Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA in the News (DISCUSSION ONLY)

[Riverman]

Herodotus described in great detail the territories of Scythia from the Hister (Danube) to the Tanais (Don) and wrote that the Cimmerians occupied the same lands before the Scythian invasion. Thus the samples immediately preceding the Scythian culture in these lands (from the Danube to the Don river) most likely belong to the Cimmerians.

That's not even a speculation, because we find the exact same artefacts entering the Carpathian basin with a layer of destruction. Among these the renowned Cimmerian iron daggers, new horse gear and larger horsebreeds. The admixture is there as well, with increased steppe, East Asian and Caucasian. So there is really nothing to debate about here. The Cimmerians, or at least elements from the Cimmerian sphere, were in Central Europe and had a major cultural impact up to the development of Hallstatt and the spread of iron metalworking.

I quoted the paper before:
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....l=1#post878832

The archaeological formations of Chernogorovka and the Novocherkassk being associated with the Cimmerians most consistently and their tools and artefacts entered Central Europe with destruction and population movement. Nothing ambiguous here at all. If anybody doesn't believe the papers I quote, they can check Wikipedia:

The Chernogorivka and Novocherkassk cultures (c. 900 to 650 BC) are Iron Age steppe cultures in Ukraine and Russia, centered between the Prut and the lower Don. They are pre-Scythian cultures, associated with the Cimmerians.

In 1971 the Vysokaja Mogila kurgan (graves number 2 and 5) was excavated in the Lower Dnieper River basin. Grave number 5 dates to the late Chernogorivka period (900–750 BC) and grave number 2 to the younger Novocherkassk period (750–650 BC).

The Novocherkassk culture expands to a larger area between the Danube and the Volga and is associated with the Eastern European Thraco-Cimmerian artefacts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novocherkassk_culture

[Billyh]

I think that characterises this kind of "Cimmerian movement" the best, the heterogeneous character, which sticks out against e.g. Noua-Sabatinovka or later Scythians even. They look like a mixed alliance from the start, similar to e.g. some early Hungarian sample groups. .

Yep, sort of like the Huns. Or maybe we'll find more Cimmerian samples and learn more of a genetic structure within them. I think Scythian-Cimmerian cultures originated around the Ob or Yenisei, with Tagar-like people

[CopperAxe]

Herodotus described in great detail the territories of Scythia from the Hister (Danube) to the Tanais (Don) and wrote that the Cimmerians occupied the same lands before the Scythian invasion. Thus the samples immediately preceding the Scythian culture in these lands (from the Danube to the Don river) most likely belong to the Cimmerians.

You will not find a single passage of Herodotus where he describes the Cimmerian lands stretching from the Dniester to the Don. In fact Herodotus pretty clearly says the Scythians had to cross the Araxes (Volga) to get into Cimmerian lands. And you won't find any other Greek author making that claim either.

You forgot that Herodotus also quotes Aristeas in Histories who placed the Cimmerians around the "southern sea" which is a name Greeks never used for the Black Sea. Or Hecataeus being one of Herodotus main sources for the Scythians who also placed the Cimmerians inbetween Azov and Caspian.

It is pretty clear that Herodotus used multiple sources with his story for the Cimmerians and this lead to contradictory statements and impossible migration routes. There is plenty of academic work done on this exact topic. Olbrecht and Diakonoff should do.

The lands formerly belonging to the Cimmerians that are now of the Scythians are described in the following passage:

And to this day there are Cimmerian walls in Scythia, and a Cimmerian ferry, and there is a country Cimmeria and a strait named Cimmerian.

The Cimmerian walls are nearby Kerch, the Cimmerian Bosporus is the name of the area around the Kerch straight and the ferry is the sea of Azov.

If we side with Diodorus, who used sources independeny from Herodotus, the Scythian kingdom initially also included the areas north of the caucasus, meaning that the Don river border between the Scythians and Sauromatae wasn't there since time immemorial.

The placement of the Agathyrsi by Marcellinus and others using older sources is pretty telling because the Agathyrsi are placed around the sea of Azov, almost as if they were the western neighbours of the Cimmerians before the Scythians drove them westwards.

We have tons of different sources placing the Cimmerians in one region, and then we have one passage from Herodotus (which he contradicts himself even) that sticks out like a sore tooth. Pretty easy to tell where the Cimmerians actually lived...

