Ancient Balkans Y-DNA lineages

In one leak a screenshot was taken in a upcoming Y-DNA from Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze, Iron Age, Roman and Medieval times from Balkans.




Mesolithic Balkans was dominated by I2a and R1b .

Neolithic by G2a

Bronze Age by R1b-Z2103, J2b2-L283 and J2a.

Once again, E-V13 appearance just as stated by Viminacium authors appears in Bronze to Iron Age transition, notice how the percentages increases during 0-500, very probably due to sampling bias of cremation/inhumation, when they adopted Christianity the burial rite changed to inhumation. So, i would say that the 0-500 column represent much better the Iron Age rather than the Iron Age column itself. E-V13 is confirmed Eastern Urnfield lineage, officially.

Hawk said:

In one leak a screenshot was taken in a upcoming Y-DNA from Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze, Iron Age, Roman and Medieval times from Balkans.

Mesolithic Balkans was dominated by I2a and R1b .

Neolithic by G2a

Bronze Age by R1b-Z2103, J2b2-L283 and J2a.

Once again, E-V13 appearance just as stated by Viminacium authors appears in Bronze to Iron Age transition, notice how the percentages increases during 0-500, very probably due to sampling bias of cremation/inhumation, when they adopted Christianity the burial rite changed to inhumation. So, i would say that the 0-500 column represent much better the Iron Age rather than the Iron Age column itself. E-V13 is confirmed Eastern Urnfield lineage, officially.

Click to expand...

very nice
looks interesting
like 17% e-v13 in iron age ( if i am reading that correctly)
from where in the balkan the samples were taken ?
i wonder what haplogroups are in the other category ?

Hawk said:

In one leak a screenshot was taken in a upcoming Y-DNA from Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze, Iron Age, Roman and Medieval times from Balkans.

Mesolithic Balkans was dominated by I2a and R1b .

Neolithic by G2a

Bronze Age by R1b-Z2103, J2b2-L283 and J2a.

Once again, E-V13 appearance just as stated by Viminacium authors appears in Bronze to Iron Age transition, notice how the percentages increases during 0-500, very probably due to sampling bias of cremation/inhumation, when they adopted Christianity the burial rite changed to inhumation. So, i would say that the 0-500 column represent much better the Iron Age rather than the Iron Age column itself. E-V13 is confirmed Eastern Urnfield lineage, officially.

Click to expand...

How can you tell E-V13 was not brought by near easterner migrants since it increased during 0-500?

Leopoldo Leone said:

How can you tell E-V13 was not brought by near easterner migrants since it increased during 0-500?

Click to expand...

Because of archaeogenetics, during Bronze to Iron Age transition various inter-related groups from Balkan-Carpathian hemisphere, starting from Vatin up north to Gava-Nyirseg which were the original Urnfield bearers came down and moved and invaded Central and Eastern Balkans mainly, modern phylogeny supports this, ancient archaeology supports this, and now common sense supports this. E-V13 in Near East/Anatolia is insignificant, most of subclades are down-clade of European major clades. Also, there is no indication why would E-V13 Thracian-related groups to prosper under Romans within Balkan itself, Dacians were themselves quite affected from Roman wars, Thracians from Sapae had to a degree some advantage, the only reasonable explanation is just as described in Viminacium paper the native Central and Eastern Balkan population leaving cremation for Christian tradition burial and of course sampling the native Balkan population after this burial rite is abandoned will give us a better picture.

Bronze to Iron Age transition in Balkans foresaw mostly in Central-Eastern Balkans the intrusion of cremation burial on a pyre on top of tumuli, this particular related cultures affected South Albania, Epirus and Greece to a degree as well.

I am also wondering about G2a, notice how good their percentage was during 0-500, 500-1500? Where are their modern representatives then? It could be that the study might suffer from sampling bias. Who knows. But it still gives us some picture.

Leopoldo Leone said:

How can you tell E-V13 was not brought by near easterner migrants since it increased during 0-500?

Click to expand...

Because there's like none E-V13 in Anatolia, Levant or the Sahara, it's all in Europe.
And not only exists in former Ottoman territories; also exists in S. Italy, France, the UK.

And by the way, it's already present in Neolithic Europe in the far south, Andalusia, Sardinia...

