Iranic Genomes Project posted this abstract on Twitter. I need to find out the origin, If you find the link please post it in the comments.
11 ancient individuals from the Seleucid-Parthian era (~300 BCE - 200 CE) from North Iran (Mazandaran, Gilan, Semnan provinces)
 |
| ★: Seleucid-Parthian new sites 🟣: Tepe Hissar Chalcolithic-Bronze age Base Map Credit: Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0) |
 |
| Abstract of the upcoming paper |
Importantly, these new genomes offer a 'rather limited connection to the Scythia and the steppe area north of Iran'. The Iran neolithic component dominates, with 20-40% Anatolian ancestry. My read is that the genomes are basically similar to Tepe Hissar chalcolithic ancestry (20-30% Anatolian, rest mainly IranN) with 0-5% steppe ancestry at best.
Waiting eagerly for the data to be published. I have been saying for a long time that the Sintashta steppe signal is absent in ancient Iranians, and not much additional steppe ancestry is seen even in modern mainland Iranians. You can read more about that here. It should be clear to most now that the origin or spread of the Indo-Iranian language is not connected to the Sintashta complex in any manner.
Some news reports about the sites involved:
Mersinchal: Rare Parthian tombstone discovered in northcentral Iran
Liar-Sang-Bon: DNA obtained from ancient skeletons found in northern Iran
Liar-Sang-Bon: Researchers Announce New Discovery in Historical Graveyard in Northern Iran
Vestemin: Graves, Crypts and Parthian Weapons excavated from the Gravesites of Vestemin
So Ashish, what this hint for origins of Achaemenians or Medes ?
ReplyDelete@nirjhar
ReplyDeleteThe samples are from Seleucid-Parthian era, so they directly tell us that Parthians have very little steppe ancestry.
By extension, we can presume that Medes too had minimal steppe ancestry since they're further to the west (and also older than 300bce).
from "The Iranic Genomic Project" in the twitter
ReplyDelete"The “Parthian” paper has extremely mislead people. It focuses simply on the local Iranians of the Caspian coast during the Parthian era. No actual genomic data for the Iranian tribe known as Parthians involved."
https://www.academia.edu/99136197/Graves_Crypts_and_Parthian_Weapons_excavated_from_the_Gravesites_of_Vestemin
ReplyDeleteOne of the sites, Vestemin, has had Parthian military weapons excavated from the graves. So it's now a new level of cope from the kurganists to claim that the graves are of non parthian locals.
I havent seen literature on archaeology of the other 2 sites, they probably have military equipment in the graves as well.
Another site, Liar-Sang-Bon, had towers of silence and dakhmas found at the sites, a Parthian method of excarnation. This is as per the Iranian archaeologists themselves.
ReplyDeletehttps://ifpnews.com/researchers-announce-new-discovery-in-historical-graveyard-in-northern-iran/
The fact that it’s from 3 different sites and the fact that autosomal dna is representative of a very large chunk of the population. Could seal the deal.
ReplyDeleteWe should expect some steppe , somewhat intermediate between Iron Age and modern? Will be surprising if it’s below expected.
Calculating the admixture dates in those samples would be interesting.
ReplyDeleteFigures 4 & 5 from Kaveh Farrokh's paper posted by vAsiSTha
ReplyDeletehttps://www.academia.edu/99136197/Graves_Crypts_and_Parthian_Weapons_excavated_from_the_Gravesites_of_Vestemin
and
"Swords of Sinauli Warriors" Twitter post by Nirjhara Mukhopadhyaya
dated November 6, 2021.
https://twitter.com/Vritrahan2014
Well, well who would've thought that West Iranians had little to do with TKM_IA.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of Parthians, recently, I've been less convinced of the Parni's impact in Parthia and I think it's overstated. I currently lean on the idea that the Arsacids weren't frauds and if they weren't actual descendants they might have some sort of relation with the Achaemenids through some satrap. Their names all Zoroastrian and atypical of Central Asian nomads. Even their coins show links with the western satrapies.
