and Indo-Iranian names. There is also one name Mita that looks like Phrygian name but a presence of any real Phrygian in that region is unlikely. A similar to Mita name is attested in Armenic Etiuni: the Muida. Given that this name appears in Iron Age as Mita of Mushki so the most parsimonious explanation is that it's related to Mushki, and maybe Etiuni. Although a Luwian etymology also exists but in my opinion it's problematic.

Anyway, returning to main subject, it's somewhat unexpected to have such result. There can be two explanations.

1. Either those Hittite names were there since Kur-Araxian period.

2. They appear with Hittite conquest.

We don't have ancient DNA from Middle and Late Bronze Ages (2000-1200BC) in Ishuwa region, but we have a sample dated at 2400BC from EBA. It's ART001. It's more southern shifted than other three samples from EBA period. This extra Levantine shift can indicate that Hurrian speakers infiltrated there later from South which opens a gate that Kur-Arax in that region was really speaking Anatolian IE languages.

This unexpected result is further reinforced if we take into account that the kingdom Armi dates (before 2250BC) overlap with Kur-Araxian culture in the Cilicia where it was located according to a recent paper. Kroonen suggested a strong Hittite presence in Armi based on Eblaite inscriptions.

Another potentially IE term Aratta also coincide with Kur-Araxian period. It was probably located somewhere in Northwest Iran, where in Iron Age a river Aratta is attested.

Offcourse we must wait ancient DNA to further confirm or dismiss this theory. Also, we must keep in mind that Kur-Araxian horizon was quite large and harboured other languages. There is little doubt that Nakh-Daghestani in Northeast Caucasus descend from KA. Also, Hurrian languages were probably spoken in south of Van, Hakkari region KA settlements. In any case it seems that the main expansion of Hurrian occured in MBA with Khabur ware.

See also

• Hittites from east

Northeast Caucasian (Nakh- Daghestani) people origin and dispersal.

If we exclude that young cluster of J2 among Nakh people, the common denominator of all NEC people is the J1-Z1842 branch. More specifically the two subbranches of CTS1460. The coalescence age of this branches coincides to the proposed age of proto-NEC break up. (~5000 years ago) so we can assume that those are the genuine NEC lineages.  The origin and the expansion of Z1842 is usually linked with Kur-Araxian culture (until now ancient DNA supported that idea, but Late Chalcolithic expansion can't be ruled out also).  Before the Kura-Araxes culture the Northeast of Caucasus was sparsely populated place and only with the advent of that culture sufficient population appeared in that region to disperse. 

The biggest linguistic diversity of NEC languages is found in the north while in the south we have only the Lezgin-Udi group, which might have migrated from the north at LBA/IA. They settled in the Northern parts of Kur river and later were known as Aluank' / Albania kingdom. Another possibility is that the Lezgin-Udi group if languages formed on the southern slopes of Greater Caucasian range.  In southern parts of Caucasian range Indo European tribes settled since the Middle Bronze Age period, while some others came in Iron Age. As Toponyms like Getaru, Gelaw can be related to those IE tribes.

Do all this mean that all Kur-Araxian culture was a NEC culture? Well not really because there is not much evidence of their presence in other parts of Kur-Araxian horizon. In other regions of KA horizon Anatolian and Hurro-Urartian terms are found. Then how to explain their connection with Kur-Araxian lineage and culture? 

This is somewhat complicated but, in most likelihood, it has to do with the fact that Kura-Araxes was not a homogeneous culture as one might imagine looking on some maps on the Internet. Here I present a more precise map of Kur-Araxian culture where You can see that so called ETC (=Kura-Araxes) pottery on the Northeast of Caucasus is not classified as typical Kur-Araxian. That map is also remarkable because it demonstrates what we already learned from genetics that Kura-Araxes culture expansion had an uneven impact. In Levant and Malatya region it was very mixed while in South Caucasus it was homogeneous and dense.

This can mean that the pre-proto-NEC population do not directly descend from Kura-Araxes, it already existed in Late Chalcolithic and during the Kur-Araxian expansion the Proto-NEC community became part of that culture and then dispersed on its own with subsequent cultures like Guinchinskaya (MBA) and Kayakent-Kharachoy (LBA/IA) which is also found in north Azerbaijan. Another possibility is that the Proto-NEC community was present in the proto-Kur-Araxians since the start. More ancient DNA will help to better understand this question.