A North Indian in Uzbekistan at 1550 B.C.

By Razib Khan 11 Comments

I was rereading the supplements for Narasimhan et. al. for the purposes of trying to adduce the best model to calculate “steppe” proportions in Iranians (someone asked I do this). In the process, I noticed this passage again:

Third, we find that one of the outliers, Bustan_BA_o2, is consistent with being admixed between an individual related to people on the Indus Periphery Cline and Middle to Late Bronze Age Steppe pastoralists, a type of admixture event we also observe in the Late Bronze-Iron Age Swat Valley that we will examine later, suggesting that the admixture events that led to the formation of the SPGT in Pakistan also occurred between outlier individuals at the BMAC and Steppe pastoralists who arrived at the end of the 2nd millennium.

Here is some detail on the site of the sample: UZ-BST-015, Site 4, Grave 4, 57-27 (I11520): Date of 1613-1509 calBCE (3280±20 BP, PSUAMS-4605). The earliest date possible on the Swat samples is 1200 BC (though 1100 BC is more likely). That means that this outlier individual is the earliest example of the genetic mix that would come to characterize much of northern India. A mix of steppe, and Iranian-farmer-related, and Ancient Ancestral South Indian (AASI).

The text of the supplements seems to imply that this individual is sui generis, a mix of Indus Periphery and steppe, which prefigures what was to come later in South Asia. But I will offer another hypothesis: this individual is a migrant, or the child of migrants, from the earliest phase of the ethnogenesis of the Indo-Aryan matrix of Northwest India.

4+

11 Replies to “A North Indian in Uzbekistan at 1550 B.C.”

  1. Slightly off topic, but have you ever run Hiris plex on Corded ware populations? I’d be curious to know whether they were also swarthy or if that’s a differentiation that just the Sintashta had…

  2. Interesting. This may be a sign that the Indo-Aryans had a foot on both sides of the Hindi Kush for some time.

  3. Are there any tools to differentiate between these two ?
    i.e. Sui generis and migrant from northwest India

  4. They are Dasas (J2/R2), Daha/Doha/Daheli (R1b 343), Dahyu/Dasyu (R1a M198) and Pani/Mani(R1a z94) people( All are lands are named in this pattern and 10-12 generations ancestors are named in this fashion). Thanks to Asko Parpola for doing such a wonderful research work. I hope this helps to relate to this context.

  5. “this individual is a migrant, or the child of migrants, from the earliest phase of the ethnogenesis of the Indo-Aryan matrix of Northwest India.”

    Very plausible and at least equally likely, if not more so, given the AASI and the timing.

  6. http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/

    On March 8th, 2020

    “Davidski said…
    @gamerz_J

    R1a-Z93 is very rare in Eastern Europe, even in Russia and Ukraine, and the subclades that are present there are often relatively basal, rather than derived from Asian lineages.”

    Huh?

  7. From Eurogenes :

    Bustan man does not look like a migrant from North India

    Target: UZB_Bustan_BA_o2:I11520
    Distance: 2.1664% / 0.02166399
    75.4 IRN_Shahr_I_Sokhta_BA2
    17.0 KAZ_Zevakinskiy_MLBA
    7.6 KAZ_Dali_MLBA

    Target: UZB_Bustan_BA_o2:I11520
    Distance: 1.0391% / 0.01039114
    51.6 IRN_Shahr_I_Sokhta_BA2
    28.2 UZB_Sappali_Tepe_BA
    11.0 KAZ_Kumsay_EBA
    5.4 RUS_Krasnoyarsk_MLBA
    3.8 KAZ_Kipchak

