N1C in South Baltic - Caused by Varyag elite of Baltic Tribes?

Couple of other relevant items to topic in question
1) I have started to get some doubts as I noticed post from user Huck Finn from biodiversity forum on the subject. Apparently there is specific type of axes that is called Malar axes and dated to bronze age. This is distribution of axes finds (their origin could have been Volga):
Maumllaraxe_zpsda816718.jpg


Notice big red circle in Lithuania? Could this be the origin in M2782+ in Balts? Maybe.

2) Found another interesting work on viking trade in Baltics.
http://www.academia.edu/485512/The_...a_zone_and_the_question_of_early_emporia_2010
With two pictures from there showing Arab Dirham finds. Find two differences! :) Very strange phenomenon in South Baltics:
2-3824ca13e0.jpg
finds dated 780-830

And
5-9c59912eda.jpg
finds dated 850-900

It looks like Prussians withdrew from Viking trade route quite early. 850. Truso was still operating after that date but apparently that particular Arab trade route was closed. Also author states interesting Prussian phenomenon - there were no silver and gold finds after 850 and author states the following on page 356:
"Early Medieval Prussian tribes were remarkably immune to influence of the Baltic region silver economy. This is known also, thanks to Adam of Bremen, who noted that Sambians and Prussians: Aurum et Argentum pro minimo ducunt (Tschan ed. &transl.1959,199)
 
Couple of other relevant items to topic in question
1) I have started to get some doubts as I noticed post from user Huck Finn from biodiversity forum on the subject. Apparently there is specific type of axes that is called Malar axes and dated to bronze age. This is distribution of axes finds (their origin could have been Volga):
Maumllaraxe_zpsda816718.jpg


Notice big red circle in Lithuania? Could this be the origin in M2782+ in Balts? Maybe.


Must be the Volga Norse. :rolleyes:
 
arvistro said:
Prussians have legends of brothers Bruten and Widewut coming to Prussia and establishing statehood

There never existed any kind of statehood among Baltic-speaking Old Prussians.
 
arvistro said:
Obviously this chronicle is full of legends.

Written between 1517 and 1529... Not legends but rather complete fiction. And even your own link says so:

No such manuscripts are known to exist and scholarly consensus is that the entire story was invented by Grunau.[4]

============================

arvistro said:
It shows lack of N1C L550+ in Galindian tribe

Sorry, but this map shows haplogroups of modern inhabitants (!). You are overlooking 800 years of demographic changes.

Moreover, Peter de Dusburg in his "Chronicon terrae Prussiae", wrote that Galindia was uninhabited already when Teutonic Knights came.

So already in 1225 Galindia had very few inhabitants. Perhaps it was due to previous Polish, Danish and Yotvingian invasions.

For example the last Danish raid against Galindia took place in year 1210 (according to "
Liber Census Daniae").

It is doubtful whether Galindian tribe existed in year 1225, before Teutonic Knights came. Let alone after the conquest...

There were - at least until year 1267 - some groups of people, especially in eastern parts of Galindia (near modern Mrągowo and Giżycko). But there was no any organized Galindian tribe. It had been destroyed (as an organized and numerous community) already before 1225.

Galindia was in any case the most sparsely populated of Prussian territories, and became part of Great Wilderness (die Grosse Wildnis).
 
Last edited:
Prussians have legends

Not Prussians, but German immigrants who settled in Prussia. Simon Grunau was not a native Prussian, but an ethnic German monk.

And his "Preußische Chronik" is largely modelled on various heroic stories from Ancient Graeco-Roman mythology.

Other - equally fictional and invented - early histories of Prussia were:

"De Borvssiae antiqvitatibvs libridvo" - published by Erasmus Stella in 1518 (bishop of Pomesania - Hiob von Dobeneck - inspired Stella to write it).

"De situ et origine Pruthenorum,de Livonia eiusque ortu et situ, de bello Turcarum et Hungarorum" - written in 1454 by future Pope Pius II.

The one written by Enea Silvio Bartolomeo Piccolomini (since 1458 known as Pope Pius II) was based on "Getica" (written in 551 AD by Jordanes).

