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

Archaeological cultures on territories of modern day Lithuania in chronological order.



Swiderian culture 11K-8.2K BC Paleoeuropeans.
Neman culture. Southern Lithuania. 7K-5KBC. Paleoeuropeans
Kunda culture 8K-5K BC. Paleoeuropeans.
Narva culture 5.3K-1.75K BC. Paleoeuropeans.
Comb ceramic culture 4.2K-2K BC. In the past scholars considered this culture Finno-Ugric. Nowadays many scholars hold an opinion that this culture was also paleoeuropean, as Finnish linguists suggest that proto-Finnic language spread into Baltic shores only 3,000 ybp (1K BC).
Corded ware culture 3.2K-2.3K BC. Earliest Indo-Europeans
Zhutsevskaya culture was a local variant of Corded ware culture. 3K-2K BC. Earlieast Indo-Europeans.
Sambian barrow culture 6BC-1AD. Western Lithuania. Early western Balts
West Baltic barrow culture 5BC-1AD. Western Lithuania . Early western Balts
Stroked-pottery culture 7BC-5AD. Central and eastern Lithuania . Early eastern Balts
East Lithuanian barrow culture 5AD-12AD . South-eastern Lithuania. Eastern Balts
Stone barrow culture 4AD-13AD . South-west Lithuanians . Western Balts (Dainava, Yotvingians)
 
Very informative posts Volat. Welcome to Eupedia.
 
Archaeological cultures on territories of modern day Lithuania in chronological order.



Swiderian culture 11K-8.2K BC Paleoeuropeans.
Neman culture. Southern Lithuania. 7K-5KBC. Paleoeuropeans
Kunda culture 8K-5K BC. Paleoeuropeans.
Narva culture 5.3K-1.75K BC. Paleoeuropeans.
Comb ceramic culture 4.2K-2K BC. In the past scholars considered this culture Finno-Ugric. Nowadays many scholars hold an opinion that this culture was also paleoeuropean, as Finnish linguists suggest that proto-Finnic language spread into Baltic shores only 3,000 ybp (1K BC).
Corded ware culture 3.2K-2.3K BC. Earliest Indo-Europeans
Zhutsevskaya culture was a local variant of Corded ware culture. 3K-2K BC. Earlieast Indo-Europeans.
Sambian barrow culture 6BC-1AD. Western Lithuania. Early western Balts
West Baltic barrow culture 5BC-1AD. Western Lithuania . Early western Balts
Stroked-pottery culture 7BC-5AD. Central and eastern Lithuania . Early eastern Balts
East Lithuanian barrow culture 5AD-12AD . South-eastern Lithuania. Eastern Balts
Stone barrow culture 4AD-13AD . South-west Lithuanians . Western Balts (Dainava, Yotvingians)


I should correct Volan
Formation of East Lithuania Barrow Culture begins

in the late second – early third century (the first stage:

phases B2–C1/C1a – till phase D1). The process was pro-

voked and directly influenced by migration of west Baltic people from the south-western territories
ISSN 1392–6748
 
Please consider statistics
Lithuania has 840 hill forts, 792 of them comes from Roman and Migration periods (A.Bliujienė 2013, Zabiela)
LV - 470, EE - 90(?) from Final Iron Age hill forts (Tvauri 2012).
So LT has 2 times higher density of hill forts than neighbors and 4 times EE.
Timing matches with East Lithuania and Stone barrow cultures also Migration period.
There are papers stating cultures expanded North.
 
A History of the Baltic States Andres Kasekamp on Google books

browse "Hillforts were errected first in Lithuania in the Early Roman Age" (sorry I'm not allowed to post screenshots nor links)
 
The map of Baltic hydronyms below is based on research done by several leading linguists from Lithuania and Russia. The inner area shows a large number of Baltic hydronyms, while the outer area shows few Baltic hydronyms on the map.

Add URI in front of link.

4.bp.blogspot.com/-9-DFhfz1jUs/Unq3NwdmRGI/AAAAAAAAAGA/7gRv8ZrmlK4/s1600/kalba-zemel.jpg


Archaeological cultures listed below are widely considered Baltic by archaeologists. The Baltic archaeological cultures located in Lithuania, Latvia, north-eastern Poland, Belarus , western Russia are coinciding with the area of Baltic hydronyms. These are

Western Baltic Barrow and related cultures
Sambian barrow culture 6BC-1AD.
Stroked-pottery culture 7BC-5AD
Dniepr-Dvina cultures 8BC-4AD
Moshinskaya culture 4AD-6AD related to Dniepr-Dvina culture
Upper-Oka culture of Iron age related to dniepr-Dvina culture
Milograd culture 7BC-1AD
Yukhnovskaya culture 5BC-2BC
Eastern Lithuanian barrow culture 3AD-12AD
Bantser-tushemlya archeological culture – 4AD-6AD
Stone barrow culture 4AD-13AD
Possibly Kolichinsk (5AD-7AD) and Kiev (2AD-5AD) archaeological cultures.


