Stable population structure in Europe since the Iron Age

I have ordered similarity maps for a couple of samples, including that one, and the interesting R1a from ~200-300 AD from Ph2ter.
He will be on it as soon as g25 coordinates are published for the samples.

Think it will paint a straight forward picture which was expected, but lacking before the samples from this paper.

Awesome. He's Z638 too right? This one will be without a doubt the closest to Proto-Albanians.

My guess would be he plots just south of modern Albanians. So take away 5-10% Gothic and 15-20% Slavic from modern Albanians and you'll get this guy.
 
You see there are more e-v13
As apperently more samples in this research needed
To be anlaysed
Pribislav :
R3664; 680-823 AD; Sipar, Croatia; E-V13>Z1057>CTS1273>BY3880>BY152493* (xBY152552,FTA7686)
P.s
This is the same dude that was e-v22
By rafc anlaysis from anthrogenica
But with pribislav anlaysis it is e-v13
I hope rafc wasnt wrong with the zadar e-L791 dude probably not because his autosomal was near eastern..

We had an older thread about a subclade of this branch:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/41941-E-FT96633-Subclade-(Italian-)?p=648346#post648346

There are two Italians tested on FTDNA. Scaledinnovation puts the path from about Slovenia-Southern Austria towards North Eastern Italy. I'd say regardless of whether its an ancient local lineage, or came from North Eastern Italy, it likely is a Venetic-Histrian-Liburnian, cremating Urnfielder into Hallstatt lineage most likely.
At least that's more likely than anything else at this point.

Upstream there are Germans, English and Belorussians, nothing from the Balkans. Looks like a not as widespread, but very old lineage dating back to the Urnfield period. I wouldn't wonder if we get more E-V13 samples from Italy, if people from North Italy in particular would test more.

Also compare:
http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/snpTracker.html

Just enter E-FT96633. We don't know whether its that subclade, but a similar path would make perfect sense - before the Medieval last meters.
 
Yeah, and we trust you. Now go play some RPG game.

Says the guy who follows the fantasies of Riverman that half of europe was Daco-Thracian...
Boy you the one gaming[h=3]💀[/h]
 
Says the guy who follows the fantasies of Riverman that half of europe was Daco-Thracian...
Boy you the one gaming������


I do agree with him that Daco-Thracians were largely E-V13, but they also had R1b-Z2103 and R1b-L51 (original Tumulus people) and perhaps some G2a, J2b2-L283, J2a but in small pockets.

And i don't agree with him that all E-V13 should be assigned to Daco-Thracians, some of them might have been among Illyrians, Celts, some like Vatina and Dubovac-Zuto Brdo/Grla Mara might have been non-IE speaking and were pushed from the Gava people (younger E-V13 subclades) down to Aegean.

It's all about giving context to things.
 
Says the guy who follows the fantasies of Riverman that half of europe was Daco-Thracian...
Boy you the one gaming[h=3]💀[/h]

Just consider historical sources and maps. I didn't make the distribution of Thracians much bigger.
Basically its about Eastern Hungary, Eastern Slovakia, Transcarpathia and adjacent regions of Poland and Ukraine, Romania, Moldova, Bulgaria, European Turkey, Macedonia, very Northern Greece, Serbia.
Influences reached much further, but they didn't turn those regions for long.
In all those areas we have archaeological and historical sources which connect them with Thracians.
G?va-Channelled Ware, Bosut-Basarabi and Psenichevo-Babadag are very real and highly important archaeological complexes which covered the mentioned areas.

It's not my fault or that of Hawk if people have no knowledge about the prehistory and history of the Balkans and where the cultures and people came from.
 
We had an older thread about a subclade of this branch:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/41941-E-FT96633-Subclade-(Italian-)?p=648346#post648346

There are two Italians tested on FTDNA. Scaledinnovation puts the path from about Slovenia-Southern Austria towards North Eastern Italy. I'd say regardless of whether its an ancient local lineage, or came from North Eastern Italy, it likely is a Venetic-Histrian-Liburnian, cremating Urnfielder into Hallstatt lineage most likely.
At least that's more likely than anything else at this point.

Upstream there are Germans, English and Belorussians, nothing from the Balkans. Looks like a not as widespread, but very old lineage dating back to the Urnfield period. I wouldn't wonder if we get more E-V13 samples from Italy, if people from North Italy in particular would test more.

Also compare:
http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/snpTracker.html

Just enter E-FT96633. We don't know whether its that subclade, but a similar path would make perfect sense - before the Medieval last meters.


Remove smooth path in scaledinnovation..............you get more accurate results


Is Agostini ( surname ) from South Tyrol one of these 2 italians ?
 