As for that 1518 work by Erasmus Stella. Stella was pro-Teutonic (he called Teutonic Knights "sanctosancta militia") and his text was a propaganda pamphlet written in order to justify German rights to Prussia. That's why he claimed that first inhabitants of Prussia were Ancient Germans.

Stella's work were his own biased interpretations of Claudius Ptolemy, Pliny, Pomponius Mela, Tacitus, Strabo, Solinus and Jordanes.

According to Stella Prussia had a history of constantly getting conquered by various tribes, and the last tribe to do so were Non-Germanic Prussians. But remnants of "native" Germanic population in Prussia survived and rebelled against their Baltic Prussian oppressors and occupiers. When they rebelled, Emperor Frederick Barbarossa (sic!) supported them and nominated as their leader certain "Konrad Duke of Massobiorum" (sic!), who was "of Old Saxon blood" (sic!). However, local "Germanic Saxons" (sic!) led by "Konrad of Massobiorum" were unable to defeat Prussians, so they invited the Teutonic Knights to help them in defeating their Prussian oppressors. This is what Erasmus Stella wrote in the 1510s, trying to legitimize German presence in Prussia.

Also S. Grunau invented fictional stories to claim "eternal Germanness" of Prussia, to justify immigration of German colonists and discrimination of Old Prussians (most of surviving Prussians were reduced to the status of serfs with no rights and later became outnumbered by immigrants). Grunau was trying to prove that Germans were native to Prussia since times immemorial, and not that they immigrated there since the 13th century.

If you read Polish then here is a good paper on Grunau's pamphlet:

http://prusowie.pl/dane/Grunau.pdf
 
Last edited:
What you are doing in this thread is inventing similar fairy tales, as those 16th century German monks & bishops, who persecuted Prussians. 42% of Lithuanians are not descended from any German(ic) guy, and Gediminids were a native Baltic dynasty, which (who) had nothing Germanic.

Baltic Prussians weren't ruled by any foreign elite, but by themselves. You apparently don't know that Prussians did not even have any hereditary nobility, but were a pretty democratic society in which noble status was not determined by blood, but by heroic deeds in battles (if you were a good warrior you were achieving noble status, but your children were not going to inherit that status - they also had to be good warriors to become nobles).

And nobles were around 15% of Old Prussian society (of course that percent was fluent, but an average of 15% is a reliable estimate).

East Prussian Germans were not descendants of Old Prussians, but mostly of West German immigrants, invited to Prussia by Teutonic Knights (like previously they brought in colonists to eastern Transylvania, where they had briefly ruled for a few dozen years before Hungarian kings expelled them) and established cities and villages on German law. Some native Prussians survived, but vast majority were at the bottom of the society because the Teutonic Order and the Church made them into feudal serfs with no rights, and persecuted them. Only Prussian traitors and collaborators enjoyed some privileges.

No more than 20% up to 33% of genetic ancestry of the population of East Prussia in year 1816 could be from Old Prussians:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ussian-Germans?p=448429&viewfull=1#post448429

The rest of East Prussians were of immigrant stock (not only German but also Polish, Lithuanian and other), who came during 800 years.

Moreover - native Baltic population of Prussia was marginalized by the Teutonic Order and reduced largely to the role of peasant serfs.

=======================================

Graphs below illustrate this most optimistic (for Old Prussians) variant of 33% (but 20% - 25% is actually more realistic):

East_Prussians_B.png


East_Prussians.png


Other includes Curonians (who settled along the Curonian Spit), Scandinavians, Jews, etc.
 
Last edited:
- As attested by viking dynasties in their host countries, they assimilated in few generations.

Abraham ben Jacob, a 10th-century Iberian Jewish traveller, wrote about the Rurikid Dynasty: "they speak Slavic, because they interbred with them." But he did not write what language had they allegedly spoken before that, and he did not write why did he think that originally they did not speak Slavic (let's add that Abraham ben Jacob never actually visited Russia, in years 961 - 962 he personally visited Italy, Germany, the Danes, the Czechs, and the Obotrites).