Actually, i am seeing a very-very minor percentage of E-V13/E-L618 in Mesolithic times.

edit: Indeed, E-L618/E-V13 was present in Mesolithic times along G2a, probably in the shores between Anatolia and Greece. Their percentage is quite small, there is also I1 and J2a.

Also, E-V13 were badly hit by Slavic migrations, this goes against the assumption of people saying that the Slavs brought additional E-V13.

Hawk said:

E-V13 is confirmed Eastern Urnfield lineage, officially.

Click to expand...

Seeing as Urnfield practised cremation, wouldn't there be less Urnfield samples?

Hawk said:

Actually, i am seeing a very-very minor percentage of E-V13/E-L618 in Mesolithic times.

edit: Indeed, E-L618/E-V13 was present in Mesolithic times along G2a, probably in the shores between Anatolia and Greece. Their percentage is quite small, there is also I1 and J2a.

Click to expand...

yes very likely it is E-L618
either way it is extremely cool
i wonder from which site this sample will come
though it might be the same sample from the cave in dalmatia

p.s
the c-v20 in mesolithic is fascinating la brana is "alive" and kicking

Philjames100 said:

Seeing as Urnfield practised cremation, wouldn't there be less Urnfield samples?

Click to expand...

Exactly, it was already stated in Viminacium paper:

A local origin is supported by a high frequency of Ychromosome lineage E-V13, which has been hypothesized to have experienced a Bronze-to-IronAge expansion in the Balkans and is found in its highest frequencies in the present-day Balkans17. We interpret this cluster as the descendants of local Balkan Iron Age populations living atViminacium, where they represented an abundant ancestry group during the Early Imperial andlater periods (~47% of sampled individuals from the 1-550 CE). Excavations of Iron Age Balkans prior to the Roman rule showed the dead where predominantly cremated.

Cosmopolitanism at the Roman Danubian Frontier, Slavic Migrations, and theGenomic Formation of Modern Balkan Peopleshttps://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...211v1.full.pdf

Click to expand...

And latest Urnfield archaeological paper just confirms this:

The earliest examples of urnfields in the area under consideration can be found in the Carpathian Basin, where this new and complex way of treating and disposing of the dead tends to be juxtaposed with and/or replace the traditional flat inhumations, primary cremations (‘in situ cremations’), or scattered cremations from at least the twenty-fifth century BC. However, it is during the first half of the 2nd millennium BC—and more intensively around the sixteenth–fifteenth centuries BC—that the urnfield custom crosses its original boundaries and starts to be intensively practised in other regions, or isolated sites still surrounded by communities practising other kinds of funerary ritual. To what extent the spread of the urnfield model is the result of cultural transmission rather than (at least partially) a demic diffusion can be debated, but unfortunately not easily verified, since cremation destroys DNA and therefore the identification of any population movement via aDNA analysis. Beside the ideological aspects, the new biomolecular evidence of virulent pathogens, most notably Yersinia pestis, found in individuals dated to the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC, from Central Asia to Central/Northern Europe (Andrades Valtueña et al., 2017; Rasmussen et al., 2015; Spyrou, 2018; Rascovan et al., 2019), suggests that the diffusion of certain epidemics, especially in densely populated and well-interconnected regions, might have triggered practical responses by societies attempting to limit transmission. The burning of corpses may be one of these.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10963-022-09164-0

Click to expand...

No wonder that the earliest E-V13 finds come from Early Iron Age irregular burial pits, sacrifices, burial pits and sacrificial remains are typical of the Eastern Urnfield Cultural Complex. The so called fluted ware/channeled ware which ultimate origin should be sought in Carpathian Basin foresaw a sudden rise with a very slow expansion during Middle Bronze Age and a massive expansion during Late Bronze Age, but these people mostly migrated in South-East Europe mainly.

Hawk said:

In one leak a screenshot was taken in a upcoming Y-DNA from Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze, Iron Age, Roman and Medieval times from Balkans.

Mesolithic Balkans was dominated by I2a and R1b .

Neolithic by G2a

Bronze Age by R1b-Z2103, J2b2-L283 and J2a.

Once again, E-V13 appearance just as stated by Viminacium authors appears in Bronze to Iron Age transition, notice how the percentages increases during 0-500, very probably due to sampling bias of cremation/inhumation, when they adopted Christianity the burial rite changed to inhumation. So, i would say that the 0-500 column represent much better the Iron Age rather than the Iron Age column itself. E-V13 is confirmed Eastern Urnfield lineage, officially.

