PDA

View Full Version : Extent of L1029 prior to the Slavic Migrations?



R1aInMyDNA
20-06-13, 07:50
I've been reading on a few different forums that L1029, a subclade of M458, can be correlated with the expansion of the Lusatian Culture of 1300-700 BCE. (I can't post links, but if you google "update on L1029" it should be the first result).

If that is true, then wouldn't a significant portion of L1029 of modern Germany predate the Slavic expansions of the 5th to 10th century AD? And if the Germanic tribes absorbed L1029, then isn't it possible small amounts of it spilled over into Denmark, Sweden, and Norway (considering the close relationship the Germanic tribes and Scandinavia share)?

If so that could explain L1029 in England (As far as I know, L260 is virtually absent in England, so I doubt the L1029 can be attributed to the Polabian Slavs). Both the Anglo-Saxons and Danish Vikings could have, then, carried L1029 in small amounts to the British isles.

Or does this sound nuts? :confused2:

LeBrok
21-06-13, 02:41
Definitely not what you call modern Germanic. Possibly it is East Germanic like Vandals or Goths. However they left in great numbers, so we should be able to have some of L1029 in Iberia, Odessa or Sicily, but have none.
It really looks Western Slavic same as M458.
The only thing that bothers me is complete lack of both HG in supposed birthplace of Slavs, in Pripet marshes around Czarnolas (Black forest) area. I circled it on M458 map. What the heck happened?! Lol.

59005901

R1aInMyDNA
21-06-13, 03:46
Definitely not what you call modern Germanic. Possibly it is East Germanic like Vandals or Goths. However they left in great numbers, so we should be able to have some of L1029 in Iberia, Odessa or Sicily, but have none.
It really looks Western Slavic same as M458.
The only thing that bothers me is complete lack of both HG in supposed birthplace of Slavs, in Pripet marshes around Czarnolas (Black forest) area. I circled it on M458 map. What the heck happened?! Lol.

59005901

The pictures you are showing are the same. L1029 (purple) is a subcalde of M458 (green), so it is included. You should be comparing L1029 with L260. L1029 and L260 both combine to make up the M458 branch.

I would generally agree with you, that M458 is a good indicator of the Slavic expansion westward. But is mainly mainly due to L260. L1029 appears more widespread and further to the west than L260 does. That would imply (considering that L260 = Slavs) that L1029 had to have expanded before the Slavic migrations.

What my point is, is that if L1029 can be found in western areas where L260 cannot, then it had to arrive there before the Slavs did. And if L1029 is in fact a marker of the Lusatian people, that would mean that L1029 would have entered modern day Saxony by 700 BCE (with the Billendorfer culture that was part of the Lusatian Culture). The Billendorfer culture was assimilated into the Jasdorf culture.

As far as the lack of M458 in the pripet marshes, here is a quote from Polako on the forumbiodiversity discussion:


Well, I think it's becoming obvious that North-Central Poland is home to an ancient population which has always had a high frequency of R1a-M458, and didn't really move anywhere in large numbers until the Indo-European migrations, or even the migration period of the early middle ages.

So as a result of that, this is also where most of the major mutations within M458 took place, and I'm pretty sure that both L260 and L1029 are native to the region.

I can't see the proto-Germanics as part of the story, and I even have a hard time accepting that Eastern Germanics are worth mentioning. That's because I1 is at around 5% in that part of Poland (with apparently somewhat higher peaks in parts of Masovia) and R1b-U106 at around 6.5%. That's much lower than in, say, Denmark or North Germany, and we can easily explain these figures by saying they came with North German and Scottish migrations of the late Middle Ages, which are well attested.

So the most plausible scenario I can think of, is that an ancient "Polish" population high in R1a-M458 became Slavic speaking after influence from the southeast. That ancient population might have been the Venedi and/or the Lugii, but I don't think these were Germanics. If we start seeing R1a-M458, including L1029, popping up in areas settled by Vandals and Goths, or better yet, in ancient Vandal and Gothic remains, then that would most likely indicate that individuals from this North-Central Polish population were incorporated into the ranks of wandering Germanic tribes, and migrated south with them.

We're also now seeing R1a-M458 near the Caspian, in East Central Asia and in South Siberia. So it'll be interesting if it shows up in ancient Scythian or Andronovo skeletons. Of course, the other option is that it was spread into the far reaches of the former Soviet Union by Poles and nearby groups.

BTW, the origins of M458 in Poland are looking more plausible with each day. Here's a map showing that there are actually two types of R1a-M458 (L260-, L1029-) present in North-Central Poland.

LeBrok
21-06-13, 04:39
Yes, L260 looks almost absolutely of polish origin. I have an alternative explanation, though I have no idea about age fo these 2 subclades.
L1029 is older and spreaded between 500-700 CE with original slavic migration. That would explain its presence up to Denmark and in East Germany.
L260 happened after 900 CE, and if it went outside polish tribes it was by "evaporation". :) It this time Slavic tribes are settled and don't swap places.
Here is the map of L260
5902

However, not seeing any M458 in supposed slavic homeland I'm not sure.