Moreover, A. Bajor in his Rurikid DNA Project found the following 7 Y-DNA haplogroups among descendants of the Rurikids:

N1c1, R1a-L260, R1a-P278, R1a-Z92, R1a-M458, R1a-Z280, I2a1

As you can see he found not a single "Germanic haplogroup" among them, which raises doubts if the Rurikids ever actually spoke Germanic.

He also confirmed the old theory that Oleg I of Chernigov was not biological but adopted son of Sviatoslav II of Kiev.

=====================================

The theory that the Rurikids were Germanic by origin was first proposed by Gerhardt Friedrich Müller in 1749, but finds no confirmation in modern genetics. If there were some Germanics in service of the Rurikids is another thing. Byzantine Emperors also employed foreign mercenaries, including Scandinavians.
 
From: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...to-the-Balkans?p=451206&viewfull=1#post451206

Tomenable said:
IIRC Ken Nordtvedt and Vadim Verenich estimate the age of formation of I2a1b1 as 2800 years ago and its TMRCA as 2500 years ago. Place of formation was Eastern or East-Central Europe according to them. This young age combined with its presence among Slavic (especially East Slavic and South Slavic) populations and its lack of presence among Baltic populations, suggests that this mutation originally formed in one of members of the Proto-Slavic community around year 800 BCE. The time when the Balto-Slavic community split (an event illustrated by the graph below), forming Proto-Slavs and the other two groups (Proto East Balts and Proto West Balts - according to Kromer's 2003 theory) has been variously estimated at between 1500 BCE and 500 BCE, but most authors place it between 1400 and 1200 BCE

Interestingly, Baltic clades N-L550 and N-L1025 have similar ages and TMRCAs as I2a1b1:

N1c1a1a1a (L550): found throughout the Baltic and North Slavic countries
N1c1a1a1a1 (L1025): found especially in Balto-Slavic countries, with a peak in Lithuania and Latvia

N-L550 formed 3300 ybp, TMRCA 2700 ybp
N-L1025 formed 2700 ybp, TMRCA 2500 ybp

Now compare this to I2a1b1 which (according to Nordtvedt & Verenich) formed 2800 ybp, TMRCA 2500 ybp.

Data on distribution of N1c1a (old name N3) and R1a in Lithuania - from Kasperaviciute 2004:

http://genofond.invint.net/genofond.ru/LoadFile50a7.pdf?file_id=966

fed9ba0fa382d46b.jpg


Map (southern region marked as SA - inhabited largely by ethnic Poles - has 61,8% R1a and only 29,4% N3):

e51a41f174799001.jpg
 
From: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/balticsea/about/news

SNP L1025+ isolate from N-L550+ sub-branch characteristic for the Balts descendants
A mutation L1025+ discovered in February 2012 in FT DNA WTY Program participant distinguishes Baltic Tribes descendants from other representatives of the N-L550+ branch. This conclusion applies not only to the modern Balts: Lithuanians and Latvians - but also to the descendants of extinct tribes West Balts: Prussians, Curonians, Yotvingians, and even to the majority of this inhabitants of the modern Belarus, which belongs to N1C1 haplogroup. This is a present look for genetic evolution of Balts:


L1025_sub-evolution.jpg


Picture on the link (created by S. Melnyk) show structure of N-L1025 subclade as we see it in May 2014:


L1025_small.jpg


Internal STR evolution of L551+ L1025+Terminal Subclade. In my opinion the DYS557 mutation 14=>13 was the first step in splitting the subclade and thus making it a very important marker. In the earlier work of Vladimir Volkov (2012, Nov.) this marker was not used in his calculations.

L551_subclade.jpg
 
Anyone know where from is YF03409 ?

http://www.yfull.com/tree/N-VL29/
 
N1c haplogroup was found in a burial of Zhizhitskaya culture at Serteya (Smolensk Oblast, Russia), from ca. year 2500 BC.