  8. Davidski: March 10th 2020
    “odest ‹Older 1201 – 1231 of 1231
    Blogger Davidski said…
    @Aniasi
    I can confirm that this individual has Indus Valley/Periphery and Sintashta related ancestries.
    UZB_Bustan_BA_o2
    IRN_Shahr_I_Sokhta_BA2_I11456 0.817±0.032
    KAZ_Botai 0.033±0.024
    RUS_Sintashta_MLBA 0.150±0.031
    chisq 11.622
    tail prob 0.476524
    Full output
    Target: UZB_Bustan_BA_o2
    Distance: 2.9943% / 0.02994269
    78.4 IRN_Shahr_I_Sokhta_BA2
    16.8 RUS_Sintashta_MLBA
    4.8 KAZ_Botai
    So sometime after 2,000 BCE the descendants of migrants from the steppe may have mixed with the descendants of migrants from the Indus Valley somewhere in Central Asia or eastern Iran.
    Alternatively, the descendants of migrants from the steppe mixed with a late Indus Valley population in South Asia, and then one or more of their descendants migrated to Central Asia.
    Take your pick for now. One day we might have enough data to work it out.”
    Samuel Andrews: March 10th, 2020
    Replete with language errors:
    “What didn’t NArashmin get a bunch of 1500-2000 BC genomes across Pakistan and India? they ddi a poor job trying to find evidence of Aryan invasion. They tell the media and act in their paper as if the SPGT are informative about Steppe migrations into India.
    They draw lines on maps of Steppe migrations into India acting like they discovered it and know everything about it. When in reality the SPGT genomes tell us nothing.
    SGPT are no more helpful than modern South Asian genomes for understaing Bronze age Steppe migrations into SOuth Asia. They are super close modern Punjabi. Makes me wonder if SGPT were simply Iron age Punjabi.
    I guess it is normal for reseachers to exgaerate how much they know, have discovered. Anyways, I’m suprisied no one here has critisied the Harvard lab for blowing out of proporition how much their ancient DNA has discovered about Indian history. They have sequenced almost no ancient DNA from India/Pakistan.”
    “The great discovery about South Asia the Narashmin paper made was Shahr_I_Sokhta_BA3. One genome of a South Asian person dating late 3rd millenum BC.
    And he isn’t even from South Asia. He is an immigrant from South Asia in Central Asia who they accidently picked up.
    Narashmin 2019 paper is about “Southcentral Asia” but really it is about Central Asia. Yet, all they talk about is South Asian genetics.
    They don’t have enough ancient DNA from South Asia to say much about the population history there including the Steppe migrations into South Asia. They make a huge mistake equivlating the Steppe migrations into South Asia & Europe. “Paralle histories”-bull shit.
    March 10, 2020 at 9:42 PM”
    VAsiSTha March 11, 2020
    VAsiSTha said…
    @samuel andrews
    Narsimhan paper had a lot of samples, tried to do a lot, but failed in all the conclusions. Maybe due to poor effort, maybe due to bias.
    The main headline points should have been
    1. Minimal steppe ancestry in BMAC/Turan till 1500bce.
    2. Upto 20% Steppe ancestry seen in Swat iron age, but no population turnover.
    3. Steppe Migration was female mediated, overturning earlier hypothesis of a male mediated migration/invasion.
    Concluions Narsimhan got totally wrong:
    1. No BMAC ancestry in SPGT: This is blatantly false, E1b ydna also found in SPGT.
    2. Steppe LBA has no role to play in migration. This is again false, some east asian + wshg/botai ancestry is required for the SPGT samples.
    3. western/central steppe people were those who migrated – False – it was people from eastern steppe who came along the Inner Asian mountain corridor from Altai to Dzhungar plains to HinduKush.
    4. Sakas/scythians had no role to play. false – saidu_sharif_H buddhist site can be modeled with Kangju or kazakh_saka outliers. buddhist connection between Taxila and tarim basin is also clear through archaeology, using the IAMC route. Modern indian Pops like Rors definitely have an additional saka source.
    5. the modeling of modern indian pops has god awful p values. dont know why it was even attempted.
    March 11, 2020 at 5:06 AM”

    All comments relayed from Eurogenes:

    http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/

  9. Fatal methodological flaws in David Reich’s 2019 paper

    Comments from Vashista on Eurogenes, March 14th 2020


    1. They went looking for a common source in all the agewise groups – SPGT, SPGT_o, H, MA, moderns etc.
    2. the sample size is different in all the groups. 1 Loebanr outlier should not be a critical part of your decision.
    3. Who knows what other ancestries entered post IA? The buddhist site with Swat_H label clearly has a different cline than SPGT itself, for eg. we are not concerned with those ancestries when answering the PIE question. the only population that matters is SPGT while answering that question, and also the outliers from BMAC bronze age.
    4. Modeling using Onge as 3rd source for moderns and making conclusions based on that is just plain stupid when you know for certain that no pure AASI population existed in the north or even the south for that matter. Especially with the piss poor p values for North indians.”

    http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/

Comments are closed.