R1aInMyDNA
21-06-13, 05:07
Yes, L260 looks almost absolutely of polish origin. I have an alternative explanation, though I have no idea about age fo these 2 subclades.
L1029 is older and spreaded between 500-700 CE with original slavic migration. That would explain its presence up to Denmark and in East Germany.
L260 happened after 900 CE, and if it went outside polish tribes it was by "evaporation". :) It this time Slavic tribes are settled and don't swap places.
Here is the map of L260
5902

However, not seeing any M458 in supposed slavic homeland I'm not sure.

L1029 is about 3000 years old... so it would have coexisted with L260 (that is 2000 years old) by the time of the Slavic expansions (just about 1500 years ago). I see no reason why only L1029 men would decide to move west, and all the L260 would just stay at home, only to move 200 years later. Plus, L1029 is found in places further west than where the Slavs migrated.

So to me that indicates a pre-Slavic population in what is now Poland migrating west a long time ago.

LeBrok
21-06-13, 06:21
So as a result of that, this is also where most of the major mutations within M458 took place, and I'm pretty sure that both L260 and L1029 are native to the region.
This is quite possible.


I can't see the proto-Germanics as part of the story, and I even have a hard time accepting that Eastern Germanics are worth mentioning. That's because I1 is at around 5% in that part of Poland (with apparently somewhat higher peaks in parts of Masovia) and R1b-U106 at around 6.5%. That's much lower than in, say, Denmark or North Germany,
Well, there is always a chance that East Germanic was more of cultural shift with Germanic elite over local (perhaps Venetic) population, not bringing much I and R1B. However if Veneti (Venedi) where the bearers of L1029 some would have left with Germanic tribes spreading L1029 along their migration. On other hand maybe East Germans didn't mix much with locals after Germanic expansion mid first millenium BC. Although during 1,000 years of living among locals it would be almost impossible not to mix, I guess.


So the most plausible scenario I can think of, is that an ancient "Polish" population high in R1a-M458 became Slavic speaking after influence from the southeast.
Judging by polish language grammar, which is very complicated almost in pristine/original state, it is highly unlikely that polish is a language of minority-elite introduced over majority of locals. Also from archeology we know that central Europe was depopulated, almost empty before expansion of Slavs.
However, polish sounds more harsh/harder than other slavic languages (at least to my ear), and this might be influence of local substratum, but also might have happened later after arrival of german emigrants into polish cities during middle ages, as Polaco eluded.

R1aInMyDNA
21-06-13, 07:16
Well, there is always a chance that East Germanic was more of cultural shift with Germanic elite over local (perhaps Venetic) population, not bringing much I and R1B. However if Veneti (Venedi) where the bearers of L1029 some would have left with Germanic tribes spreading L1029 along their migration. On other hand maybe East Germans didn't mix much with locals after Germanic expansion mid first millenium BC. Although during 1,000 years of living among locals it would be almost impossible not to mix, I guess.


That is what I was thinking as well. So my question is, if over the course of nearly 1000 years, L1029 was "turned German" in eastern Germany, then isn't it plausible that some L1029 found it's way into Denmark and the rest of Scandinavia with the migrating Germanic Tribes? If that is true, then L1029 in the British Isles could be attributed to a small presence of L1029 in Danish Vikings.

Also, if the L1029 we are talking about was due to the Lusatian Culture, then tribes as far west as modern Saxony would have contained elements of L1029 (Would that still be considered Eastern Germanic?)

LeBrok
21-06-13, 08:01
That is what I was thinking as well. So my question is, if over the course of nearly 1000 years, L1029 was "turned German" in eastern Germany, then isn't it plausible that some L1029 found it's way into Denmark and the rest of Scandinavia with the migrating Germanic Tribes? If that is true, then L1029 in the British Isles could be attributed to a small presence of L1029 in Danish Vikings.

The problem with this idea is that we don't see L1029 carried away with Vandals and Goths to south Europe.
The L1029 in Vikings could be explain by participation of Slavs of Pomerania in Viking culture.
Here is a story of Island Wolin where Vikings and Slavs lived together.



Archaeological finds on the island are not very rich but they dot an area of 20 hectares, making it the second largest Baltic marketplace of the Viking Age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_Age) after Hedeby.[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] Some scholars have speculated that Wolin may have been the basis for the semi-legendary settlements Jomsborg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jomsborg) and Vineta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vineta). However, others have rejected the identification, or even the historical existence of Jomsborg and Vineta (for example, Gerard Labuda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_Labuda)).[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolin#cite_note-koczy-2)
Gwyn Jones notes that the size of the town was exaggerated in contemporary sources, for example by Adam of Bremen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_of_Bremen) who claimed Wolin/Jomsborg was "the largest town in Europe". Archaeological excavations however have found no evidence of a harbor big enough for 360 warships (as claimed by Adam) or of a major citadel. The town was inhabited by a both Slavs and Scandinavians

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolin

zanipolo
21-06-13, 09:46
there is a paper on Belarussa DNA done in 2013

Its states IIRC that L1029 is from belarussia and has recently become know as the mazovia royal line.

It did not enter the west until after the germanic/barbarian invasions of the Balkans , italy, france and Spain.