[CopperAxe]

That's not even a speculation, because we find the exact same artefacts entering the Carpathian basin with a layer of destruction. Among these the renowned Cimmerian iron daggers, new horse gear and larger horsebreeds. The admixture is there as well, with increased steppe, East Asian and Caucasian. So there is really nothing to debate about here. The Cimmerians, or at least elements from the Cimmerian sphere, were in Central Europe and had a major cultural impact up to the development of Hallstatt and the spread of iron metalworking.

I quoted the paper before:
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....l=1#post878832

The archaeological formations of Chernogorovka and the Novocherkassk being associated with the Cimmerians most consistently and their tools and artefacts entered Central Europe with destruction and population movement. Nothing ambiguous here at all. If anybody doesn't believe the papers I quote, they can check Wikipedia:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novocherkassk_culture

If we are doing wikipedia quotes, take a peak what the Russian wikiledia has to say about the Cimmerians:

Киммери́йцы (устар. киммеры, др.-греч. Κιμμέριοι, аккад. [Gimirāia], [Gamir(a/āia)][⇨]) — кочевые ираноязычные[2][3][4][5][6] племена, вторгшиеся в Закавказье во второй половине VIII века до н. э. и в VII веке до н. э. завоевавшие некоторые районы Малой Азии. Также условное название так называемых «доскифских» народов Северного Причерноморья железного века.

Cimmerians (obsolete Kimmers , other Greek Κιμμέριοι , accad . [Gimirāia], [Gamir(a/āia)] [⇨] ) are nomadic Iranian-speaking [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] tribes who invaded Transcaucasia in the second half of the 8th century BC. e. and in the 7th century BC. e. conquered some areas of Asia Minor . Also a conventional name for the so-called "pre-Scythian" peoples of the Northern Black Sea region of the Iron Age

There is nothing in archaeology that would suggest you are dealing with the historical Cimmerians, who are only known for their invasion in the near east. You keep saying it isn't speculation but it precisely is speculation because we know nothing of these early pre-scythian tribes from a historical basis, and most historians precisely locate the Cimmerians east of the Azov sea based on historical records.

[Alain]

You will not find a single passage of Herodotus where he describes the Cimmerian lands stretching from the Dniester to the Don. In fact Herodotus pretty clearly says the Scythians had to cross the Araxes (Volga) to get into Cimmerian lands. And you won't find any other Greek author making that claim either.

You forgot that Herodotus also quotes Aristeas in Histories who placed the Cimmerians around the "southern sea" which is a name Greeks never used for the Black Sea. Or Hecataeus being one of Herodotus main sources for the Scythians who also placed the Cimmerians inbetween Azov and Caspian.

It is pretty clear that Herodotus used multiple sources with his story for the Cimmerians and this lead to contradictory statements and impossible migration routes. There is plenty of academic work done on this exact topic. Olbrecht and Diakonoff should do.

The lands formerly belonging to the Cimmerians that are now of the Scythians are described in the following passage:



The Cimmerian walls are nearby Kerch, the Cimmerian Bosporus is the name of the area around the Kerch straight and the ferry is the sea of Azov.

If we side with Diodorus, who used sources independeny from Herodotus, the Scythian kingdom initially also included the areas north of the caucasus, meaning that the Don river border between the Scythians and Sauromatae wasn't there since time immemorial.

The placement of the Agathyrsi by Marcellinus and others using older sources is pretty telling because the Agathyrsi are placed around the sea of Azov, almost as if they were the western neighbours of the Cimmerians before the Scythians drove them westwards.

We have tons of different sources placing the Cimmerians in one region, and then we have one passage from Herodotus (which he contradicts himself even) that sticks out like a sore tooth. Pretty easy to tell where the Cimmerians actually lived...

however, there was also an interchange like DA112, Hallstatt-Bylany, 850-700 BC likely Agathyrsi ( Iranian Nomad and Mixed local Dacians ) or Cimmerian admixture

For example, three indicate they belong to R1b, with one being R1b-P312, which should have something to do with contacts between Hallstatt and steppe peoples and was not unlikely !

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0094-2




DA112:
mtDNA: HV0+195

[Riverman]

There is nothing in archaeology that would suggest you are dealing with the historical Cimmerians, who are only known for their invasion in the near east. You keep saying it isn't speculation but it precisely is speculation because we know nothing of these early pre-scythian tribes from a historical basis, and most historians precisely locate the Cimmerians east of the Azov sea based on historical records.