Remove smooth path in scaledinnovation..............you get more accurate results
Is Agostini ( surname ) from South Tyrol one of these 2 italians ?

I don't know and if going into the data base of the M35 project my browser crashes. You could ask the thread starter who might know his matches. If you get to know something, I would be interested as well.
 
Well, certainly i would really like to know about the Veneti-Histri people, what Y-DNA they carried, because archaeology states that they derived from Este Culture which in turn shared a common ancestor with Proto-VIllanovan. Somehow things are a bit messy, and i guess the Urnfield Cultural Complex should mean that in this cultural complex there was various Y-DNA participating and sharing in this networking channel which shared common beliefs, rituals, and lifestyle.

I am guessing we should play the hard game of comparing the burials with pre-Urnfield/Hallstatt and post to deduce who was the lineage because the bearers of these culture unfortunately cremated their deaths and we require a science-fiction tool to get the DNA from the ashes in urn.
 
Well, certainly i would really like to know about the Veneti-Histri people, what Y-DNA they carried, because archaeology states that they derived from Este Culture which in turn shared a common ancestor with Proto-VIllanovan. Somehow things are a bit messy, and i guess the Urnfield Cultural Complex should mean that in this cultural complex there was various Y-DNA participating and sharing in this networking channel which shared common beliefs, rituals, and lifestyle.

I am guessing we should play the hard game of comparing the burials with pre-Urnfield/Hallstatt and post to deduce who was the lineage because the bearers of these culture unfortunately cremated their deaths and we require a science-fiction tool to get the DNA from the ashes in urn.

The Veneti-Histrian-Liburnian complex, but the Veneti in particular, have not just the Urnfield connection, they being also very much influenced by the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon and Basarabi-Early Hallstatt. The Illyrian core on the other hand being rather avoided by the Thraco-Cimmerians, practically no finds there.
These could be very late migrants to the areas in which they are found, but if not, they all show connections to Urnfield-Hallstatt groups. Thraco-Cimmerian horizon find concentrations:

Thraco-Cimmerian.png


Note the rarity of finds in the Illyrian core territory, but it goes around the Illyrians, moving deeply West and South into Italy. Its as if the Thraco-Cimmerian expansion avoided the Illyrian core territory - which they actually did. Thraco-Cimmerians united the advanced knowledge of iron making they brought from the East with the abilities which G?va already had shown and many of the G?va/Channelled Ware cultural innovations. This new fusion was at the base of the Hallstatt revolution and the spread of advanced iron making, especially in weaponry, as well as improved and heavier cavalry.

A common find is the iron "Cimmerian dagger" in this horizon:
1824-01_tlpll7.jpg

https://www.hermann-historica.de/en/auctions/lot/id/41399

During the period 900-700 BC a considerable
number of objects manufactured in eastern Europe
workshops appear in archaeological contexts in Central Europe. These materials are found associated
with Central European materials of the Late Urnfield
and Early Hallstatt periods in graves and hoards. The
?Thraco-Cimmerian? objects are concentrated in the
Carpathian Basin
and penetrated as far west as Bohemia, Croatia, Lower Austria and North Italy. Most
of what came to Central Europe from the east was
connected with military equipment and horse gear
,
and this fact, speaks for nomads.
At present, two stages in interactions between
the Cimmerians of East European Steppes and the
population of Central Europe can be distinguished
(ぜ?????▲? 2003, 39f.). At the early stage (9th ? 8th
centuries BC) the contacts with the Upper and Middle Danube region prevailed (the Late Urnfield and
related cultures). They were reflected in weaponry
and horse harnesses. At the later stage (8th ? 7th centuries BC) the contacts of Cimmerians with the cultures of the Thracian Hallstatt and the northern Balkan become stronger, and they reflected in ceramics
and ornaments
.

The new Cimmerian bits consisted of two movable joint parts, meant for riding,
contrary to the rigid bits of Urnfield Culture which
were more suitable for traction (Balkwill 1973; H?ttel 1981). In comparison with the Urnfield bits with
a size usually of 7 cm, the new Cimmerian types
were 10 - 11 cm, implying larger breeds of horses
(Kossack 1998). The use of cavalry in war required
well-trained horses and skilful experts for the breeding and training of the animals. Wide distribution of
these innovations assumed either the presence of well
organized exchange between eastern-Central European elites, or the occurrence of new representatives of
Cimmerian nobility with their retinue and equipment
in the Carpato-Danubian region.