A comment from the author
It would good to translate those obscure terms (N, P ...) to normal
language. In short, M458 (R1a1a1g1), which is called "the European branch"
of R1a, consists of two principal branches, the Central European (CE) and
West Slavic (WS). They have distinctly different base haplotypes and form
two distinct branches on the R1a haplotype tree. The West Slavic branch is
the L260 subclade. The CE branch does not have an identified SNP as yet, and
splits into two sub-branches, CE-1 and CE-2. Each one has its own base
haplotype. All three - WS, CE-1 and CE-2, arose (or started to expand) in
the 1st millennium BC, however, their common ancestor, M458, is much more
ancient.

It might be that L1029 marks either the CE branch, or one of the CE (CE-1 or
CE-2) sub-branches.

There is nothing "disjoint" here. All the branches and subclades form a
robust system, each one has its own base haplotype, each one has its own
place on the chronological scale, as well as all their common ancestors have
their own places on the chronological scale. The new SNPs will be useful, of
course, but they would not change anything in our understanding of the
system.

Anatole Klyosov

reply:

"Disjoint" is a term used in set theory. Disjoint sets have no elements in
common:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjoint_sets

In this case, R1a-L1029 and R1a-L260 appear to be disjoint sets, but before
submission to ISOGG I will need an officially documented L260+ L1029-

.........................

It would seem that the poles want the L1029 to be lusitanian marker and stated it moved east when germanic incursion took place in poland BC times, but this to me is illogical as none of these markers went with the barbarian invasions, so they have had to arrive after these invasions occurred.

R1aInMyDNA
21-06-13, 22:23
The problem with this idea is that we don't see L1029 carried away with Vandals and Goths to south Europe.
The L1029 in Vikings could be explain by participation of Slavs of Pomerania in Viking culture.
Here is a story of Island Wolin where Vikings and Slavs lived together.


L260 is completely absent in the British Isles. So I'm doubtful that L1029 can be attributed to the Pomeranian Slavs.

And we do see a little L1029 in Southern Lands. Northern Italy has a hit. Also look at Bulgaria/Macedonia. The Ostrogoths settled there.

Also, if we look at R1a we do know that the Germanic tribes carried (like the Northwestern Branch that you can see at R1a.org) you will notice no presence of this HG in southern lands.

I think it would be wrong to think that the Germanics had a massive genetic influence on Western Europe (they did have a massive political one). You are talking about tribes that probably numbered in the tens of thousands entering lands already inhabited by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Romanized Europeans.



Snip


Where does that paper say L1029 formed in Belarus?

I can't post links yet, but I read a good discussion about this. IIRC, M458 shows a higher level of diversity and concentration in North Central Poland. It would be strange if M458 developed in Belarus, only to move west about 1000 years ago, then divide into 2-3 subclades, and then boom in population, all the while leaving Belarus with relatively little presence. That and all M458+, L260-, L1029- seem to mainly exist in Polish lands.

