When could possibly Ugrofinians have come to Europe?

R

Rethel

Regular Member
Messages
689
Reaction score
73
Points
0
As I remember, in 80s and 90s the popular theory among lingustics
and archeologists was saying, that uralic peoples came to Finland
about 2000 or 3000 years ago.

In this diagram http://www.kolumbus.fi/geodun/YDNA/SNP-N-TREE-FIN.jpg
will see, that common ancestor of northeuropean berers of hg N lived some
4400 years ago and he was probably geographicly located rather in Syberia
than in Europe. So, it wouldn't be so strange, if his descendands would came
to us couple of hundrets of years later. It would perfectly fit to older theories.

But the interesting thing is who was before them?
Oldeuropeans or maybe Indoeuropeans or both?
Whoever wouldn't be lives there, it must be pretty
empty space like northern Russia at the present day.

The second option can be support by
one of the oldest R1a findings in Karelia.
Or maybe majority of living there people
were of totatly different ancestry?

Some linguists claim that first were Indoeuropeans,
because the oldest toponims are indoeuropean,
especially in Finland. So... who and when? :)
 
nice tree

before Finns, Germanic farmers lived in Southern Finland
about 600 BC climate become cooler and farming was no longer possible in these areas
Germanic farmer tribes started to move south and most of them left Finland
instead of Germanic farmers, Finnish hunters came in from the Russian forests

Germanic farming tribes descend from Nordic Bronze Age


about this climate period :

The Nordic Bronze Age was characterized first by a warm climate that began with a climate change around 2700 BC (comparable to that of present-day central Germany and northern France). The warm climate permitted a relatively dense population and good farming; for example, grapes were grown in Scandinavia at this time. A wetter, colder climate prevailed after a minor change in climate between 850 BC and 760 BC, and a more radical one around 650 BC.

The archaeological legacy of the Nordic Bronze Age culture is rich, but the ethnic and linguistic affinities of it are unknown, in the absence of written sources. Some scholars also includes sites in what is now northern Germany, Pomeraniaand Estonia in the Baltic region, as part of its cultural sphere.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Bronze_Age#Climate
 
bicicleur said:
before Finns, Germanic farmers lived in Southern Finland
Click to expand...

How far on the north is this south? Half of Finland or maybe only coasts?

Ugrofins as far as Volga and Ural probably was preceeded by some people with prebaltic
languages, becasue they have many borrowings. In Finland for example the very name of
Finns (Suomi) and Lapps (Saami) is consider as indoeuropean. One of the most important
ugrofinian deities is clearly indoeuropean (Perkele). These are only two examples from many.
Yet one example is very interesting, from Syberia - the name Mansi people probably having
the indoeuropean root as well. So I suggest, that we can forget about ugrofinic Kunda aso.
 
Rethel said:
How far on the north is this south? Half of Finland or maybe only coasts?

Ugrofins as far as Volga and Ural probably was preceeded by some people with prebaltic
languages, becasue they have many borrowings. In Finland for example the very name of
Finns (Suomi) and Lapps (Saami) is consider as indoeuropean. One of the most important
ugrofinian deities is clearly indoeuropean (Perkele). These are only two examples from many.
Yet one example is very interesting, from Syberia - the name Mansi people probably having
the indoeuropean root as well. So I suggest, that we can forget about ugrofinic Kunda aso.
Click to expand...

I think only coastal south Finland, but it is very unclear as you can see from what they say :

The archaeological legacy of the Nordic Bronze Age culture is rich, but the ethnic and linguistic affinities of it are unknown, in the absence of written sources. Some scholars also includes sites in what is now northern Germany, Pomeraniaand Estonia in the Baltic region, as part of its cultural sphere.

this means, they don't know exactly

Kunda is descendant from Polish Swiderian 10.000 BC, which IMO is haplofroup I.
After Kunda there was Karelian hunter HG 5000 BC R1a1 and 4000 BC Serteya R1a1
Earliest HG N1c known in Europe is 2500 BC Serteya

