The Genetic Origin of the Indo-Europeans

[J Man]

An interesting source on Aknashen:The Neolithic Settlement of Aknashen (Ararat valley, Armenia)

The culture seems to be connected to the  Aratashen-Shulaveri-Shomutepe culture?

From the above source:

Horizon V (~6kBC radiocarbon date*) *emphasis mine
The skeleton was lying in a flexed position on the left side, the axis joining the pelvis to the top of the skull following a southwest – northeast orientation. The upper limbs were extended, the hands resting near the knees. The thighs were flexed at a right angle to the trunk and the legs were flexed at a right angle to the thighs. A detailed analysis of the position of the bones, especially those that would have been in disequilibrium after decay of the soft tissues, indicates that body decomposition occurred in a filled space, which means that the pit was filled with earth immediately after burial. At the time of discovery, the limits of the burial pit could not be recognized; it might thus be assumed that the pit was refilled with the earth taken off while it was dug. There was no archaeological material associated with the burial.

Early - Middle Bronze Age deposit A child burial was found in the northeastern part of Trench 7 (UF5 F2), north of a curvilinear wall (Figures 2 and 10). Its age at death is estimated between 5 years and 3 months and 7 years, based on the degree of dental maturity. 43 Mortuary practices at Aknashen Figure 7. Funerary deposit Tr.8 UF8: preservation file of the child burial. The body was lying on its left side, in a flexed position, presenting three-quarters of the back. The skull was crushed. The position of the upper limbs could not be identified, except for the right arm, which was in a position of slight abduction. The thighs were flexed at a right angle to the trunk and the legs were flexed at the thighs. The axis joining the pelvis to the top of the skull followed an east-northeast – west-southwest orientation, the head facing the north-northwest

From the supplements of The Genetic Origin of Indo-Europeans regarding Progress, mentions Nalchik:

2.10 Progress-2 and VonyuchkaSummary by D. Anthony

Progress-2 was excavated 2009-2010 under the direction of S.Y. Berzina. The multi-period kurgan cemetery was located on the left bank of the Malka River, itself a left tributary of the Terek River in the central Caucasus steppes east of Piatigorsk. The central Caucasus steppes consist of high grass-covered ridges that form a watershed, cut by streams flowing northeast into the Caspian (through the Terek River), north into the Manych Depression, or northwest into the Sea of Azov/Black Sea (through the Kuban), with the glaciated peaks of the Caucasus visible 100kmto the south. Progress-2 is one of many Eneolithic grave sites including Vonyuchka concentrated in the central Caucasus steppes, the upper Terek tributaries, and the Manych Depression. Very few Eneolithic graves are found in the NW Caucasus Kuban drainage.

The oldest and largest of these Eneolithic cemeteries was excavated in 1929-30 in the city of Nalchik and yielded one date of 4840–4820 BCE (GrA-24442, 5910 ± 45 BP). Nalchik has not been sampled for aDNA. Nalchik differed from other Eneolithic sites in its size (121 burials, while the later Eneolithic cemeteries such as Progress-2 usually have 2-4 individuals) and in the factthat 75% of the Nalchik burials were posed contracted on the left (mainly females) or right (mainly males) sides, while Progress-2 and almost all later Eneolithic graves were posed supine with raised knees, like most Khvalynsk and Serednii Stih graves (although contracted-on-the-side graves continued at Khvalynsk as a small minority). Burials contracted on one side were later also38typical of the Maikop culture.

About 25% of the graves at Nalchik in which a specific pose was clear were posed supine with raised knees. They can be interpreted as later graves in a multi-component cemetery, showing a shift in funeral ritual, a hypothesis supported by the discovery in one of the supine-with-raised knees graves (#83) of the only copper artifact found at Nalchik, a ring, and a serpentine stone bracelet like one found at Khvalynsk, dated 4500-4300 BCE there. Or the raised-knee graves at Nalchik could be older than Khvalynsk, contemporary with the raised-knee graves at LebyazhinkaV:12 and Ekaterinovka Mys in the Samara region, dated 4700-4500 BCE. More radiocarbon dates are needed to identify the oldest raised-knee graves, but Nalchik shows that the raised-knee posture was an Eneolithic innovation that replaced an older ritual (contracted on the side) in the North Caucasus.

So... I am very uninformed in archeology, or the region for that matter. But, maybe someone versed in archeology can make sense of this? It seems the common flexed to the side North Caucasus practice that was predominant in early Nalchik was in the Eneolithic replaced by the supine raised legs position common in later Progress/Yamnaya? But it also seems that Aknashen had the North Caucasian practice. Thus, at first sight, at least when it comes to funerary practices, it seems the later dominant culture in Progress was a Neolithic innovation rather than a South/North-Caucasus one?