zanipolo
21-06-13, 23:55
L1029 And Np News


New topic 17 Oct 2012.
L1029 was a new SNP (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#SNP) last March. L1029 provides a branch of M458, added to the ISOGG (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#ISOGG) tree this year. The other branch is L260 (update next topic (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#L260M458News)). L260 was discovered in 2010. Most M458+ L260- samples are coming out L1029+. I have been calling M458+ L260- samples N type (very few exceptions - next topic). It is now clear that L1029 is a major branch, capturing more than 90% of N type (more than 90% of M458+ L260-).
In the Polish Project (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#PolishProject), most of the N type L1029- results are samples with Poland given as the ancestral country. This spring, Mayka (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Mayka) started classifying these as the “Np” cluster (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Cluster).
In this topic I present preliminary evidence that Np corresponds to a Y-DNA clade concentrated in Poland. I also explain why all Polish N type samples (tested or predicted M458 and not L260) would benefit from the L1029 test, because Np cannot be predicted precisely, and because there is a low fraction of L1029- outlier (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Outlier) samples, not fitting Np.
So far (10 Oct data) there are 20 results L1029- (including a few samples that are not M458+) and 42 results L1029+. N type requires 67 or more of the standard markers (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#StandardFTDNAMarkers) for confident assignment. Using samples with those 67 markers the numbers are 114 N type, of which there are 12 L1029- and 41 L1029+. Of the 61 remaining N type samples (at 67 in the Polish Project) not tested for L1029, I estimate only about 5 might come out L1029-, because testing has been concentrated on STR (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#STR) predictions, discussed below in this topic.
One M458+ L260- L1029- sample is not counted as N type, as discussed in the next topic as Ry type (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#RyType). This seems to be a very small outlier clade (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Clade) with an old node (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Node) in M458.
Two of the others differ significantly from the other 12, so I am predicting these two as outliers, with M458 nodes older than the main Np hypothetical clade.
Np Cluster Definition: I constructed an STR definition (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Definition) for the remaining 10 samples with similar STR values and L1029- result. The definition uses 37 of the 67 markers. The cutoff (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Cutoff) is 2 (step (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Step) less than 2 are considered matches). I uploaded this definition to Ysearch (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Ysearch), code CHFXB. My analysis file is L1029Study.xls (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishCladesUpdate/L1029Study.xls)
On this basis, 3 of the untested N type samples fit the definition and are predicted L1029- members of the hypothetical Np clade. Two more are marginal, so perhaps there are 14 Np samples among the 114 N type. N type is 8.8% of the Polish Project, so that means 14 / 114 * 8.8% = 1.1% Np samples in the Polish Project. The statistical uncertainty is wide, so my estimated 80% confidence range is 0.5% to 2 %. Insofar as the Polish Project is representative of Historical Poland, it seems the Np hypothetical clade has roughly 1% frequency in the region of Historical Poland. Of the 10 confirmed Np samples, 8 provide “Poland” as origin, one “Russian Federation” and one “Lithuania”. The 3 predicted Np samples have two “Poland” and one “Belarus”. There is no need to subtract the samples without “Poland” because the Polish Project as a whole has a similar frequency of samples not “Poland”; such samples come from men with evidence of male ancestry from Historical Poland.
DYS460 = 10 is a very strong signature (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Signature) marker for Np. All 13 of the confirmed and predicted Np samples have this value. Those two outlier samples also have this value. Among those 41 L1029+ samples, only 6 have this 10 value; 3 have 12 and the 32 others all have the N type modal (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Modal) 11 value. The statistics of this paragraph are misleading because DYS460=10 was used to encourage L1029 testing in the Polish Project. I would expect a few Np to show up in the future with 460 value other than 10 (mutated from the Np ancestral value), and I would expect in the long run a lower fraction (less than 6 / 32) L1029+ to have the 10 value (independent mutations). Among the 49 N type samples not confidently assigned to sub-categories, only 5 have the 10 value, and 1 of these is a marginal Np sample mentioned above.
CDYa = 33 is another good signature. These two markers alone with cutoff 1 (that means both markers match) capture 9 of the 13 Np samples (Np defined as 13 captured by 37 markers cutoff 2). These two markers also capture 2 marginal samples (at the step 2 cutoff of Np at 37), plus only one other N type, plus a few D type (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#DType) (D are not members of the M458 clade, but DYS460=10 is modal in D). CDY is a fast mutator, so it is unusual to serve as a signature marker. I ran into this on one other occasion, where I postulated a mutation disabled CDYb; see my discussion at http://www.gwozdz.org/L540.html#CDYb. Actually, another reasonable explanation is that this CDYa=33 signature is just luck, because using only 10 samples we should not be too surprised that one of the rapid mutators looks like a signature, by the luck of random mutations. Yet a third explanation: Np might really be 2 or more clades where the ancestors (MRCA (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#MRCA)s) of each clade had the CDYa=33 value by luck, but those ancestors differed at other markers; this explanation is discussed more below.
There are no more good Np signature markers. Np modal values differ from N modal values at only 4 of the 67 markers. There are only two Np samples at 111 markers, and they do not seem to differ from N at those additional 44 markers. On this basis, I am not confident that my definition is very precise, because it takes as little as 2 mutations in the male line history for a sample to be incorrectly predicted, using any STR definition.
There is another reason for my uncertainty about my 37 marker Np definition: I worked harder than usual to construct this definition, so there is selection bias. Markers that just happen to have no mutations in those 10 samples are all in the definition. Any marker got dropped if it produced 2 or more mutations in any sample of those 10. Surely as more samples show up I’ll need to modify my definition. Those 37 markers are only a “good bet” definition for Np prediction today.