Check: Chekunova E. M. et. al. (2014), The first results of genetic typing of local population and ancient humans in Upper Dvina region, in A. Mazurkevich, M. Polkovnikova and E. Dolbunova (eds.), Archaeology of lake settlement IV-II mill. BC, pp. 290-294.

Actually, two samples of N1c were found there - that from Zhizhitskaya culture from 2500 BC, and another, younger sample:

http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/41146-Race-of-the-proto-Uralics/page12

Younger N1c is from "Long Barrows" culture, older is from neolithic Zhizhitskaya
culture (never heard about it before). Zhizhitskaya culture is at least partially derived from Comb Ceramic horizon.

About archeological context and time frame. If I'm reading the confusing map correctly, the Zhizhitskaya folks are sitting in the crossroads of Globular Amphora, Corded Ware, Fatyanovo and Yamna

6p3vyx.png


fjooig.png
 
Couple of other relevant items to topic in question
1) I have started to get some doubts as I noticed post from user Huck Finn from biodiversity forum on the subject. Apparently there is specific type of axes that is called Malar axes and dated to bronze age. This is distribution of axes finds (their origin could have been Volga):
Maumllaraxe_zpsda816718.jpg


Notice big red circle in Lithuania? Could this be the origin in M2782+ in Balts? Maybe.

any dates for this phenomenom?

could it be ca 3.2 ka?

it looks like after the Tollense battle ca 3.25 ka battle Norse people were at war with Urnfield people
they didn't get any metal ores from the Carpathian basin any more
they set out some expeditions to find the Caucasus ores
 
Hm. Actually it is 1000 bce-700 bce.
Baltic M2783 has TMRCA of 600 bce.
But the impulse would come from East to West, same impulse probably brought ancestors of Baltic-Finns into Baltics. And same or related impulse apparently brought M2783 to Balts.
Do you have more info about Norse exploring Caucasus ores 1000 bce?
 
Hi everyone,
I'm new to the forum, but would like to draw your attention to the matching of big group of Lithuanians to the Riurikids prices DNA.
Comparing Lituania Propria DNA Project
min-max in groups hg N (L1025+> Z16981+ & predicted) , hg N (L1025+> Z16981+ > CTS8173+/Z16980+), hg N (L1025+> Z16981+ , CTS8173-) ,
to the Rurikid Dynasty DNA Project
111461 Puzyna kniaz Puzyna: Bazyli Hłazyna, b.c.1420, Smolensk
200703 Korybut Woroniecki Prince Lucjan Korybut Woroniecki, 1806-1875
There is matching 99 out of 102 markers.
Historically Riurikds were rulers and elite of the territory from Kiev to the Novgorod and Polock. Most likely in Lithuania also.
 
Last edited:
There is interesting results from Polish Y-DNA Haplogroup Summary Table (please google).
LTNQ
6.9%N (M231)5.2%N-L5505.0%N-M27834.6%N-Z169751.9%
N-Z169811.1%

So 6,9% out of 38,53M population is 2.659M N1C1.
I think it's more than LT+LV+EE N1C1 all together.
 
Last edited:
It is about climate catastrophy of 536/537 and its consequences. ca 50% population loss in Estonia, Latvia, South Sweden, Norway, North Germany (everywhere where land cultivation was major source of food); but almost no loss in Finland. End of old trade networks, beginning of new trade networks operated by Finns without middlemen in Estonia or Scandinavia.









There are more looses for countries with intensive agriculture than for countries where hunting is a food source.
It's easier hunting with snow, than without.
It should trigger migration to the North.
 
Exactly! Before it went into Balts it was in West Finland...

Another interesting Norse Baltic link.
According to certain Russian sources Gediminas was son of Skolmantas (one of Yatwing Princes and sorcerer).

Yatwings (before viking age known as Sudovians) etimology is now pretty much believed to come from Old Norse Jatvigr (luck in war or lucky spear).
It is pretty much possible that Gediminas' very early ancestor was Norseman Jatvigr, founder of Jatvings clan...

The deeper I get into this, the more of Norse I find in early Balt statehood...