They have the same artefacts and cultural base, and clearly have split in two directions. If you are talking about the Black Sea and Near East, its the same source. However, we won't be ablet to go back in time and ask them how they identified, these alliances which conquered the Western Pontic steppe and the Carpathian basin, penetrating deep into Central Europe. But the convention is to designate this movement as Cimmerian and in its developed phase Thraco-Cimmerian. Probably we will have at some point enough data from the different Cimmerian-related groups of that time which spread iron and larger horse breeds, improved gear etc. to compare their patrilineages.
At the moment it suffices to say that a Cimmerian-related movement of steppe people into the Carpathian sphere did take place and was highly influential, much more so than the Scythians, because they caused the development of the most important continental cultures of that Early Iron Age time, Basarabi and Hallstatt.

Otherwise I'm afraid we can't solve this with more data so you can be satisfied as well. But the cultural-archaeological connection is just pretty straightforward, so is the fact that steppe-admixture appears in the Carpathian basin which seems to have a similar profile as the ones associated with Cimmerians in the North Pontic region, to put it that way.

Important quote:

The choice by the Cimmerians of
nomadic, semi-nomadic, or semi-sedendary forms of
pastoralism was determined by the ecological niche
they occupied. The migration of Cimmerians took
place in several directions. First of all it was the areas
which were located in zones with a positive level of
humidity. Among these areas were the Dnieper forest-steppe zone, the Crimea Peninsula, the northern
Caucasus and the Great Hungarian Plain. These new
centers were located in environmental areas of wetter
climate and their positions allowed them to play an
important role in the new condition.
The increase of the Cimmerian influences initiated historical and cultural changes in different parts
of eastern and Central Europe, and this is represented by the reorientation of long-distance exchange
networks and the changes in centres of metal production.
The nomadic impact on the Early Iron Age
cultures can be seen in the increasing importance of
the horse. The appearance of horse riding in the early 1st millennium BC brought about a revolution in
communications. The horse could be used to explore
new territories, in raiding and trading. Cimmerians
played a vital part in the transmission of the horse
riding and in the development of a new bridle technique. Both innovations were to have a major impact
on European history. A mobile life-style helped to
create a new set of cultural and social patterns of
behaviour. The great importance of horses and horse
riding is evident from the number of finds relating to
horse gear discovered in the Cimmerian graves (pl.
1,2). The previously mentioned changes also influenced warfare (the use of cavalry in battle requiring
well-trained horses), religious practices (the distribution of inhumation burials with horse harnesses), and
social structures (the appearance of elite groups of
mounted warriors who benefited from long distance
exchange).

https://www.academia.edu/5790493/On_...Central_Europe

[Yamdut]

Yes, Indian L1a1 and L1a2 most likely came with IVC and BMAC (IranN mediated). But the origins of L1b and L2 have always puzzled me , as they are restricted to west Asia and Europe with the near complete absence in South Asia.

A peculiar Jat Clan Bassi has high frequency of L1b. All Bassi tested are L1b afaik, though other Jats are mostly L1a2 and R1a-Y7.

[Arlus]

A peculiar Jat Clan Bassi has high frequency of L1b. All Bassi tested are L1b afaik, though other Jats are mostly L1a2 and R1a-Y7.

That's interesting. If available can you please share some of their results in the L thread? One of Jat sample in a spreadsheet here has L1b and an Indian (possibly Goan) on FTDNA has it too.

[ADW_1981]

Are we sure they were not IE speakers though? Elymian is IIRC considered IE and it is bottled up in the far west. Did its distribution just 'skip' over the non IE speaking Sicani?

Unless Elymian came oversees, would not both it and Sicanian be more likely pre italic IE languauges spoken by a largely non (genetically) IE population? Otherwise how to understand the path of Elymian into western most Sicily?

Aren't some of the Z195+ specimens in Sicily pretty old though? I believe they are radiocarbon dated earlier than when the Elymians are attested on the island. That said, I agree that it's impossible to just refute them as being non-IE people. The individuals who are recorded as speaking non-IE, or have non-IE writing have not been tested to date. ie: Nobody left a treasure map to a buried corpse with a note saying "Future people - Dig this guy up here, he did not speak IE". (this applies to ancient Basque/Iberians/Etruscans too)

[Yamdut]

That's interesting. If available can you please share some of their results in the L thread? One of Jat sample in a spreadsheet here has L1b and an Indian (possibly Goan) on FTDNA has it too.

It is surprising to see a Chattisgarhi with L haplogroup because that area has least frequencies of L. As per google, Satnampanth was founded by Ghasidas from Maharashtra. What is ethnic background of your community ?