I published (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#FallIssueOfJogg) my SBP (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#SBP) method of quantifying confidence (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Confidence) in clade predictions based on Y-DNA STRs. Lower SBP means higher confidence. I reserve the word type (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#Type) for clusters with SBP < 20%. I consider SBP meaningless for SBP > 50%. Np comes out with SBP = 64%. This does not necessarily mean that Np is invalid as a clade prediction. My SBP method gives larger values for SBP with few samples, so valid clades improve with more data (SBP becomes smaller). A clade with modal STR values close to the father clade (N is the father of Np) necessarily comes out with large SBP. Concentration in Poland is evidence of validity for Np. That 460=10 is also evidence of validity. In my estimation, Np has about 80% confidence of validity, all evidence considered, but only 50% confidence of being a unique clade. Np might be primarily one clade with interference from other independent small clades with similar STR values. Or, Np might be 2 or more clades, about the same size, all concentrated in Poland, but distantly related. Clarification: two clades with very close nodes to the father branch might be considered a single clade; here I mean that Np might be 2 clades with nodes that are not close in the tree, perhaps with other small clade nodes between them that do not fit Np STRs (by the luck of random mutations in the ancestor). More discussion below on this idea.
In the R1a Project (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#R1aProject), my 37 marker definition captures 11 samples with SBP = 95% (data at 67 markers, download 14 Oct). Eight of the 11 have L1029- result and the others are not tested yet. Seven of the 11 are of “Poland” origin. Two L1029- are N type that do not match Np. There are 38 L1029+ that do not match Np. Summary: L1029- are rarer in the R1a Project (compared to the Polish Project) and the L1029- predominantly match Np. SBP is worse (higher) because of interference at the cutoff by more R1a samples from outside Poland. This paragraph is not conclusive, however, because the administrators of both projects work together; many of the samples come from men who joined both projects. Both projects worked hard on getting L1029 results this year, using 460=10 fit as a guide for emphasis.
As an independent test, I checked (11 Oct) the “RussiaDNA” Project (another FTDNA (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#FTDNA) project). Of 260 R1a total, only 12 have been tested for L1029, and only 2 of these 12 came out L1029-: one Poland and one Russian Federation. This is preliminary evidence that Np is rare in the Russian federation, although N is common in all Slavic countries.
More projects checked (14-15 Oct):
Russian_impire: 4 L1029 tests, one negative, not Poland
LituaniaPropria: 4 L1029 tests, two negative, both “Lithuania” origin, one L1029- also in the Polish Project, both also in the R1a Project
in addition, both L1029+ are also in the Polish Project, and one in the R1a Project, so these are not independent data
Scottishdna: no L1029 tests
Finland: 1 L1029 positive
BritishIsles: 1 L1029 positive
Other projects are not concentrating on L1029 tests. I hesitate to encourage them, because M458+ L1029- seem to be mostly from Poland.
I have an R1a database at 67 markers with 1816 samples from 15 FTDNA projects. I collected this 20 June, when there were fewer L1029 results. My 37 marker definition captures 13 samples, but 12 of these are in the Polish Project, and the other is in the R1a project. No additional samples fit Np. There are more marginal samples at the cutoff step 2: 10 of them: only 2 in the Polish Project; only one from Poland. This is my strongest evidence that the Np cluster is concentrated in Poland.
Ysearch: 9 samples are captured by my Np definition CHFXB. Only 2 are from Poland. Only 2 of the 13 Polish Project Np joined Ysearch (one Poland and one Lithuania). SBP is poor for Np at Ysearch because there are 6 samples at the step 2 cutoff, none from Poland. In addition, 2 “Central European” modals fall at step 2 (37 markers used), emphasizing how hard it is to separate Np. A simple explanation for these Ysearch results is that there are 1 or more other clades concentrated outside Poland, which might be L1029- or L1029+.
At the top of this topic, I reported “more than 90% of N type” (M458+ L260-) are L1029+. Since L1029- are concentrated in Poland, it may actually be more than 95% worldwide. However, there is a reasonable possibility of one or more small clades showing up L1029- from outside Poland when more samples are tested.
Age of Np: It is too soon to estimate the age (TMRCA (http://www.gwozdz.org/PolishClades.html#TMRCA)) of L1029, and age based on STR variation is uncertain because of known caveats (http://www.gwozdz.org/R1a.html#AgeCaveats). However, L1029 is probably not much younger than N type because L1029 includes almost all of N type. N type is surely older than 2,000 years. Indeed, variation of L1029 STRs is looking similar to N type variation. The L1029- node is necessarily the same or older than the L1029 node, so Np has an old node. However, the age of the node is almost always older than the age of the clade (TMRCA). Np seems very young, as evidenced by the unique 460=10 value discussed above. On the other hand, other markers have significant variation within Np; that may mean Np is not so young; or, that may mean Np is composed of 2 or more clades, each of which is young.
Speculation: Np reminds me of P type (L260 update, next topic). In my 2009 publication, and at this web page, I have speculated that L260 may have a very old node, but the P type ancestor (MRCA) may have lived more recently, perhaps not long before formation of the tribes that led to the Polish nation. It seems to me that M458 is quite old, but not many M458 individuals survived over the millennia, and a few of the M458 survivors were lucky enough to found clades during the population expansion of the last 3 millennia. Perhaps the Np ancestor, with L1029- and 460=10, also lived long ago and left few survivors; most of those few formed what are today very small clades, and one was (or perhaps 2 or more, all with 460=10, were) lucky enough to found the medium sized cluster today apparent as Np. I find it interesting to consider the men who lived 1,000 to 2,000 years ago in the region that is now Poland (and / or maybe in another region from which there was a migration to Poland). Due to the statistics of Y-DNA inheritance, most men do not form clades that last long, and very few men form large clades. Human behavior may perhaps broaden the statistical spread of clade size, allowing rare men to produce relatively larger clades. I speculate that among those proto-Polish men who founded clades that survive today, most were R1a, and many of those were M458, and one or a few of those were Np, and one was P.