A bit late to the discussion.

There is only one Russian source that mentions ‘Skolomend’

Gradnd duke of Lithuania Algirdas had a son Andrei from marriage with Maria Yarslavna of Vitsebsk. There is a Russian chronicle Zadonshina written in late 14th early 15th century in which Andrei corresponds to his brother Dmitri "Brother Dmitri, we are two brothers, sons of Algirdas, grandsons of Gedyminas, great grandsons (pravnuki) of Skolomend"

pravnuki in Russian can also mean distant descendant.

S.C. Rowell suggests in his books Lithuania Ascending: A Pagan Empire Within East-Central Europe, 1295-1345 (pp 54-55) that Skolomend could be powerful Sudovian warrior Skumantas. Also known as Skomantas in other sources. If this is true then Skomantas could be an ancestor of Gediminid dynasty. But this maybe another fanciful hypothesis.


--

Yatvyag (Yotvingian) may have Norse etymology. Unlikely, the term was a self-identification term of western Baltic tribe. This was exoethnonym applied to them in Ruthenian chronicles. Teutons had another term for them – Sudova. As per Lithuanian scholar A Tautavicius Yotvingians were divided into four groups:

Poleksians (Slavic term)– western Balts settled around eastern Belovezha forest, just north of Brest city. They were the most southern group of Balts at the time.
Sudova were those who lived nearest to other western Balts (Prussians). Present day north-eastern Poland.
Dainava lived in today’s southern Lithania and north-western Belarus. Dainava was also an ethnographic region of southern Lithuania. The guys who have plenty of R1a1.
Yotvingians were western Balts of present day western Belarus and eastern Poland

Tautavicius A. Jotvingiai, dainaviai, sOduviai, poleksnai ir... / Lietuvos mokslas, II tomas, 1 (2) knyga. Vilnius, 1994, p. 4-14..
 
Last edited:
I would propose a different etymology for the name Lithuania that would also explain Latvia and Livonia. Wikipedia tells us that ”since the word Lietuva has a suffix (-uva), the original word should have no suffix. A likely candidate is Lietā. Because many Baltic ethnonyms originated from hydronyms, linguists have searched for its origin among local hydronyms. Usually such names evolved through the following process: hydronym → toponym → ethnonym. A small river not far from Kernavė, the core area of the early Lithuanian state and a possible first capital of the would-be Grand Duchy of Lithuania, is usually credited as the source of the name. This river's original name is Lietava. Kernavė is a small town in the southeastern part of Lithuania, in Širvintos district, located on the right bank of the river Neris, on the upper Neris terrace.”

I like the hypothesis about Lithuania being derived from a hydronym. The root of the word 'Lit-' , 'Liet-' , 'Lyut-' is common in Baltic and Slavic languages. For example, there is a toponym in Slovakia 'Lytva’.

Many archaeologists associate East Lithuanian barrow culture with a group of eastern Balts that were known as Litva in Ruthenian chronicle. A group of eastern Balts that established the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the mid 13th century. That group of east Baltic people that gave the name to the state and ethnonym to Balts of different origins living on territories of present day Lithuania.

Geographic location of original Lithuania was in the basin of Neris river. The old name of Neris river is Vilia . Vilia s a Baltic hydronym. Belarusians still call the river this way. Vilnius city derives its name from the river Vilia. But that’s another story.


Geographic location of East Lithuanian barrow culture. PS I cannot post the links until I get 10 posts. Just add URI in front of the link


cs407522.vk.me/v407522071/5b9c/R1Gkixp4y_4.jpg
 
Arivistro, you're so enthusiastic about your theory, so I don't want to spoil it. But the general explanation is that all N1C1 were just there in the Lithuanian territory from Narva culture times...

We now know the clade that the Balts have is N1c1-M2783. The mutation of M2783 occurred 2,500 years before present. It's too young for the Narva culture. But you may be right and some N1c1 carrier lived in Narva culture. Ancient DNA from Lithuania has already been done. We have to wait until the results are released.
 

This thread has been viewed 112798 times.

Back
Top