Its just such a pity only females and one "true Cimmerian" being sampled from the Mezocsat context, but no Carpathian basin local males:

During the Early Iron Age in Central Europe a
fairly clear demarcation between two centers of Cimmerian influences can be observed.
The first is located on the Great Hungarian Plain
and Southwest Slowakia as well as southern Moravia
(Patek 1974; Kemenczei 1984; Chochorowski 1993;
Romsauer 1999). Its sites show fundamental changes
in the cultural landscape in comparison with the previous epoch. Here are concentrated the monuments
of the Mezőcs?t type, which reflects the spreading of the eastern traditions in burial rites (flexed
or stretched out inhumations), material culture and
economy. The Mezőcs?t phenomenon could be interpreted as a result of the penetration of separate
Cimmerian groups in Hungary and neighbouring
territories and their mixing with the local populations. The East Carpathian Basin was a particular
bridgehead from which a local variant of Cimmerian
Culture spread its influences and developed contacts
with other regions of the Central and western Europe.

The nomadic or semi-nomadic way of life of
the Mezőcs?t population assisted in the transmission
of the technical achievements and ideology of Cimmerian Culture (horse harness, weaponry, symbols
of power, etc) through all Central Europe.
The second center of Cimmerian influence
unites the Late Urnfield and Hallstatt cultures which
continued to develop their economic and cultural traditions to the west of Danube (Patek 1993). Here, in
the western areas of the early Hallstatt world, the artifacts of Cimmerian type have been found mainly in
the burials, which reflect a high social status of their
owners. Contacts of nomads with the local populations have influenced the social structures of western Hallstatt population (Kristiansen 1998). These
changes in social models were accompanied by the
widespread introduction of iron and the adaptation of
new religious and symbolical values. A consideration
of the ?western? area of the distribution of Cimmerian innovations allows us to assume the appearance
there in the 8th century BC of a new social organization for which there are typical fortified settlements
and kurgan burials (P?cs-Jakabhegy, Sopron, etc).
In the territories of both centers, the finds,
which could be considered as imports and imitations
of Cimmerian objects, are the most numerous.

While imports are important indeed, there was movement of people too, and be it primarily specialists and elites with their retinue, like obervable in Fr?g in particular.

Very interesting is to note were typical Thraco-Cimmerian bits being found:


During the Pre-Scythian epoch, there is a wide distribution in the Carpatho-Danubian area of bronze
bits with the ends in the form of circular rings. These
are known from the following finds of these elements
of horse gear in Central Europe: Austria (Seeboden,
Stillfried), Croatia (Batina, Legrad), Czech (Pl?tenice, Předměřice, Z?bořί ), Germany (Steinkirchen),
Hungary (Biharugra, Dinny?s, Dunak?ml?d, P?csJakabhegy, Szanda, Szeged, F?g?d), Italy (Este),
Slovakia (Santovka), Romania (Cipău, Vetiş).

In Italy its especially Este, Veneti territory! The Croatian finds are in the very North, directly at the border of Hungary and close to the Hungarian steppe landscape.

https://www.academia.edu/5790493/On...rian_Imports_and_Imitations_in_Central_Europe

The Veneti were specialists in horse breeding and fighting:
The Veneti were considered to be excellent horse-breeders widely known for producing the strongest and fasters mares in ancient Italy. Venetic horses were greatly sought-after by the Greeks; they famously won the Olympic Games for Leon of Sparta in 440BC.

Several Venetic inscriptions mention the word 'ekuperatis', which means 'master of the horse' and perhaps refers to commerce, warfare, nobility, or all of the above.

https://www.honga.net/totalwar/rome...neti_civil_war&u=inv_ven_veneti_heroic_riders

The strongly Thraco-Cimmerian/Basarabi influenced Austrian Hallstatt group of Fr?g had very close ties to the Veneti Este culture as well.
 
Remove smooth path in scaledinnovation..............you get more accurate results
Is Agostini ( surname ) from South Tyrol one of these 2 italians ?

One is from Foggia, seems to have a good tree back to the 17th century, the other has no good tree, but his surname is most common in Lazio, Tuscany and Abruzzo, much rarer in the North East.
 
A third EV-13 in Croatia? And sibling branches as expected again.

I had this argument in the pre-Z638 sample days. Northern Illyrians should be related, but have mostly different branches than southern Illyrian branches. They should mostly not be the same because there should be ~2000 years divergence.

So just like northern Illyrians should have different J2B2 branches (Z638 vs. other Z597), they should also have different EV-13 branches. In fact I would call these populations "Illyroid" that might have became Illyrian proper only later. Kind of like Italy having lots of Italic languages, but only Latin survived and took over everything.
 
A third EV-13 in Croatia? And sibling branches as expected again.