ZhizhitskayaRussiaSerteya (Smolenskaya oblast) II [A6]M2500 BCN1c

?Chekunova 2014
 
Great discussion topic. I'm pretty sure Finno-Urgicsy autosomall are basically the same as their IE neighbors but with Siberian ancestry. Whether that's because they have IE ancestry or because they're a similar mix as IE is unknown. I'll want to look at analysis done on them later. I've heard Uralic-Proto Indo European had contact with each other. I suspect Finno Urgic arrived from Siberia around 3000 BC with N1c1a1a.
 
http://finnugor.elte.hu/?q=fgriea

There are three disciplines – linguistics, archaeology and physical anthropology – which play a decisive role in the elaboration of new approaches to the problem of contact between Finno-Ugrian and Indo-European. However, what must be borne in mind is that the findings of one particular discipline cannot be regarded as being universally valid and that the results of the other two disciplines can be used to a limited extent only for confirming its results. To quote an obvious example: the genetic makeup of the Finnish population is not a valid argument for claiming that the Finno-Ugrian linguistic affinity is a fundamentally misleading theory. This does not follow from a dogmatic acceptance of Finno-Ugrian linguistic affinity, but rather from the rationale that a linguistic theory can only be refuted by another linguistic theory. The genetic ancestry of a population group does not necessarily coincide with the origins of its tongue. Caution must also be exercised in the evaluation of archaeological assemblages. Although the continuity of cultures can be often demonstrated using archaeological methods, archaeological continuity does not necessarily imply the linguistic continuity of the population of the archaeological culture. These are problems which constantly bedevil the scholars of Hungarian prehistory. When the ancient Hungarians occupied their new Carpathian homeland, their material culture was basically identical with that of other steppean peoples, while their language originated from an entirely different environment. Their anthropological makeup reflected this dual origin already at the time of the Conquest. The investigation of the anthropological finds from the first centuries following the foundation of the Hungarian state reflect a considerable mingling between the ancient Hungarians of the Conquest period and 9th century population of the Carpathian Basin. The debate over the exact date of the Hungarian Conquest – fuelled in part by national pride – and the „dual Conquest” theory which has by now become acceptable also in scholarly circles has gradually been channelled onto a more scholarly plane. (Although it must in all fairness be added that the dilettante approach continues to thrive and captivate the imagination of the layman.) We can now witness an increased interest in prehistory also in Finland.

The genetic ancestry of a population group does not necessarily coincide with the origins of its tongue.
 
http://www.sgr.fi/susa/93/rahkonen.pdf

　Review of the Origin and Area of Settlement of the Finno-Ugrian Peoples by Richard Indreko, Heidelberg, 1948
https://www.questia.com/library/jou...w-of-the-origin-and-area-of-settlement-of-the
Indreko's most relevant thesis from the perspective of the Uralic theory is that there appears to be no evidence of migrations from the area of the Ural Mountains, the traditional Uralic homeland, towards the West. On the contrary, it appears to Indreko that populations moved in the opposite direction, basically northwards, in concomitance with the receding ice-sheets. In particular, the first post-Ice Age inhabitants in the area extending from the Baltic Sea up to the Urals were "Finno
Ugrian" populations of the Europoid type, who moved there from southern and western Europé.




 
arvistro said:
Good question. For a long time scientist mainstream was Comb Ceramic pottery, but now this pretty much sums up the latest thoughts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit–Comb_Ware_culture#Language
Click to expand...

Thanks Arvistro!

I copy that here, because it could be gone soon, who knows...

Previously, the dominant view was that the spread of the Comb Ware people was correlated with the diffusion of the Uralic languages, and thus an early Uralic language must have been spoken throughout this culture. However, another more recent view is that the Comb Ware people may have spoken a Paleo-European (pre-Uralic) language, as some toponyms and hydronyms also indicate a non-Uralic, non-Indo-European language at work in some areas.[4] Even then, linguists and archaeologists both have also been skeptical of assigning languages based on the borders of cultural complexes, and it's possible that the Pit-Comb Ware Culture was made up of several languages, one of them being Proto-Uralic.
 