Click to expand...

Very interesting. I just posted this a few days ago, but it should serve for all Paleo-Balkan tribes.



Very similar dates time periods. I also had 0 to 500 AD, and 500 AD to present. I wonder how they define Bronze Age and Iron Age. I used 700 BC to 0 for Iron Age, 2000 BC to 700 BC for M/LBA, and earlier than that for EBA.

Also Hawk, please shut up. I told you EV-13 wasn't that popular and it experienced a founder effect. You keep expecting an 80% EV-13 population. You're not going to get it.

We have 0 proof that a mostly EV-13 MAJOR population ever existed.

enter_tain said:

Also Hawk, please shut up. I told you EV-13 wasn't that popular and it experienced a founder effect. You keep expecting an 80% EV-13 population. You're not going to get it.

We have 0 proof that a mostly EV-13 MAJOR population ever existed.

Click to expand...

E-V13 from Bronze to Iron Age transition and onwards was the major Y-DNA in Balkans and that's evident. This is what people specialized in these field say.

A local origin is supported by a high frequency of Ychromosome lineage E-V13, which has been hypothesized to have experienced a Bronze-to-IronAge expansion in the Balkans and is found in its highest frequencies in the present-day Balkans17. We interpret this cluster as the descendants of local Balkan Iron Age populations living atViminacium, where they represented an abundant ancestry group during the Early Imperial andlater periods (~47% of sampled individuals from the 1-550 CE). Excavations of Iron Age Balkans prior to the Roman rule showed the dead where predominantly cremated.

Cosmopolitanism at the Roman Danubian Frontier, Slavic Migrations, and theGenomic Formation of Modern Balkan Peopleshttps://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...211v1.full.pdf

Click to expand...

So, imagine if all people equally practiced inhumation, the bars of Iron Age would look like 0-500, a timeline when cremation started to be abandoned by Central Balkan people.

enter_tain said:

Very interesting. I just posted this a few days ago, but it should serve for all Paleo-Balkan tribes.

Very similar dates time periods. I also had 0 to 500 AD, and 500 AD to present. I wonder how they define Bronze Age and Iron Age. I used 700 BC to 0 for Iron Age, 2000 BC to 700 BC for M/LBA, and earlier than that for EBA.

Click to expand...

Dardapara,

Per Joachim Matzinger (Der Illyrer, 2021 book), Illyrian and Albanian belong to two different branches within Indo-European language family. So, if J2b2-L283 is Proto-Illyrian/Illyrian-related then Proto-Albanoids had different lineages initially. Though, some J2b2-L283 clades in Central Balkans did participate in the formation of Proto-Albanians just as some R1b-Z2103 and E-V13 (the main candidate for Proto-Albanoids so far but not all subclades). No wonder, to this day Carpathian (karpë) and Beskidy(bjeshkë) are etymologies of a remnant Albanoid-like language from Bronze/Iron Age.

Hawk said:

Dardapara,

Per Joachim Matzinger (Der Illyrer, 2021 book), Illyrian and Albanian belong to two different branches within Indo-European language family. So, if J2b2-L283 is Proto-Illyrian/Illyrian-related then Proto-Albanoids had different lineages initially. Though, some J2b2-L283 clades in Central Balkans did participate in the formation of Proto-Albanians just as some R1b-Z2103 and E-V13 (the main candidate for Proto-Albanoids so far but not all subclades). No wonder, to this day Carpathian (karpë) and Beskidy(bjeshkë) are etymologies of a remnant Albanoid-like language from Bronze/Iron Age.

Click to expand...

Per 200 other authors, it doesn't. Albanian and Messapic clearly belong to the same branch, and Messapic-Illyrian are also clearly linked linguistically, archeologically, etc... We literally have countless evidence Messapians came from the western Balkans.

Not to mention all the countless Illyrian tribe names linked to Albanian animals/plants. These are Western Balkans linked. Serbia clearly drifts off. Those lineages don't represent ancestral Albanians.

