@Riverman
My answer here could concern two threads, I put it here:
Agree with you in your answer of the Dacian langage question to Torzio. Some common influence could have played on Dacian language if we suppose Romanians have important Dacian heritage ( ? supposed Illyrian’s influence ??? risky bet) as this influence did on others in the proximity of South-Hungary plain and more southernly but otherwise the allover phonetic of Romanian (and Albanian, if some common substrata) does not evok too tight links with Celtic or Germanic.
Romanian is a Romance language, presumably with a Daco-Moesian substrate and Albanian influence when large groups of the Vlachs sought refuge close to Albanian strongholds in Late Antiquity, which probably spread from there to other Vlachs further away, which in turn did assimilate a lot of other groups, mainly Slavic, but also some Turkic and Germanic remnants most likely.
But concerning Y-E1b-V13 I need more. I don’t discard the Fluted/Channelled ware culture as an important element in this region as a whole, but I don’t see the link with Y-E-V13 or better said a by force link ; it’s true I lack Y-haplo’s of Lengyel, Michelsberger, Baden. ATW I read the Channelled Ware culture was born rather in Western Hungary (G? va) in a post-Otomani environment before gaining ground towards southern Danube and Dniestr in East, covering Transylvania.
I wrote about that already, Otomani is a candidate from which Pre-Gava could have emerged, but some authors said it rather replaced Otomani. In any case, the centre of Gava was Eastern Slovakia and North Western Romania, as well as territories around that core region. From there Gava expanded and found various daughter groups so to say, which is what the Channelled Ware/Fluted Ware horizon is about. The only question which remains is how Gava came up and whether E-V13 was dominant in Gava from the start, or just in one of its groups, or even one of its daughter groups. I think it was Gava from the start, because we have now knowledge of samples from Pannonia, Bulgaria and Serbia before Channelled Ware and in all three regions: No E-V13. Yet the impact of Channelled Ware was huge, so if it wasn't E-V13, what other lineages did they spread? Just connect the two dots: You need a lineage which spread with Channelled Ware, E-V13 wasn't present before and big afterwards = clear case scenario for me.
Its however possible that E-V13 became really dominant in just one or more of the daughter groups. We know for sure Psenichevo and Basarabi had a lot of E-V13. Related Eastern Hallstatt groups are very likely, Getae likely too. Also we have, according to Huban who looked at the sample distribution, one possibly Gava related find of E-V13 in very North Eastern Hungary. This needs to be confirmed from the Pannonian paper, but its in any case quite telling that E-V13 didn't appear in the EBA-MBA in any other region than close to the later core of Gava/Channelled Ware.
Western Hungary is not the primary source region at all. Different cultures no finds. Both E-V13 and Gava originated rather further to the North, in a zone from Silesia to Western Ukraine, with an ultimate centre in Eastern Slovakia-North Western Romania, where we find some of hte biggest elite burials of the early phase too by the way and also some traditions started there. If you want to know what Channelled Ware people were about, they spread Naue II swords and iron weapons, they were metallurgists and warriors. Even the pottery, the typical Gava/Channelled Ware is typical, because it represents in its elaborated form a black burnished ware, which looks like iron. They might even have had a religious cult around iron and swords it seems. Up to the Daco-Thracians and Eastern Hallstatt, the iron sword bearers were the elite, the leaders and it was not just about the swords being expensive. They also offered hoards of weapons to gods, something which starts in the North and moves all the way down to Greece.
Its spreading occurred between LBA and EIA so around Urnfield period roughly said. Were they THE spreaders of UFC ?
Urnfield culture is a religious phenomenon and multi-ethnic. Its Gava/South Eastern Urnfield, which is Daco-Thracian and spread E-V13. Its closest relative and associated group being the Lusatians, with which they had minimum as much in common as with the Middle Danubian group, which bordered them in the South and from which Pannonians seem to come from.
Not sure. ATW UFC saw moves and/or cultural transfers and densification of settlements in some places : surely not a monolithic phenomenon. In West (Celts) it seems the elites are not been erased if they have accepted new ones in some proportions. In Southern Poland, a move occurred from Bohemia, of Tumuli tribes akin to the Bavarian ones (Celts rather than Italics, or if para-Italics, N-E Veneti or close?), which did not mix with UFC people moving just South of them, before kind of UF-isation later which gave way to the Lusacian Culture. I think the complete replacement of elites did no more occur at these times, compared to LN/ChL/EBA.