There are different traditions about the origin of the Parthian dinasty, but it is remarkable that the founder Arsaces wears a Saka dress on coins: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/arsacids-i
ReplyDeleteStrabo wrote that some say he was a Scythian, some a Bactrian: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/11I*.html
The Parni are considered completely assimilated with the local Parthians during the 3rd century, adopting Zoroastrian culture.
@Giacomo Sakas are 50% Steppe_MLBA, 30-35% East Asian, 15-20% BMAC from Gnecchi-Ruscone et al 2021. If Sakas had an influence in Parthians then East Asian ancestry would be traced in them. So it could be a similar case to the Ptolemy dynasty or Bulgars in Bulgaria.
ReplyDeleteKhotanese and Parthian are unrelated dialects (see Heggarty's graph).
Yes the Scythian dress has been used as evidence for the Dahae origin of the Dynasty but Chinese caftans and boots do not necessarily mean that the medieval rulers of Iran were from China.
ReplyDeleteThe coin itself shows no links with the Eastern Satrapies but with western ones like that of Datames. The mainstream explanation is that he traveled far and wide in his younger years but the guy on the coin is so young he's literally babyfaced. Add to that using Achaemenid titles on the coins which also wasn't common.
@Orpheus, Parni were probably less mixed with East Asian than Sakas, but they could be a small tribe that was assimilated by the Parthians, who were South Central Asian and Eastern Iranian people, with a Northwestern Iranian language, which is normal in the Caspian region, no special relation with Eastern Iranian like Saka and Khotanese, but with some Eastern loanwords: "The Aparna originally spoke an East Iranian language, the traces of which survive in some Parthian loan-words in Armenian such as kari (very, cf. Sogd. kʾ’y), margarÄ“ (sorcerer, cf. Sogd. mʾrkry, Parth. mʾrygr; cf. W. Henning, “A List of Middle Persian and Parthian Words,” BSOAS 9, 1937, p. 85, repr. Acta Iranica 14, p. 565; R. Gauthiot, in MSL 19, 1915, pp. 125-29). More Aparna words may be traced in Manichaean Parthian; e.g., hnd (blind, cf. Western Iranian kwr; for other examples see Henning, Mitteliranisch, pp. 93-94). Their language, however, was eventually replaced by Parthian, a Northwestern Iranian language."
ReplyDeletehttps://iranicaonline.org/articles/aparna-c3k
@Vara, so do you suggest that Scythian dress was a prestige fashion? This is more likely if they shared Scythian culture. On the opposite, Achaemenid Persians adopted Median dress.
There was 100% a Parni migration to Parthia as can be seen in the archaeological records but I do think that it's overstated by the literature.
ReplyDeleteArsaces wearing a Scythian hat(the whole dress isn't that visible) could have so many different reasons including marriage and alliances. The Achaemenid royal garments weren't Median but Elamite while what they wore in war was closer to that of the Medes. And in general, Persians adopted Lydian and Assyrian elements(one of the markers distinguishing between pre-Achaemenid Iranians and Elamites) even though they had no shared culture.
So the hat isn't really the strongest evidence for a Dahae origin considering everything else is in favor of a western origin.
Well the Tocharians in Agni and Kuchea wore Buddhist robes. So dress and pointy hats are not solid markers of language or genetic transfer.
ReplyDeleteBuddhist monks robes are a religious dress (although that too changes greatly in different ethnic traditions: Sinhalese, Tibetan, Japanese monks have different kinds of robes), while the costumes worn by the first Parthian kings on coins had clearly an ethnic character. Later, from Mithridates, they adopted again the Greek diadem, while Arsaces imitated Seleucid coins but wanted to show that he was not Greek but Iranian, and apparently belonging to the Scythian-like Parni: https://jhss.ut.ac.ir/article_74930.html?lang=en
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, the article is in Persian, but the English abstract gives already some elements. Of course, this gives no hints about the language spoken or the real genetic ancestry of the kings, but it shows a connection with the cultural tradition of the steppe nomads that is justified only in people who descended from them.