Lecture on Slavic Migrations and the Origin of People in the Balkans

‘Slavic Migrations and Genomic Origin of the Balkan People’ is the title of the lecture to be delivered by Professor Carles Lalueza-Fox at the SASA Grand Hall, on Tuesday, 28 June, at noon.
A several-year-long study on the origin of the Balkan people has revealed that about a half of today’s Serbian population’s genomes is indigenous, at least up to the Bronze age, whereas the remaining half is of Slavic origin, descendant from the Slavic migrants in the 7th century. Therefore, Slavic migration to the Balkans did not bring about population replacement, but an admixture of indigenous Balkan genome and the genome of Slavic migrants. Molecular markers have suggested that the Slavic migrations to the Balkans could have originated from present-day Poland and Ukraine. This study analyses the genetic structure of the local people in the region of Serbia in the Bronze, Iron, Roman and post-Roman period, and the present-day population. This continuity in the analysis has paved the way for identifying the constancy of population in our region and the DNA proportion in today’s modern population with lineage traced back to ancient history. The sites for the research of population’s genetic changes include Viminuacium, Mediana, Timacum Minus and several other sites in the Balkans, which provides a basis for the analysis of later Slavic migrations and facilitates modelling of the genetic structure of the modern Serbian population in the wider context of other Balkan people.
The above-mentioned study is the result of the cooperation of the Faculty of Biology of the University of Belgrade (Professor Midrag Grbić, a visiting professor, Professor Željko Tomanović, SASA corresponding member, Professor Dušan Keckarević), Institute of Archaeology (Dr Ilija Mikić, research associate, Dr Miomir Korać, principal research fellows and associates), University Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona (Professor Carles Lalueza-Fox and associates), Harvard University, Harvard Medical School (Professor David Reich and associates).


from the actual lecture :

kingjohn said:

Lecture on Slavic Migrations and the Origin of People in the Balkans

‘Slavic Migrations and Genomic Origin of the Balkan People’ is the title of the lecture to be delivered by Professor Carles Lalueza-Fox at the SASA Grand Hall, on Tuesday, 28 June, at noon.
A several-year-long study on the origin of the Balkan people has revealed that about a half of today’s Serbian population’s genomes is indigenous, at least up to the Bronze age, whereas the remaining half is of Slavic origin, descendant from the Slavic migrants in the 7th century. Therefore, Slavic migration to the Balkans did not bring about population replacement, but an admixture of indigenous Balkan genome and the genome of Slavic migrants. Molecular markers have suggested that the Slavic migrations to the Balkans could have originated from present-day Poland and Ukraine. This study analyses the genetic structure of the local people in the region of Serbia in the Bronze, Iron, Roman and post-Roman period, and the present-day population. This continuity in the analysis has paved the way for identifying the constancy of population in our region and the DNA proportion in today’s modern population with lineage traced back to ancient history. The sites for the research of population’s genetic changes include Viminuacium, Mediana, Timacum Minus and several other sites in the Balkans, which provides a basis for the analysis of later Slavic migrations and facilitates modelling of the genetic structure of the modern Serbian population in the wider context of other Balkan people.
The above-mentioned study is the result of the cooperation of the Faculty of Biology of the University of Belgrade (Professor Midrag Grbić, a visiting professor, Professor Željko Tomanović, SASA corresponding member, Professor Dušan Keckarević), Institute of Archaeology (Dr Ilija Mikić, research associate, Dr Miomir Korać, principal research fellows and associates), University Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona (Professor Carles Lalueza-Fox and associates), Harvard University, Harvard Medical School (Professor David Reich and associates).


from the actual lecture :

Click to expand...

Excellent, thanks for sharing. No surprises
about the appearance of haplogroups brought by Slavs or that ancient Balkan people mixed with Slavs and were not replaced. Complete replacement was an unreasonable idea going back at least to Cavalli-Sforza. It’s also reasonable for Stamatoyannopoulos et al. to have assumed the Slavs came from Poland/Ukraine (duh), and not too unreasonable to use modern northern Slavs as proxies, given that there may have been few if any ancient Slavic samples. Would love to see how close modern Poles and Ukrainians are to the Slavs who came to the Balkans.

Southern Illyrians more southern shifted. Gee who would've thought. This is too easy lmfao. I feel bad for these dudes who want to make historical fanfic

Depending on the dates of these samples, we need to add

(1) Roman Imperial (East, south-east?)

(2) Slavic/Germanic (North/North-East)

to get modern Albanians.

From Bruzmi @ Anthrogenica



I don't like quoting that dude and his fake ass models, but this is raw data.