---

Either way, the archeological part of the supplement of the IE paper mentions Aknashen only once:

The I31755 male had a Caucasus-derived Y-haplogroup, J2a J-M319, variants of which were shared with Aknashen and Maikop, but he lacked the Aknashen-type Neolithic CHG and instead exhibited only the older CHG variant related to Mesolithic CHG, like the Berzhnovka/Progress-2 population. His paternal ancestry was rare in the sampled steppe populations. His mt-haplogroup, T2a1b, was widespread among steppe women, found in Ukraine Neolithic, Serednii Stih and Volga Cline groups. In PCA the Krivyanskiy-9 male was very close to the Yamnaya cluster although not in the Yamnaya clade.

It seems this is the only Y haplogroup we can for certain trace to Aknashen: J2a J-M319

I am not aware of published M319 in Aknashen or ancient Armenia. Also M319 is over 10.000 years old so old enough to exist in CHG-type Mesolithic people North of Caucasus (likely source) and south of the Caucasus in the Mesolithic-Neolithic. So there is no reason to link directly to Neolithic Armenia yet

Yes this is correct....Aknashen belongs to J-PF5197 not J-M319 so paternally Aknashen is quite far away from Krivyanskiy-9. 

J-M319 had plenty of time to spread both north and south of the Caucasus since as you say it is very old.

[Archetype0ne]

An interesting source on Aknashen:The Neolithic Settlement of Aknashen (Ararat valley, Armenia)

The culture seems to be connected to the  Aratashen-Shulaveri-Shomutepe culture?

From the above source:

Horizon V (~6kBC radiocarbon date*) *emphasis mine
The skeleton was lying in a flexed position on the left side, the axis joining the pelvis to the top of the skull following a southwest – northeast orientation. The upper limbs were extended, the hands resting near the knees. The thighs were flexed at a right angle to the trunk and the legs were flexed at a right angle to the thighs. A detailed analysis of the position of the bones, especially those that would have been in disequilibrium after decay of the soft tissues, indicates that body decomposition occurred in a filled space, which means that the pit was filled with earth immediately after burial. At the time of discovery, the limits of the burial pit could not be recognized; it might thus be assumed that the pit was refilled with the earth taken off while it was dug. There was no archaeological material associated with the burial.

Early - Middle Bronze Age deposit A child burial was found in the northeastern part of Trench 7 (UF5 F2), north of a curvilinear wall (Figures 2 and 10). Its age at death is estimated between 5 years and 3 months and 7 years, based on the degree of dental maturity. 43 Mortuary practices at Aknashen Figure 7. Funerary deposit Tr.8 UF8: preservation file of the child burial. The body was lying on its left side, in a flexed position, presenting three-quarters of the back. The skull was crushed. The position of the upper limbs could not be identified, except for the right arm, which was in a position of slight abduction. The thighs were flexed at a right angle to the trunk and the legs were flexed at the thighs. The axis joining the pelvis to the top of the skull followed an east-northeast – west-southwest orientation, the head facing the north-northwest

From the supplements of The Genetic Origin of Indo-Europeans regarding Progress, mentions Nalchik:

2.10 Progress-2 and VonyuchkaSummary by D. Anthony

Progress-2 was excavated 2009-2010 under the direction of S.Y. Berzina. The multi-period kurgan cemetery was located on the left bank of the Malka River, itself a left tributary of the Terek River in the central Caucasus steppes east of Piatigorsk. The central Caucasus steppes consist of high grass-covered ridges that form a watershed, cut by streams flowing northeast into the Caspian (through the Terek River), north into the Manych Depression, or northwest into the Sea of Azov/Black Sea (through the Kuban), with the glaciated peaks of the Caucasus visible 100kmto the south. Progress-2 is one of many Eneolithic grave sites including Vonyuchka concentrated in the central Caucasus steppes, the upper Terek tributaries, and the Manych Depression. Very few Eneolithic graves are found in the NW Caucasus Kuban drainage.

The oldest and largest of these Eneolithic cemeteries was excavated in 1929-30 in the city of Nalchik and yielded one date of 4840–4820 BCE (GrA-24442, 5910 ± 45 BP). Nalchik has not been sampled for aDNA. Nalchik differed from other Eneolithic sites in its size (121 burials, while the later Eneolithic cemeteries such as Progress-2 usually have 2-4 individuals) and in the factthat 75% of the Nalchik burials were posed contracted on the left (mainly females) or right (mainly males) sides, while Progress-2 and almost all later Eneolithic graves were posed supine with raised knees, like most Khvalynsk and Serednii Stih graves (although contracted-on-the-side graves continued at Khvalynsk as a small minority). Burials contracted on one side were later also38typical of the Maikop culture.