I had this argument in the pre-Z638 sample days. Northern Illyrians should be related, but have mostly different branches than southern Illyrian branches. They should mostly not be the same because there should be ~2000 years divergence.

So just like northern Illyrians should have different J2B2 branches (Z638 vs. other Z597), they should also have different EV-13 branches. In fact I would call these populations "Illyroid" that might have became Illyrian proper only later. Kind of like Italy having lots of Italic languages, but only Latin survived and took over everything.

They are all from later periods and 2 of 3 from areas of the Veneti-Histrian-Liburnian block. The one from more Northern Croatia is from an area which received influences, but it should be an Illyrian at the time the sample is from.

Indeed, a lot of what was later Illyrian, Thracian, Greek etc. got assimilated between the MBA and the beginning historical period. If you think about it, most of the E-V13 lineages have a TMRCA in the LBA-EIA transition. This means they had to be together with many other lineages around that time of 1.300-900 BC. This doesn't look like it was the source, but the receiving end, obviously.
 
One is from Foggia, seems to have a good tree back to the 17th century, the other has no good tree, but his surname is most common in Lazio, Tuscany and Abruzzo, much rarer in the North East.


Foggia is where the Daunians settled from their homeland in the modern border of slovenia and croatia
 
A third EV-13 in Croatia? And sibling branches as expected again.

I had this argument in the pre-Z638 sample days. Northern Illyrians should be related, but have mostly different branches than southern Illyrian branches. They should mostly not be the same because there should be ~2000 years divergence.

So just like northern Illyrians should have different J2B2 branches (Z638 vs. other Z597), they should also have different EV-13 branches. In fact I would call these populations "Illyroid" that might have became Illyrian proper only later. Kind of like Italy having lots of Italic languages, but only Latin survived and took over everything.

all the apulia illyrians come from the green part only on map below




your Illyrian proper is the black part
 
Foggia is where the Daunians settled from their homeland in the modern border of slovenia and croatia

Yes. However, if we don't trust Roman and Early Medieval samples, even a good tree going back to about 1650 is probably no safe bet. That the surname of the second carrier is most common in the Abruzzo and central regions adds up though.
 
They are all from later periods and 2 of 3 from areas of the Veneti-Histrian-Liburnian block. The one from more Northern Croatia is from an area which received influences, but it should be an Illyrian at the time the sample is from.

Indeed, a lot of what was later Illyrian, Thracian, Greek etc. got assimilated between the MBA and the beginning historical period. If you think about it, most of the E-V13 lineages have a TMRCA in the LBA-EIA transition. This means they had to be together with many other lineages around that time of 1.300-900 BC. This doesn't look like it was the source, but the receiving end, obviously.

Are these Veneti-Histrian-Liburnian like your Daco-Sarmatian? You're actually a joke.

There are Illyrian J2B2 lineages surviving even in 2022 AD in Bosnia/Croatia.
 
The Veneti-Histrian-Liburnian complex, but the Veneti in particular, have not just the Urnfield connection, they being also very much influenced by the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon and Basarabi-Early Hallstatt. The Illyrian core on the other hand being rather avoided by the Thraco-Cimmerians, practically no finds there.
These could be very late migrants to the areas in which they are found, but if not, they all show connections to Urnfield-Hallstatt groups. Thraco-Cimmerian horizon find concentrations:

Thraco-Cimmerian.png


Note the rarity of finds in the Illyrian core territory, but it goes around the Illyrians, moving deeply West and South into Italy. Its as if the Thraco-Cimmerian expansion avoided the Illyrian core territory - which they actually did. Thraco-Cimmerians united the advanced knowledge of iron making they brought from the East with the abilities which G�va already had shown and many of the G�va/Channelled Ware cultural innovations. This new fusion was at the base of the Hallstatt revolution and the spread of advanced iron making, especially in weaponry, as well as improved and heavier cavalry.

A common find is the iron "Cimmerian dagger" in this horizon:
1824-01_tlpll7.jpg

https://www.hermann-historica.de/en/auctions/lot/id/41399





Its just such a pity only females and one "true Cimmerian" being sampled from the Mezocsat context, but no Carpathian basin local males:



While imports are important indeed, there was movement of people too, and be it primarily specialists and elites with their retinue, like obervable in Fr�g in particular.

Very interesting is to note were typical Thraco-Cimmerian bits being found:




In Italy its especially Este, Veneti territory! The Croatian finds are in the very North, directly at the border of Hungary and close to the Hungarian steppe landscape.

https://www.academia.edu/5790493/On...rian_Imports_and_Imitations_in_Central_Europe

The Veneti were specialists in horse breeding and fighting:




https://www.honga.net/totalwar/rome...neti_civil_war&u=inv_ven_veneti_heroic_riders

The strongly Thraco-Cimmerian/Basarabi influenced Austrian Hallstatt group of Fr�g had very close ties to the Veneti Este culture as well.