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

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

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


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


cs407522.vk.me/v407522071/5b9c/R1Gkixp4y_4.jpg

Theories are up to like or dislike.
But I should quote "there is no other country name derived from hydronim" (S.Karaliūnas "Baltų etnonimai" 2015).
So this version is quite speculative.
CZ + SK has 4 Litava rivers + one Leitha / Litava on other side of Danube near Viena.
There massive bunch of antonyms with Lit- there and in C.Europe.
 
Theories are up to like or dislike.
But I should quote "there is no other country name derived from hydronim" (S.Karaliūnas "Baltų etnonimai" 2015).
So this version is quite speculative.
CZ + SK has 4 Litava rivers + one Leitha / Litava on other side of Danube near Viena.
There massive bunch of antonyms with Lit- there and in C.Europe.

The hypothesis is plausible described by many scholars.

Balts didn't have their writing for a long time leaving no written evidence about themselves from earliest times. In earliest Ruthenian chronicles Lithuania or more correctly litъva (ъ is short 'a' which is no longer used in literally East Slavic languages) was applied to a group of east Baltic people. Thus, in the Tale of Bygone Years (Primary Chronicle) compiled in Kiev around 1113 by monk Nestor 'litъva' people are mentioned en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle

Excerpt from Primary Chronicle. Use google translator if needed.

В Иафетовой же части сидят русские, чудь и всякие народы: меря, мурома, весь, мордва, заволочская чудь, пермь, печера, ямь, угра, литва, зимигола, корсь, летгола, ливы. Ляхи же и пруссы, чудь сидят близ моря Варяжского.

литва - Litva (Balts)
зимигола - Semigalians (Balts)
корсь - Curonians (Balts)
летгола - Latgalians (Balts)


In other early chrincles 'litva' was applied to people too.

Later, the name Litva was applied to the state. It is also known that many people identified themselves after the regions in which they lived. Thus neighbouring Slavic tribe of northern Belarus 'Polochans' were named after Polota river. Slavic tribe Buzhane were named after Bug river. As the previous poster suggested Baltic tribes also had identification terms after rivers. I cannot think of many example. Litva (Lietuva) is one the example.

In this case hydronym -> ethnonym -> country name.
 
It's seems we've lost original topic.
Avistro thinks variags could brought N1C1 to the Baltics, That's plausible.
I point there was earlier inflow of the people - 2-3CAC and then massive Migration period that changed archeological cultures all over Europe and Scandinavia.

As to the Litva/Leita A.Dobonis published "LDK leičiai" research in 1995. This become official theory since then accepted by historians and linguistics.
Google book Foreword to the Past– A Cultural History of the Baltic People

Autorius (-iai): Endre Bojtár
 
It's seems we've lost original topic.
Avistro thinks variags could brought N1C1 to the Baltics, That's plausible.
I point there was earlier inflow of the people - 2-3CAC and then massive Migration period that changed archeological cultures all over Europe and Scandinavia.

As to the Litva/Leita A.Dobonis published "LDK leičiai" research in 1995. This become official theory since then accepted by historians and linguistics.
Google book Foreword to the Past– A Cultural History of the Baltic People

Autorius (-iai): Endre Bojtár

Avistro stated this 2 years ago. Since then he learned many things and probably changed his mind about migration path of N1c1.

1. N1c1 came into east Baltic from the East.
2. The earliest known N1c1 is found in western Smolensk (Zhizhitskaya culture 4, 500 years before present). Right on the border of Russia and Belarus in the basin of Dvina (Daugava) river.

Likely, N1c1 traveled in Scandinavia from Finland. Although Finns have their own subclades of N1c1 , Few Finns also share subclade of N1c1 similar to that found in Rurikid.

Gediminid and Rurikid do not share the same subclade Although both had a common ancestor.
 
According to Lithuanian anthropologist Gintautas Chesnis there was a migration from Scandinavia to Lithuania in Neolithic. Other than that Scandinavians and Balts are different genetically, anthropologically, ethnographically.



PS add www to the following link


delfi.lt/news/daily/lithuania/lietuviu-proteviai-skandinavai-o-pusbroliai-baltarusiai.d?id=20646059
 
Avistro stated this 2 years ago. Since then he learned many things and probably changed his mind about migration path of N1c1.