Wearing a hat isn't proof of descent just like the Ummayad rulers imitating the cloths of the Sasanian shah isn't proof of Persian descent. You already pointed out the Persians wearing Median clothing. We already know that the Parni were assimilated in Parthia anyways. If a hat is all we have then the Dahae option is very weak.
ReplyDeleteThe real questions is how famous were rebel Anatolian satraps in Eastern Iran and central Asia 80 years after the fall of the Achaemenids?
@ Vas- pl. check Email. Cheers
ReplyDeleteShould be intersting to analyse, although earlier Mede & Parthian genomes would be important to obtain in future.
ReplyDelete@ Orpheus
Maybe the Tian Shen Sakae have East Asian admixture, but there are also the less well known Scytho-Sarmatian sites along the Aral -Caspian area which would have far less East Asian admixture
@Rob Sarmatians and West Scythians have about half the Asian ancestry Sakas have (10-15% from 30%), so they're probably an expansion of the Eastern Scythians absorbing the populations they encountered as they moved.
ReplyDeleteWhat's interesting is that their BMAC-like ancestry is at the same levels. Probably from absorbed people from the Caucasus would be my guess.
@ Orpheus
ReplyDelete''Sarmatians and West Scythians have about half the Asian ancestry Sakas have (10-15% from 30%), so they're probably an expansion of the Eastern Scythians absorbing the populations they encountered as they moved.''
Dont think so, the numbers dont add up & neither does the archaeology
Sarmatians have very little East Asian ancestry, ~ 10% , acquired through low-level admixture with Sakae rather than derivation from
Altai Scythians have in the order of almost 50% 'Inner Aian' ancestry
West Scythians are a whoe other complexity which I wont get into
''What's interesting is that their BMAC-like ancestry is at the same levels. Probably from absorbed people from the Caucasus would be my guess.'
Some of the Altai Scythians have essentially zero BMAC ancestry, whilst Sarmatians have 30%.
So theyre different formations, evolving out of a common post-Andronovo basis
@Rob I didn't say anything different wrt Sarmatians though. 10-15% East Eurasian ancestry (down from the 30% of Sakas)
ReplyDelete"Some of the Altai Scythians have essentially zero BMAC ancestry, whilst Sarmatians have 30%."
I was referring to the Saka. Cultures like Tasmola and Aldy Bel do indeed have much less BMAC although some ~5% was still detected, at least in the samples from the paper I'm citing. Could be that the common pre-proto-Scythian culture had received some BMAC geneflow alongside East Eurasian ancestry before it fragmented. The post-Andronovo basis as you mention.
specifically to the Saka* (most of which did not live in the Altai)
ReplyDelete@rob
ReplyDeleteI'm going to be traveling a bit for work, so will reply back in a week.
That Lower Don sample is out, btw
ReplyDelete@ Orpheus- understood
Dr. Rai
ReplyDeleteIn Hindi,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRkKUA9lZ9Q&ab_channel=RanveerAllahbadia
Ashish bhai, wignats keep saying that EHG were males and CHG were females, is there any truth to this ?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Kanhai Bhatt Ask them where's the CHG mtdna in yamnaya?
ReplyDeleteThe original CHG samples have mtdna H13c1 and K3.
CHG derived meshoko has mtdna R1a.
None of these mtdna were found in yamnaya,so it's impossible for yamnaya to be from 'CHG women'.
There are 13 samples from yamnaya_samara(purest yamnaya) and none have any CHG mtdna.
Yamnaya mtdna seems to be a mix of EHG mtdna and EEF mtdna indirectly from iron gates/Ukraine_neolithic mtdna.
Iron gates had EEF/anatolian Ancestry and mtdna which it passes through yamnaya indirectly.