Veneti-Histri and partially Liburni had nothing to do with the so called Thraco-Cimmerian horizont, they were part of Este Culture, an Urnfield Culture variant. AFAIK, Slovenan archaeologists also involve Lausitz Culture in case of this people, hard to guess.

As i have been telling before, the Daco-Thracian culture was heavily influenced by the Indo-Iranian culture, the Phrygian cap is likely an early Indo-Iranian element, and many of the clothes, attire, religious beliefs. Though they were patriliearly descended from Gava Urnfielders they differed a lot from them in many aspects which includes these Steppe Indo-Iranian influences.
 
Veneti-Histri and partially Liburni had nothing to do with the so called Thraco-Cimmerian horizont, they were part of Este Culture, an Urnfield Culture variant.

I didn't suggest they were anything else, but they had at least significant cultural influences. Like you find the horse breed, horse bits, warrior gear, weapons etc. from the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon in Este. As well as a lot of contacts to Fr?g and other East Hallstatt groups from Austria, which were Basarabi influenced.
This doesn't make them anything else but Urnfielders and between Italics and Illyrians ethnically, in my opinion. These are just influences and contacts to the Eastern Urnfield and Thraco-Cimmerian groups, which may have brought some migration, some gene flow. More than in the neighbouring Illyrians proper which had less such contacts and were not part of these networks (Urnfield, Hallstatt).

As i have been telling before, the Daco-Thracian culture was heavily influenced by the Indo-Iranian culture, the Phrygian cap is likely an early Indo-Iranian element, and many of the clothes, attire, religious beliefs. Though they were patriliearly descended from Gava Urnfielders they differed a lot from them in many aspects which includes these Steppe Indo-Iranian influences.

They were so from the start, because Noua-Sabatinovka was their influence and opponent at the same time. Their direct neighbour and influence was coming from the mixed Noua-Wietenberg group in Transylvania. Its even possible they were a formative element of G?va in a way, but rather they were the opponents from which they still learnt something I guess.
Later they had strong influences from the Cimmerians, obviously, but not everywhere as much, and the Scythians - same pattern.

So yes, Iranian influences were there all the time since the earliest stage (Pre-G?va).
 
all the apulia illyrians come from the green part only on map below

This is an early Iapygian sample and his clade is mostly found in the Hoti tribe and the Y21878>FT29003>Cluster from Albanians of North Macedonia. There is a variety of clades under J-Z597 starting from ancient BCE samples from the Bronze Age Dalmatian Posusje culture and continuing in the Iron Age Illyrians. The Daunian J2b-L283 samples are unfortunately low coverage.

ID
NEO806

Date (mean)
1063 BCE

Phylogeny
J-L283>>Z615>Z597>Z638>Z1297>Z1295>Y21878

Archaeological Context
Italy_BronzeAge

Site
Grotta Delle Mura

Location
40.957, 17.29

Source
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.05.04.490594v1


J2b-L283>>Z638>Z1297>Z1295>Y21878

As I have said before, this early East Adriatic migration pattern can only be possible if >Z638+ was already on the other side of the ocean which it was, more accurately in the Bronze Age Dalmatian Posusje culture.

Also, this is important to point out since some who have no idea about the phylogeny of J2b-L283 are repeatedly spreading misinformation when it comes to the ancient samples in question. This is my earlier post on this thread regarding this topic:
The J2b-L283>638+ sample is from the same archeological context as the other J-L283>>Z615>Z597>Y15058>Z38240 which lies within MBA Dalmatian Posusje culture which furthermore attests that the they spread from the same cultural context. If there already was a variety of clades in a MBA Dalmatian context it will also show in the IA Illyrian context who are clearly a parental and autosomal continuity from these samples for which in the East and West Adriatic we already have ancient Z638+ BA samples. Postulating or assuming that Z638+ will be found in more northern or inland ancient samples too is not "jumping to conclusions" in my opinion. That of course does not change the fact that 631>Z1043 was obviously not spread by Celts

 
Last edited:
Are these Veneti-Histrian-Liburnian like your Daco-Sarmatian? You're actually a joke.

They are more like the Mycenaean Hercules weight lifting sample, which you would cluster near if you erase with a pencil eraser the 20% Slavic mixture, than you'd plot right near the wedge shaped like a vagina.
 

This thread has been viewed 68805 times.

Back
Top