My error...the belaruss I was refferring to was for L260 and not L1029. L1029 seems basically Masovian marker.
Masovians.... are they the creation of dark-ages Galidians?
Masovian area ........pliny states ...the guthones lived there. Are guthones the goths?

R1aInMyDNA
22-06-13, 00:57
My error...the belaruss I was refferring to was for L260 and not L1029. L1029 seems basically Masovian marker.
Masovians.... are they the creation of dark-ages Galidians?
Masovian area ........pliny states ...the guthones lived there. Are guthones the goths?

Sorry, but where are the Pliny States? I'm not familiar with it.

The Masovains appear to have been a Lechite tribe that moved west with the Slavic migrations. L1029 would have been present among them, but would have already existed in the Masovain area prior to the Slavic Migrations.

zanipolo
22-06-13, 01:27
Sorry, but where are the Pliny States? I'm not familiar with it.

The Masovains appear to have been a Lechite tribe that moved west with the Slavic migrations. L1029 would have been present among them, but would have already existed in the Masovain area prior to the Slavic Migrations.

sorry , i meant to say that the historian Pliny, states .............

true on Masovians, but galidians are baltic prussians , not germanic and not slavic, but known as west-balts

R1aInMyDNA
22-06-13, 02:17
sorry , i meant to say that the historian Pliny, states .............

true on Masovians, but galidians are baltic prussians , not germanic and not slavic, but known as west-balts

Ohhh haha I was trying to find where the Pliny states where! All I could find was the historian so that makes sense now :grin:

My point about the Masovains is that they did are not responsible for the introduction of L1029 into Poland. It would seem that L1029 has been in Poland for about 3000 years, and spread with the Lusatian culture.

About the Goths and Guthones... from what I understand they are the same people or very closely related.

I am curious, most M458 distribution maps show a small presence (about 4% - 6%) on the Southern tip of Scandinavia (in Skåneland and a little to the East).

Here is a quote from a paper titled:
Gothic connections: Contacts between eastern Scandinavia and the southern Baltic coast 100 BC - 500 AD


A reasonable explanation for similarities in the material cultures can be that they are products of long-term contacts, perhaps originating in connections between the Lusatian culture and other urnfield groups on the continent and eastern Scandinavia already during the Late Bronze Age – Early Iron Age.

if the Lusatian culture carried L1029, perhaps this could explain the M458 presence there? And consequently the L1029 found in England (Skåneland was under control of the Danish).

LeBrok
22-06-13, 03:37
Is there more L1029 in Britain than one in Leeds, as pair map above?

Zanipolo's cited paper says that L1029 might be 1000-2000 years old. If it is true it would make it more slavic than anything.

Other than that, I'm still unsure on this and can go either way.

R1aInMyDNA
22-06-13, 04:22
Is there more L1029 in Britain than one in Leeds, as pair map above?

Zanipolo's cited paper says that L1029 might be 1000-2000 years old. If it is true it would make it more slavic than anything.

Other than that, I'm still unsure on this and can go either way.

This is what the paper states:

N type is surely older than 2,000 years.

Palisto's r1a tree as well as R1a.og put it at 3000.

so far there are two or three L1029 results in England.

LeBrok
22-06-13, 04:37
Sorry, but where are the Pliny States? I'm not familiar with it.

The Masovains appear to have been a Lechite tribe that moved west with the Slavic migrations. L1029 would have been present among them, but would have already existed in the Masovain area prior to the Slavic Migrations.
Right.

Interesting is that Mazovia(east of Warsaw) is actually empty of L1029 and M458, except one in Warsaw (as per map), almost as desert as Pripet areas.

Silesia and Czech republic is low on both too L clades. Here we can find more Celtic names and more R1B.

LeBrok
22-06-13, 05:13
This is interesting. I marked/circled a big void of L1029, in center of it. It corresponds with supposed Slavic homeland and two major Polish tribes, later known as base of Poland, Greater Poland and Poland Minor. I guess it might prove R1aInMyDna point, that L1029 is not Slavic.
5903

R1aInMyDNA
22-06-13, 06:58
This is interesting. I marked/circled a big void of L1029, in center of it. It corresponds with supposed Slavic homeland and two major Polish tribes, later known as base of Poland, Greater Poland and Poland Minor. I guess it might prove R1aInMyDna point, that L1029 is not Slavic.
5903

M458 does show up in the regions you highlighted. That is, M458+ L260+. I wish I had 10 posts... then I could post pictures and links... :embarassed:

L1029, however, seems to have a very little presence there, like you said.

EDIT: so L260 is defiantly a sign of the slavic migration. L1029 not so much.

zanipolo
22-06-13, 08:01
M458 does show up in the regions you highlighted. That is, M458+ L260+. I wish I had 10 posts... then I could post pictures and links... :embarassed:

L1029, however, seems to have a very little presence there, like you said.

EDIT: so L260 is defiantly a sign of the slavic migration. L1029 not so much.

If you think L1029 is lusitanian, what gives you this idea?

saxons in ancient times where basically on the north sea, the area i imagine you think in "east germany" it is was ancient semones germanic people, ...these became the alemanni os SW germany....maybe cherbusi germans ?!?

The pan-illyrian ideas of 30 years ago when lusitanian was thought to be these types of people is raising eyebrows again....i am unsure.

I have only seen 1 in italy, 1 in greece and 1 in bulgaria

What about pomerania.....is there any there?

R1aInMyDNA
22-06-13, 08:21
If you think L1029 is lusitanian, what gives you this idea?

saxons in ancient times where basically on the north sea, the area i imagine you think in "east germany" it is was ancient semones germanic people, ...these became the alemanni os SW germany....maybe cherbusi germans ?!?

The pan-illyrian ideas of 30 years ago when lusitanian was thought to be these types of people is raising eyebrows again....i am unsure.

I have only seen 1 in italy, 1 in greece and 1 in bulgaria

What about pomerania.....is there any there?

I'm talking about the lusatian culture, not lusitanian people.

Here is a link for the Lusatian Culture: Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatian_culture)

Perhaps you confused them with the Lusitanians?


EDIT: There seems to be about 3-4 L1029 matches in Pomerania

zanipolo
22-06-13, 20:59
I'm talking about the lusatian culture, not lusitanian people.

Here is a link for the Lusatian Culture: Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatian_culture)

Perhaps you confused them with the Lusitanians?


EDIT: There seems to be about 3-4 L1029 matches in Pomerania

yes , that's what I meant...bad spelling by me.