Below is a list of Mtdna of yamnaya_samara samples(purest yamnaya,it has no recent admix from south).
I mention where these mtdna have been found earlier.
From this site
https://haplotree.info/maps/ancient_dna/slideshow_samples.php?searchcolumn=Country&searchfor=Russia&ybp=500000,0&orderby=MeanYBP&ascdesc=DESC
I0370-H13a1(foun in iron gates/Ukraine_n)
I0429-T2c (found in volosovo EHG and Ukraine/n)
I0355-K1b2a (found in karavikha EHG)
I7489-H2a1 (EEF/iron gates)
I0439-U5a1a1(WHG/EHG)
I0444-H6a1b (EEF/iron gates)
I0428-W6c- It's sibling subclade W5 has been found in EEF farmers in europe.
I0231-U4 (WHG/EHG)
I0438-U5a1(WHG/EHG)
I0433-W3a1a
This is the only possible CHG mtdna,but this isn't even CHG.
It's found in shahr e shokhta and bmac both of which are iran_n.
So,1/11 samples have "southern" mtdna.
This means~ only 8% CHG/Iran_n mtdna in yamnaya vs 50% CHG/Iran_n autosomal Ancestry in yamnaya.
It's clear this 50% Ancestry was mediated by males,8% mtdna can't explain it.
Tldr-yamnaya mtdna is 90-95% EHG+Anatolian Farmer/EEF.
Much of this EEF mtdna is indirectly from Ukraine_neolithic which had Ancestry from Balkans Mesolithic (who themselves had partial EEF Ancestry)
Not one yamnaya_samara(purest Yamnaya) sample has mtdna K3,H13c1(CHG subclade) or mtdna R1a.
These are the only confirmed CHG mtdna
They are back. This time with reporter Anand Ranganathan on the team.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFIXN6A0zvo
Shinde,
ReplyDeleteRakhigari is twice as large as Mehargarh 6:59 min
Who are the Harrapan People?
A distinct South Asian genetic signature started appearing about 12000 BP. A genetic study of the modern populations from Andaman to Kashmir reveal that people retain 25% of this original signature. Rest of the genes are made, "may be 2% Iranian, 4% African.." (9:01)
"The important thing is there is no breakage in genetic (mssing word) of South Asia at all."
(9:10)
All the speakers seem to agree with the above.
Why is Ashish inactive on twitter these days? Does anyone know what he's into lately?
ReplyDeleteabsolutely no clue. anyone else know about Ashish? I hope he is okay
ReplyDeleteShinde 23:54
ReplyDeleteHarrapan people started going out there (Shehar i Sokta? Central Asia?)) and mixing with them. The mixed people started coming back in a reciprocal manner.
Anand (25:14) talks about the paper soon to be published by Niraj Rai et. al., but does not say when. This supposedly blockbuster paper has been in the news for a couple of years now.
ReplyDelete2017
ReplyDeleteJean-Paul Demoule - The canonical Indo-European model and its assumption
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsUqyL48ETY
"One can nevertheless challenge this model on at least for levels. First, on a factual, strictly extra-linguistic level, based on data provided by archaeology, comparative mythology, biological anthropology and linguistic palaeontology: this approach leads to the conclusion that, in the present state of knowledge, it is impossible to confirm the validity of the centrifugal tree model in its various forms. Secondly, on a historical and cultural level, we have to call into question the correspondence, based on the model of the 19 th century Nation State, between an “archaeological material culture”, a “people” and a homogenous language. Thirdly, on a linguistic level, we can question the validity of the tree model for charting the resemblances and correspondences between languages. Finally, on an ideological level, we can show by means of historiography how the idea of an original people was constructed over time by European thinkers"
Schmidt's wave theory at 36:45
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsUqyL48ETY
IIr has its own space outside of all other 11 branches! Any tree model by delimitation must date these languages as the latest "innovations" compared to the 11 "archaisms." Anatolian is obviously missing from this picture drawn in 1872 CE.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsUqyL48ETY
After the decipherment of the Anatolian clay tablets in the early 1930's CE, Saussure's then widely rejected 1879 CE theory of |"coefficients sonantiques" or laryngeals was panick strickenly accepted to explain the undeniable presence of an IE language in modern day Turkey. In the meantime, Scandinavia and even the north pole (!) were entertained as candidates for the IE homeland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Arctic_Home_in_the_Vedas
Fast forwarding to 2022 CE
“The genetic history of the Southern Arc: A bridge between West Asia and Europe”
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm4247
Compelled by hard genetic evidence, the authors have all but *excluded* the Anatolian languages from the neat little tree model.