About 25% of the graves at Nalchik in which a specific pose was clear were posed supine with raised knees. They can be interpreted as later graves in a multi-component cemetery, showing a shift in funeral ritual, a hypothesis supported by the discovery in one of the supine-with-raised knees graves (#83) of the only copper artifact found at Nalchik, a ring, and a serpentine stone bracelet like one found at Khvalynsk, dated 4500-4300 BCE there. Or the raised-knee graves at Nalchik could be older than Khvalynsk, contemporary with the raised-knee graves at LebyazhinkaV:12 and Ekaterinovka Mys in the Samara region, dated 4700-4500 BCE. More radiocarbon dates are needed to identify the oldest raised-knee graves, but Nalchik shows that the raised-knee posture was an Eneolithic innovation that replaced an older ritual (contracted on the side) in the North Caucasus.

So... I am very uninformed in archeology, or the region for that matter. But, maybe someone versed in archeology can make sense of this? It seems the common flexed to the side North Caucasus practice that was predominant in early Nalchik was in the Eneolithic replaced by the supine raised legs position common in later Progress/Yamnaya? But it also seems that Aknashen had the North Caucasian practice. Thus, at first sight, at least when it comes to funerary practices, it seems the later dominant culture in Progress was a Neolithic innovation rather than a South/North-Caucasus one?

---

Either way, the archeological part of the supplement of the IE paper mentions Aknashen only once:

The I31755 male had a Caucasus-derived Y-haplogroup, J2a J-M319, variants of which were shared with Aknashen and Maikop, but he lacked the Aknashen-type Neolithic CHG and instead exhibited only the older CHG variant related to Mesolithic CHG, like the Berzhnovka/Progress-2 population. His paternal ancestry was rare in the sampled steppe populations. His mt-haplogroup, T2a1b, was widespread among steppe women, found in Ukraine Neolithic, Serednii Stih and Volga Cline groups. In PCA the Krivyanskiy-9 male was very close to the Yamnaya cluster although not in the Yamnaya clade.

It seems this is the only Y haplogroup we can for certain trace to Aknashen: J2a J-M319

I am not aware of published M319 in Aknashen or ancient Armenia. Also M319 is over 10.000 years old so old enough to exist in CHG-type Mesolithic people North of Caucasus (likely source) and south of the Caucasus in the Mesolithic-Neolithic. So there is no reason to link directly to Neolithic Armenia yet

What I meant is that that haplogroup M319 (disambiguation) based on the bolded part of the quote seems to have been present in Aknashen. Although I agree that the steppe samples are not necesserily linked to Aknashen. I guess confusing choice of words on my part.

I wonder if they have more Aknashen samples in the pipeline.

[J Man]

An interesting source on Aknashen:The Neolithic Settlement of Aknashen (Ararat valley, Armenia)

The culture seems to be connected to the  Aratashen-Shulaveri-Shomutepe culture?

From the above source:



From the supplements of The Genetic Origin of Indo-Europeans regarding Progress, mentions Nalchik:

So... I am very uninformed in archeology, or the region for that matter. But, maybe someone versed in archeology can make sense of this? It seems the common flexed to the side North Caucasus practice that was predominant in early Nalchik was in the Eneolithic replaced by the supine raised legs position common in later Progress/Yamnaya? But it also seems that Aknashen had the North Caucasian practice. Thus, at first sight, at least when it comes to funerary practices, it seems the later dominant culture in Progress was a Neolithic innovation rather than a South/North-Caucasus one?

---

Either way, the archeological part of the supplement of the IE paper mentions Aknashen only once:


It seems this is the only Y haplogroup we can for certain trace to Aknashen: J2a J-M319

I am not aware of published M319 in Aknashen or ancient Armenia. Also M319 is over 10.000 years old so old enough to exist in CHG-type Mesolithic people North of Caucasus (likely source) and south of the Caucasus in the Mesolithic-Neolithic. So there is no reason to link directly to Neolithic Armenia yet

What I meant is that that haplogroup M319 (disambiguation) based on the bolded part of the quote seems to have been present in Aknashen. Although I agree that the steppe samples are not necesserily linked to Aknashen. I guess confusing choice of words on my part.