Bicicleur, there is really no way that we can say a Germanic language was spoken in Finland during the Corded Ware period 3200-2300 BC. I agree that they probably spoke a language related to IE languages but that particular extinct language is surely closest to Finnic languages than to any other language in the world, and as Finns are genetically very close to Corded Ware, it is obvious that there is a population continuum to modern Finns. It is highly possible that yDNA N1c-VL29 (c. half of Finnish N1c) is from that period!
The idea that Finns are Iron Age hunters is surely completely false and without any genetic proofs.

Till date, the only ‘hunter‘ N1c is from Zhizhitskaya culture (2500 BC) near Smolensk which is very far from Siberia. As Finns have a very interesting myth about a blacksmith who made wonders, it is possible that the arrival of the Finnish language is related to metal working.

It is a pity that researchers only focus on yDNA that is strategic for the development of IE languages.
 
IMO there are 3 founding fathers for the Germanic tribes :
R1a-Z284 and I1-M253 who arrived with corded ware and started to expand into Scandinavia 4.7 ka
R1b-U106 with subclades who arrived as western Bell Beakers in Jutland 4.35 ka, probably displaced by R1b-P312 eastern Bell Bekaers
all that was even before Nordic Bronze
there is anciant DNA which proves both R1a-Z284 and R1b-U106 :
Nordic Middle NeolithicDenmarkKyndelose [RISE61]F2650-2300 BC including reduction for high marine signalR1a1a1Page7+; Tagankin adds: R1a1a1b1a3b1 (CTS8401) + Z281 R1a-Z282>Z284>Z287>CTS8401J1c4Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015; additional info from Vladimir Tagankin

Battle Axe/ Nordic LNSwedenLilla Beddinge 56 [RISE98]M2275-2032 BCR1b1a2a1a1M405/S21/U106K1b1a1Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015

since then the genetics of the proto-Germanics has little changed, probably neither changed their language a lot due to external contacts
due to warm climate since 4.7 ka they had catlle as far north as southern Finland
German tribes came into history only some 2.3 ka when they were moving south due to climate change since 2.6 ka
it is the same climate change that made Finns and Saami become reindeer hunters and move into Finland and northern Scandinavia, probably from Russia, as Uralic languages were supposed to have existed north of Sintashta (which is derived from corded ware) since at least 4.1 ka
those Uralics north of Sintashta probably got cattle and learned about metallurgy and were involved in the Seima-Turbino phenomenen
but climate change didn't allow cattle herding in Finland and Lapland after 2.6 ka
 
Let's agree to disagree. I am western Finn and I have taken a test that shows that I am close to Corded Ware and I clearly have Neolithic blood and my Siberian percentage is in 5% range. There is no way that I am a newcomer from Siberia. I am by no means very close to Volga Ural populations but instead I am close to people living in the nearby areas, and an Eastern Finnish male with no known foreign blood whose family is on both sides from Eastern Finland, and even from Northeastern Finland, who did the test was even more Corded Ware and very Sintashta, so this Eastern Finnish wave did not take us further away from IEs.
 
Last edited:
Bicicleur, according to Wikipedia (https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rautakausi), during the Iron Age (from 500 BC ), in Finland, people lived in individual houses or in groups of a few houses. The economy was based on agriculture, hunting and fishing and small scale trade. The cultivated species were barley, spelt, rye, oats and turnip. The plough was a rudimentary hook plough. Domesticated animals were cattle, sheep and pigs. Houses were from 10 to 20 meters long and erected on poles, and the walls were made of intertwined branches or of peat. The amount of Iron Age finds is smaller than that of Corded Ware finds but is enough to show that the Finnish territory was contunuosly populated.

Moreover, the Finnish traditional cow race (itäsuomenkarja) belongs to the rare species of Central Asian steppe cattle that is also found in Volga Ural and even in Yakutia, so the Finnish cow has the same origin as the language.

Reindeer herding is a Saami-specific thing, and it was not practised by Finns who used to live in the warmer areas of the country.

There is not any indication of a new archaeological culture or people arriving to Finland during the Iron Age, and the admixture statistics show that Finns have not mixed extensively during the last 2000 years. However, by the Iron Age, Corded Ware derived groups probably mixed or started to mix extensively with the inland groups to form the modern Finns.
 