New buzz words
ReplyDelete"Identity by Descent" or IBD
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-023-01582-w
1 month old video Niraj Rai in Hindi
ReplyDeleteIndia's Secret GENETIC History Will Shock You - Dr. Niraj Rai Science Special
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEEraa6BGak
Chaubey 2 weeks ago
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/shorts/lPPcmgOMaC8?feature=share
Hii, hello @meshiko, if you had mail ashish did he replied please tell.
ReplyDeleteHello, @Mayuresh Madhav Kelkar, any new update on indian ancient genetics from niraj rai and Gyaneshwar chaubey.
ReplyDeleteIT Kharagpur SAMVAAD event: Clip of Professor Gyaneshwer Chaubey on Indian Genetics
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g6u3cqIhV8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylT47oUwCJ0
ReplyDeleteEP-126: Rakhigarhi & Sinauli Secrets, Mahabharata 'Evidence', Aryan Invasion with Dr. Sanjay Manjul
https://voiceofindia.me/2023/12/01/warriors-chariots-asi-finds-proof-aryans-were-not-invaders-of-india-krishan-murari/
ReplyDeleteWarriors & Chariots: ASI finds proof Aryans were not invaders of India – Krishan Murari
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrBoZrhv3Y4
ReplyDeleteThe Indo-European Puzzle Revisited: Integrating Archaeology, Genetics, and Linguistics New Edition
ReplyDeletehttps://www.amazon.com/Indo-European-Puzzle-Revisited-Integrating-Archaeology/dp/1009261746/ref=asc_df_1009261746/?hvadid=647176302687&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9001920&hvnetw=g&hvrand=3375941201868816432&hvtargid=pla-1960291571164&linkCode=df0&mcid=8e0d79a6475a3b43b1109e7c3f8482af&psc=1&tag=hyprod-20&asin=1009261746&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1
In Hindi,
ReplyDeleteWas Sinauli A Land of Warriors? | Secrets of Sinauli | Discovery+ India
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkIpl_Esz_4
Make a post on the new Indo European paper 2024
ReplyDeleteSurvive the jive made a talk on 2024 paper on PIE origins
ReplyDeleteShame Vas is absent, Lazaridis et al 2024 is quite interesting. This image https://imgur.com/lNdDa66 made me think how likely it is that Aknashen_N at ~20% is just an older proxy in the same way CHG was for Yamnaya. An unsampled half(?)-Aknashen population would shoot the admixture % up to ~40-50.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vezUlWaOnNI
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m94nnL6Zrg&t=263s
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know what happened to Ashish? I hope he is ok. His linkedin account appears deleted too.
ReplyDeleteMayuresh, the Sinauli documentary is not available in the US. Is there a way to buy it? Also, do you (or other reader) say whether there was just one episode of 56 minutes or many? says "season 1", which suggests multiple episodes.
ReplyDeleteAnd more relevant to this blog: 6 years after discovery of so many skeletons... any news on the dna findings?
Hmm weird, I posted but it seems it disappeared. Anyway: new bio-linguistic paper, finding support for a version of the hybrid IE hypothesis (along the lines of Harvard, Heggarty, Max Planck etc)
ReplyDeletehttps://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.09.08.611933v1