Pomeranians .....maybe.....face-urn culture ..........baltic people, some historians say they where Karelians, ............many migrated to northern USA, usually with the swedes to Minnesota

R1aInMyDNA
22-06-13, 23:21
yes , that's what I meant...bad spelling by me.

Pomeranians .....maybe.....face-urn culture ..........baltic people, some historians say they where Karelians, ............many migrated to northern USA, usually with the swedes to Minnesota

Here is a quote from the wiki


The Pomeranian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomerania) culture, also Pomeranian or Pomerelian Face Urn culture was an Iron Age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Age) culture with origins in Pomerania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomerania), northern Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland), which eventually covered most of today's Poland. About 650 BC, it evolved from the Lusatian culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatian_culture) between the lower Vistula (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vistula) and Parseta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parseta) rivers

So L1029 would have been present among them. The Pomeranian Face Urn culture evolved from the Lusatian culture.

West of the Pomeranian Face Urn culture was the Billendorfer culture you can read about here (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billendorfer_Kultur)

The Billendorfer culture also evolved from the Lusatian culture, but was absorbed culturally by the Jastorfer culture (here is a link talking about that, on pg. 298 (http://books.google.com/books?id=zAY4we4LKQMC&pg=PA297&lpg=PA297&dq=billendorf+culture&source=bl&ots=i7kfrYU8dP&sig=CrV_kIJQdPdYta2ucMGmSOPxGu0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=n8OiUYT9FYONigKBx4DwDQ&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=billendorf%20culture&f=false))

So yes, If L1029 is in fact present in the Lusatian culture and it's offshoots, then I would imagine tribes like the Semnones to carry it. Also, are there any records of where the Semnones are from originally? I understand most of the Germanic tribes are recorded by the Romans as coming from somewhere in Scandinavia.

zanipolo
23-06-13, 00:44
Here is a quote from the wiki



So L1029 would have been present among them. The Pomeranian Face Urn culture evolved from the Lusatian culture.

West of the Pomeranian Face Urn culture was the Billendorfer culture you can read about here (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billendorfer_Kultur)

The Billendorfer culture also evolved from the Lusatian culture, but was absorbed culturally by the Jastorfer culture (here is a link talking about that, on pg. 298 (http://books.google.com/books?id=zAY4we4LKQMC&pg=PA297&lpg=PA297&dq=billendorf+culture&source=bl&ots=i7kfrYU8dP&sig=CrV_kIJQdPdYta2ucMGmSOPxGu0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=n8OiUYT9FYONigKBx4DwDQ&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=billendorf%20culture&f=false))

So yes, If L1029 is in fact present in the Lusatian culture and it's offshoots, then I would imagine tribes like the Semnones to carry it. Also, are there any records of where the Semnones are from originally? I understand most of the Germanic tribes are recorded by the Romans as coming from somewhere in Scandinavia.

map of ancient german tribes

notice NO germans in southern Germany

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/9256/5gv.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/600/5gv.png/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

R1aInMyDNA
23-06-13, 06:51
map of ancient german tribes

notice NO germans in southern Germany

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/9256/5gv.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/600/5gv.png/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

I do not understand why that is significant? Can you explain?

zanipolo
23-06-13, 08:56
I do not understand why that is significant? Can you explain?

you wanted to know where the semones are from..check the map

BMPO
03-07-13, 03:38
I am M17 R-Z92 and I am from the republic of Macedonia, does this coincide with any historical movement of people towards my region of ancestry?

Dibran
09-01-18, 16:08
,,,,,,,


...............


......................

Recently received my Full Genomes Yelite results. I am confirmed by Admins(and per preliminary placement on Yfull) to be L1029*, negative for all known downstream mutations. 25 unique SNPs. I only had 3 close matches in FGC. Sadly they were still far. TMRCA between us 2350ypb. The 2 closest matches were from Germany. One(a little further) was a Russian from the Urals. Michal suspects(but uncertain given the instability of the SNP) to form a novel clade upstream of YP263. My placement seems to be at the top of L1029*. My closest match seems to be a Y-SEQ Albanian, TMRCA 1000ypb. I hope to test him(assuming he agrees) to see how the cluster forms between us.

From my understanding each L1029* individual forms their own cluster and have a TMRCA with eachother of 2000ypb. So I may or may not share a SNP with existing Yfull samples that are L1029*. I know its most probable to have arrived with the Avaro-Slavs that invaded Byzantium. However, given the infancy of the science, I feel its too early to make broad conclusions.

From what I see, Basal L1029* like my own seems more widespread than more downstream L1029, which is typical of the migration patterns. Given I lack all the SNPs associated with the migration events from what we currently know, I suspect it could have been Ostrogoths, Bastarnae, Volga Bulgars and even Varangians.

As I understand it, Varangians were hired from Scandinavia to the Baltics and even Russia. Perhaps a Varangian from Kievan Rus carried a more basal L1029* clade to the Balkans. There is also the case as one mentioned earlier, Pomeranian Vikings could well have settled in England and even in the North of France. Perhaps trace ammounts were carried later by Normans, who had a huge impact on Albania, and its tribal customs. They even carried a campaign through my village against the Venetians where they were defeated.