There was a near complete replacement, not just of the elites in some regions. Channelled Ware really did take over, in some regions, that is very obvious. In others they mixed, so it kind of depends. Like Belegis II-Gava centres, right close to Mokrin, which was dominated by I2, R1b and J2, and close to later Viminacium, both Belegis II-Gava and later Bosut-Basarabi had their centre and that was a true replacement of the local population. You also see that in the record, because some of the defeated groups fled to the South and East, where they were finally caught and either annihilated, assimilated, or tried to flee even further. You see that in the record, like for Incrusted Ware, which being squeezed in between Western (Glasinac-Mati-Illyrian) and Eastern (Gava-Daco-Thracian) expansions from the North. In some regions they fused and new mixed cultures emerged, in others they seem to have tried to escape the newcomers.
But what you see, in the archaeological record already and is known from historical accounts (Sea Peoples, Dorians etc.) as well, the Urnfield expansion caused a migration period and the final collapse of the old Bronze Age system. And the primary agent of this, for the whole Balkan and East Mediterranean, was Gava/Channelled Ware. Because they did first mass produce Naue II swords in their Carpathian workshops, and then they were among the first in the world to start a mass production of iron swords. Read up on Teleac:
In an attempt to explain the immense size of
the fortress at Teleac ? unusual by Central European
measure [...]
Thus, it seems reasonable to associate this
advance with the onset of the extraction and production
of iron. Moreover, it was the time of the
technological transition from the use of bronze to
iron as the material employed to make weapons
and tools. The comparatively large amount of iron
fi nds in Transylvania in general and in Teleac in
particular imply that iron extraction and production
played an important role early on.
The oldest
object made of iron found in Europe ? a knife or
sickle ? comes from Ganovce, district of Poprad,
Slovakia, in a fortifi ed settlement of the Otomani
culture.
Gava pottery was ideologically and religiously important, even beyond the Gava culture itself, which being proven by rare, highly expensive imports in Germany for example - the most likely background is a cult around iron and metal:
Th e technically demanding,
black-polished pottery of the G?va culture
decorated with garland patterns or channels
displays an unmistakable metallic aspect
Even Greece was profoundly changed:
Since Submycenaean times (c. 1080?1020 BC)
a profound transition in the handling of the deceased
took place: the transition from inhumation
burial to cremation.
The connection to the Carpathian sphere is obvious:
The blade is made of iron, the
socket ? of bronze.61 Aside from these weapons,
note should be made of the eye-catching spectacle
fi bulae, which were a widespread element of dress
at that time and possibly illustrate the mobility of
larger or also smaller groups of peoples between
the Carpathian Basin and Greece.
Thus, the fortifi cation at Teleac comes all the
more into focus. Th e immensity of the fort refl ects
the potential of violence of that time. Obviously,
there was a suffi ciently large population for mobilising
an attack on the massive fortifi cation and to
set it on fi re. At present we only know that the walls
were a wood-earthen construction, but there are
many details of the fortifi cation that must still be
investigated.92 Furthermore, the burnt walls presage
insight in a martial violence, which has hitherto
been attested in only few places in Central Europe.93
https://www.researchgate.net/public...t_of_Teleac_and_Early_Iron_in_Southern_Europe
Teleac was later destroyed in one huge siege, which can, at that time, only be compared with the bigger battles of the Sea Peoples or the siege of Troy. If they would have had a written history, everybody would know about it, because it was a major central point for all of Eastern Central Europe and the Balkans, controlling trade routes, resources and iron weapons production. The E-V13/Channelled Ware did spread also because of their metallurgical innovations. They were top notch for their time and this position survived even the fusion with Cimmerians-Scythians, in the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon and going on into Early Hallstatt. Only with La Tene, which came up also because of Scytho-Thracian influences on Celts, the tide changed and now the Celts pushed forward. Up to this point, especially if talking about iron weapons, the Carpathian zone was on top of things for quite some time, especially in the transitional period from the LBA to the EIA.