I wonder if they have more Aknashen samples in the pipeline.

The author's choice of words there is a bit strange since M319 is not present in either Aknashen or Maykop samples so far. They probably just mean that Krivyanskiy-9, Aknashen and Maykop all belong to J2a.

[R.Rocca]

By the way, the lengths that they have gone to not offend non-Europeans is sad but totally expected given the world we live in. To completely remove the word "European" and go with “Proto-Indo-Anatolian” is unforgivable. Descendant European languages are the most common languages spoken in the world. Perhaps they were afraid they were going to offend the speakers of the long dead Anatolian languages.

[pelop]

By the way, the lengths that they have gone to not offend non-Europeans is sad but totally expected given the world we live in. To completely remove the word "European" and go with “Proto-Indo-Anatolian” is unforgivable. Descendant European languages are the most common languages spoken in the world. Perhaps they were afraid they were going to offend the speakers of the long dead Anatolian languages.

It says Indo-Europeans right there in the title. They use Indo-Anatolian and Indo-European to disambiguate between the stage that included Anatolian languages and the stage after these had split, what some linguists call "late PIE".

[jdean]

Do they really say Indo-Anatolian, that's daft, Anatolian had nothing to do with the branch that ended up in India : )

[R.Rocca]

By the way, the lengths that they have gone to not offend non-Europeans is sad but totally expected given the world we live in. To completely remove the word "European" and go with “Proto-Indo-Anatolian” is unforgivable. Descendant European languages are the most common languages spoken in the world. Perhaps they were afraid they were going to offend the speakers of the long dead Anatolian languages.

It says Indo-Europeans right there in the title. They use Indo-Anatolian and Indo-European to disambiguate between the stage that included Anatolian languages and the stage after these had split, what some linguists call "late PIE".

I'm obviously talking about the linguistic terminology and not the "Indo-Europeans" as a people. Indo-Anatolian is just as wrong as if they had termed it Euro-Anatolian.

[Archetype0ne]

Proto-Indo-Anatolian was the language spoken in the North Caucasus piedmont and Lower Volga by people of mixed CHG-EHG-Central Asian/Siberian ancestry and Proto-Indo-European was the language spoken by people of Serednii Stih descendants mixing with migrants from this area.

They talk about IA and IE in linguistic terms throughout the paper, and these two are mutually distinguishable terms. They connect IE to Sredni Stih + BP / Remotnoye wave, and IA to the wave from the Lower Volga-North Caucasus (depending on which hypothesis BP + Lower Volga + Remotnoye).

The underlying details change depending on the hypothesis,


*

but the fact remains that they do not use IA and IE interchangeably.

*notice both PIE / PIA being used to denote different things.

[Jack Johnson]

I may be just a dilettante at best while potentially reading some of these posts wrong, but this idea that R1a-M417 men joined in with the R1b-M269 men (who are supposedly the oldest proto-PIE speakers?) just seems like total nonsense and a gross oversimplification out of 2015 Apricity or something. Pretty much all of these Eastern European hunter gatherer/forager/fisher/pastoralist groups were mixtures of R1a, R1b, I2, Q1a, Q1b, and even J1 and J2 clades. Some para-IE groups likely had V1636 and M269 lines, others had near exclusively Z2103 or L51, with some minority lineages (I2-L699, Y13200, etc.). Sounds like we should delve more into the specific branches of these clades, rather than blankly assuming that somehow, all M417 men represent this completely different ethno-linguisitc coterie. It’s not like there was a pure, large late Neolithic “R1a” clan that somehow had DNA testing, and they were like “hey you R1b guys, we’re like brothers, let’s conquered the world!” These were very closely related networks and founder effects were common, just look at the Y-DNA diversity of Khvalynsk. Minority Y-DNA lines are almost always in human groups dominated by one or two haplogroups.

[Vinitharya]

I'm an A-West guy. I think Hypothesis B was invented by the Soviets and called the 'Armenian hypothesis', but it presents problems concerning the uniparentals. Both R1a and R1b were in origin Siberian mammoth hunter lines that traveled west along the steppe. This hypothesis would require another haplogroup line to be the progenitor of proto-Indo-European, like what is the case with Basque where it is uncertain what the original founder haplogroup is because they are majority R1b now. The greater Caucasus is a far greater barrier than the mountains to the south of Armenia; most linguists believe that Armenian came from the west rather than directly from Yamnaya, mostly due to similarities with Greek but also because of those mountains, which are Europe's highest.