1. N1c1 came into east Baltic from the East.
2. The earliest known N1c1 is found in western Smolensk (Zhizhitskaya culture 4, 500 years before present). Right on the border of Russia and Belarus in the basin of Dvina (Daugava) river.

Likely, N1c1 traveled in Scandinavia from Finland. Although Finns have their own subclades of N1c1 , Few Finns also share subclade of N1c1 similar to that found in Rurikid.

Gediminid and Rurikid do not share the same subclade Although both had a common ancestor.
Yes, that is correct. What made (some) sense 2 years ago, does not make much sense now.
My current belief is N-L1025 came into Baltics together with art of metals and fortification that also brought Baltic Finns into region. Somewhere 1st Millenium BC.
 
Arvistro,
That exactly what I came to conclusion too.
Fortifications and art of metals was standard skills of legionaries.
Nero amber expedition and Tacitus book was the turning points.
 
The first smithy in Žardė hillfort near Klaipėda has C14 dates 420 -160+60 BCE.
About the same age smithies discovered in S.Finland with later roman artifacts.
 
There are papers stating cultures expanded North.

In my opinion migrations into eastern Baltic occurred along waterways. Into Latvia along Dzvina (Daugava) river from western Russia and northern Belarus. Into Lithuania along Neman and Vilia (Neris) rivers from Belarus.
 
In my opinion migrations into eastern Baltic occurred along waterways. Into Latvia along Dzvina (Daugava) river from western Russia and northern Belarus. Into Lithuania along Neman and Vilia (Neris) rivers from Belarus.

Please google papers on Eastern Lithuanian barrow culture (R.Lietuvos pilkapių kultūrą).

Baltic sea was the biggest waterway and free market until Danish expansion and Swedish - Novgorodian war.

Litgen project clearly shows more Ra1 along the river Nemunas and more N1C in N.Lithuania without transit waterways.
Then Ra1 is more common along the Daugava and N1C1 in Estonia.

I suppose this indicates Ra1 moved down by the rivers from the south were max is in Dneper basin.
 
Please google papers on Eastern Lithuanian barrow culture (R.Lietuvos pilkapių kultūrą).

Baltic sea was the biggest waterway and free market until Danish expansion and Swedish - Novgorodian war.

Litgen project clearly shows more Ra1 along the river Nemunas and more N1C in N.Lithuania without transit waterways.
Then Ra1 is more common along the Daugava and N1C1 in Estonia.

I suppose this indicates Ra1 moved down by the rivers from the south were max is in Dneper basin.

Eastern Lithuanian borrow a relatively late archaeological culture of mid and late Iron age . During Iron age there was a Slavic migration into Belarus and western Russia splitting autochthonous population (wester, eastern and Dniepr Balts). Indo-European migrations into Lithuania and Latvia happened since late Neolithic and Bronze ages. Both R1a and N1c came from the east with R1a and R1b migrating on a more southern path reaching all the way to British Isles. The Baltic sea was a natural barrier for a northern migration of N1c1.

Population geneticist Kushniarevich published a paper in which she described a migration along Neman and Pripyat' rivers. In the past people settled near the rivers to have access to water. They migrated along the rivers too.

Speaking of Balts, they were mostly inland people. The only sea-fares among the Balts that I can think of were Curonians.
 
There was a migration from Scandinavia into east Baltic during Bronze age. Those were proto-Germanic settling mostly in coastal (western) Finland, western Estonia and nother-western Latvia.

Formation of Proto-Finnic – an archaeological scenario from the Bronze Age / Early Iron Age by Valter Lang, University of Tartu, Estonia. Paper was presented at International Finno-Ugric congress , 2015. http://www.oulu.fi/sites/default/files/content/CIFU12-PlenaryPapers.pdf






image.png
 
Eastern Lithuanian borrow a relatively late archaeological culture of mid and late Iron age . During Iron age there was a Slavic migration into Belarus and western Russia splitting autochthonous population (wester, eastern and Dniepr Balts).

There was a small migration into south-eastern Lithuania during Iron age. Archaeologist Valentin Sedov describes Kirivichi settlement among people of Litva. Those Kirivichi that lived around Polotsk and Vitsebsk cities.



Litva and Krivichi , Lietuvos Archeologija. . 2001. T 21, p. 81-88. ISSN 02-07-8694 http://talpykla.istorija.lt/bitstream/handle/99999/1597/LA_21_81-88.pdf
 

This thread has been viewed 112801 times.

Back
Top