There were also earlier German soldiers stationed in my village, supposedly in 900AD. So it could even be an East German that settled. Even Bastarnae are a possibility. They were still active in the early middle ages, and they expanded throughout east europe before cutting through the East Balkans further west into Macedonia. They could have easily absorbed L1029 in their travels.

I see any number of scenarios. Sadly people are quick to go to tunnel vision and say it only arrived with the great migration Sklavenoi, and not possible other avenues. You have early Antes mercs hired by Rome to fight the Huns that could have carried it. Or even early Slavic farmers prior to the migration that settled in Greece.

https://s10.postimg.org/a8nr25mzd/L1029.png

Are there any recently published scientific material on M458-L1029? How much do we actually know about it to be certain of who it did or did not come with?

Joey37
24-06-18, 00:14
I am also interested in L-1029, since I ran my 23andMe raw data through the Morley Subclade Predictor and got L-1029 as my most likely match. My paternal line originates in Germany. It seems like an interesting para-Slavic group.

smaccy08
05-10-18, 11:10
Dito, Joey37. I ran my father's Ancestry results through the Morley Subclade Predictor and also was predicted to be L-1029. His father, my grandfather, has taken the y-37 at FTDNA and got R-M198 as the predicted haplogroup. My greatgreatgrandfather originally came from the Upper Palatinate in Bavaria, 50 miles from Pilsen (Czech Republic).

I'm open for any suggestions (via pm!) on which test I should order next.
Also, I'm looking forward to reading more about this haplogroup. So, if there are any new insights about its origins, please reply to this thread!

nothingfail
29-01-19, 06:31
Definitely not what you call modern Germanic. Possibly it is East Germanic like Vandals or Goths. However they left in great numbers, so we should be able to have some of L1029 in Iberia, Odessa or Sicily, but have none.
It really looks Western Slavic same as M458.
The only thing that bothers me is complete lack of both HG in supposed birthplace of Slavs, in Pripet marshes around Czarnolas (Black forest) area. I circled it on M458 map. What the heck happened?! Lol.

59005901
Why is BuLGaria not in the calculations! I2a1 and E-v13 are predominant in South Eastern Europe and also "Slavic"! Who said the homeland of the so called Slavs was the River Pripyat Region! I read Getae (who were Thracians, that is of the BaLKans) was the old name of the S(c)laveni. BuLGarian YDNA (male) is closest to that of Latinized Romanians and of Hellenes (Hellenized) and MtDNA (female) is closest to that of Italians, Hellenes and Ukrainians (aka Rusyns up to the 17th cent.). It looks like the original S(c)laveni were from the BaLKans and went North for various reasons all the way to the BaLTic Sea, some may have went North East and become BuLGars/ BuRGars, for example due to the Roman raids, which dor example levelled the Epirus with the ground and it was devastated, who later returned and regained control as Barbarians and particularly Sclaveno - BuLGars/ BuRGars!!! BuLGarian YDNA is in fact the same as that of Romanians, Northern Greeks and Albanians, that is the S(c)laveno - BuLGars/ BuRGars must be of local origin!!! I found this map showing R1a L1029 as predominating in and around BuLGaria - who can confirm that!?

Dibran
29-01-19, 18:48
Why is BuLGaria not in the calculations! I2a1 and E-v13 are predominant in South Eastern Europe and also "Slavic"! Who said the homeland of the so called Slavs was the River Pripyat Region! I read Getae (who were Thracians, that is of the BaLKans) was the old name of the S(c)laveni. BuLGarian YDNA (male) is closest to that of Latinized Romanians and of Hellenes (Hellenized) and MtDNA (female) is closest to that of Italians, Hellenes and Ukrainians (aka Rusyns up to the 17th cent.). It looks like the original S(c)laveni were from the BaLKans and went North for various reasons all the way to the BaLTic Sea, some may have went North East and become BuLGars/ BuRGars, for example due to the Roman raids, which dor example levelled the Epirus with the ground and it was devastated, who later returned and regained control as Barbarians and particularly Sclaveno - BuLGars/ BuRGars!!! BuLGarian YDNA is in fact the same as that of Romanians, Northern Greeks and Albanians, that is the S(c)laveno - BuLGars/ BuRGars must be of local origin!!! I found this map showing R1a L1029 as predominating in and around BuLGaria - who can confirm that!?

I am pretty sure that is an old map and doesn't take every sample to date into account. As far as my understanding goes, L1029 is most commonly found in Poland, Germany, and South-West Belarus. Highest diversity of L1029 clades are also to be found in these areas(which is usually an indicator of possible origin). L1029 in the Balkans is predominantly YP417 and YP263. YP417 is more dominant in Bulgarian than YP263 but both are represented. As far as 1029 being Thracian I doubt it. Currently there is no ancient ydna for L1029 or even M458 to confirm its situation pre-500AD. The only L1029 sample we have is from the middle ages 11th century cemetary at Usedom where a Slavic admixed German was found(if I recall correctly). We need ancient samples to be sure. Perhaps Proto-Slavs were a mix of Getae and other tribes, however theres no way to know without ancient remains what they carried. So far the only R1a discovered in Thracian samples in Bulgaria was a unrelated(most probably extinct) clade of R1a-Z93. A distantly related cousin clade under M417.