[Riverman]

Indo-Anatolian was specifically designed, as a term, to designate the non-steppe Indoeuropeans. Since this non-steppe hypothesis is effectively dead, it is obsolete and should be abandoned. Honestly not even some aspects of the chronology and branching events are that clear at this stage, since one thing is for certain, the Pre-Anatolian group made a long journey which made it deviate strongly from the trunk group of IE.
I always asked myself, if its about linguistic branching events and chronology, how they can effectively account for large scale substrate effects in particular. I have to confess I know very little about linguistics and probably that perspective is naive to some who know more, but from a purely logical point of view, the linguistic chronologies could be seriously skewed by various factors IMHO.

[alanarchae]

I never let the issue of Anatolian bother me. We don’t have sampled we can confidently calll Anatolian speakers until a ute about of time after the batch off from the other IEs. Just look at the extreme dilution seen among the Mycenaean Greeks and then consider that the ancestors of the Anatolian lspent up to a millennium isolated from the other IEs (which likely means further dilution by non IEs) which the proto Greeks didn’t. Then consider the state-like social structure of the Hittites etc. I don’t think it’s that surprising that little genetic trace existed by 2000BC. The Anatolian’s should not be used as a weapon against the steppe hypothesis.

For the record I think they were likely some isooctane Suvorovo descended group of Steeny Stars f roots who were holed up somewhere for 1000 years before crossing to Anatolia. I strongly favour an east Balkans and/or maritime entry into Anatolia c.3000BC after spending about 1000 years somewhere in the Balkans.

[Archetype0ne]

The thing is, that right now things are really open despite the paper.

On one end, we need an admixture event of Remotnoye to talk about both PIA and PIE. So people that want to argue about (south) Caucasus origin of core-PIE-IA can easily piggyback the Aknashen component as the tracer dye.

On the other hand, we see the BPgroup both initially in the mix of Lower Volga + BP, and a second wave of BP tagging along with the Aknashen in the Remotnoye admixture. For which, people who want to argue against Aknashen can support the BP signal as the tracer dye.

The thing I have not seen talked about, what about these Central Asian element, lol? Surely people could argue just as well for the Central Asian element on grounds similar to the second scenario mentioned beforehand? As remember Central Asian was a core component of BP, and we have BP both initially, and in a second wave.

Edit: Also something else not mentioned. Even in hypotheses B - East (of the paper), Remotnoye is the component that gave rise to PIA, and it contains BP. So it is not Aknashen directly and alone, but rather a back migration of it in tandem with BP... So even in hypotheses B one could argue that the PIA core linguistic features came from the Steppe, and even EHG if they like.

[pelop]

I'm an A-West guy.  I think Hypothesis B was invented by the Soviets and called the 'Armenian hypothesis', but it presents problems concerning the uniparentals.  Both R1a and R1b were in origin Siberian mammoth hunter lines that traveled west along the steppe.  This hypothesis would require another haplogroup line to be the progenitor of proto-Indo-European, like what is the case with Basque where it is uncertain what the original founder haplogroup is because they are majority R1b now.  The greater Caucasus is a far greater barrier than the mountains to the south of Armenia; most linguists believe that Armenian came from the west rather than directly from Yamnaya, mostly due to similarities with Greek but also because of those mountains, which are Europe's highest.

It's hard to argue proto-Armenian didn't enter from the Caucasus after the ancient Armenian samples we saw in the "Southern Arc" paper. There are R-Z2103 branches that have an exclusively West Asian distribution both in terms of modern and ancient DNA. Same is true for R-V1636 and it's very likely for certain R-PF7562 branches as well, which itself is the sibling branch of R-L23. Speaking of R-PF7562, we now have the oldest sample with that haplogroup from a Yamnaya burial in Romania. The previous oldest was a non-RC dated sample from MBA/LBA Crete.

However, it's also very possible that people carrying some form of Eneolithic steppe ancestry also entered Anatolia from Thrace. We have Cernavoda and Usatove samples from the Eneolithic Ukraine carrying both steppe ancestry (of the "CLV" type) and enough European farmer ancestry that would have already diluted the steppe signal by the time their descendants moved into Anatolia and mixed with locals.

[old europe]

It is over

https://ibb.co/n6CS2kj

In the Laz paper they went to great lengths to model BA Central Anatolia (Hittites), the only ones with Steppe ancestry. The best model is with Sredni Stih ancestry. Needing Sredni Stih ancestry to model BA Anatolia is evidence for a Western entrance to Anatolia as neither their Hypothesis B or A-East account for the presence of Sredni Stih or Core Yamnaya ancestry in the PIA.