Kristiina said:
Let's agree to disagree. I am western Finn and I have taken a test that shows that I am close to Corded Ware and I clearly have Neolithic blood and my Siberian percentage is in 5% range. There is no way that I am a newcomer from Siberia. I am by no means very close to Volga Ural populations but instead I am close to people living in the nearby areas, and an Eastern Finnish male with no known foreign blood whose family is on both sides from Eastern Finland, and even from Northeastern Finland, who did the test was even more Corded Ware and very Sintashta, so this Eastern Finnish wave did not take us further away from IEs.
Click to expand...
I think Hungarian dna showed some continuity with pre-Magyar folk, but not really with Magyars who actually brought the language.
So, one might argue based on dna that there is continuity and they spoke Hungarian since early iron age and are not new comers by same logic.
 
Maybe the Finnish language was introduced by a handful of high prestige iron workers or chieftains whose yDNA (specific N1c haplotypes) spread wildly in a sparsly populated country. However, this is all pure speculation as long as we do not have any ancient yDNA or autosomal studies from the relevant periods and cultures. In any case, it is clear that there was not any cultural or genetic turnover during the Iron Age.
 
I am a fan now of Napolskich's work and ideas re Uralic people ethnogenesys. I found him very convincing. But unfortunately I only know of his works in Russian..
Basically he links the beginnings of Baltic Finns to Textile Ceramics culture.
 
If we combine archaeology and ancient DNA analyses by comparing ancient DNA to that of modern inhabitants we get quite reliable results, but if we only connect a certain archaeological culture and language without any ancient DNA, it is very speculative at best.

In any case, textile ceramic is very ancient in North Eurasia, it is found even in America, and it started to spread already during the Mesolithic period. However, there are two later types that are relevant here: Imitated Ceramic is concentrated in northern Scandinavia, northern Finland and Kuola Peninsula (http://www.helsinki.fi/hum/arla/keram/it.html) and Sarsa Tomitsa ceramic is found in the rest of the country (http://www.helsinki.fi/hum/arla/keram/st.html). They are dated to 1500–500 BC. Sarsa Tomitsa ceramic has also been found in agricultural settlements. I do not know if anybody has claimed that Sarsa Ceramic corresponds to the arrival of new people. They look like local developments.

In his very detailed comparative analyses, Jaakko Häkkinen has found that certain metallurgical terms and a handful of agricultural terms can be reconstructed to proto-Uralic, so I do not find it at all convincing that Uralic languages are a kind of a Mesolithic relic and even more so when the yDNA that is typical to Uralic people has not been found in hunter gatherer contexts e.g. in Mesolithic Karelia or in Bronze Age Altai.
 
Last edited:
Kristiina said:
Bicicleur, according to Wikipedia (https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rautakausi), during the Iron Age (from 500 BC ), in Finland, people lived in individual houses or in groups of a few houses. The economy was based on agriculture, hunting and fishing and small scale trade. The cultivated species were barley, spelt, rye, oats and turnip. The plough was a rudimentary hook plough. Domesticated animals were cattle, sheep and pigs. Houses were from 10 to 20 meters long and erected on poles, and the walls were made of intertwined branches or of peat. The amount of Iron Age finds is smaller than that of Corded Ware finds but is enough to show that the Finnish territory was contunuosly populated.

Moreover, the Finnish traditional cow race (itäsuomenkarja) belongs to the rare species of Central Asian steppe cattle that is also found in Volga Ural and even in Yakutia, so the Finnish cow has the same origin as the language.

Reindeer herding is a Saami-specific thing, and it was not practised by Finns who used to live in the warmer areas of the country.

There is not any indication of a new archaeological culture or people arriving to Finland during the Iron Age, and the admixture statistics show that Finns have not mixed extensively during the last 2000 years. However, by the Iron Age, Corded Ware derived groups probably mixed or started to mix extensively with the inland groups to form the modern Finns.
Click to expand...

so you think the Finns were earlier, but Saami arrived later?

iron age started with Jastorf culure and spread to north-European plain and Scandinavia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jastorf_culture
is this the source of Finnish iron age as well?

iron was much more abundant than bronze, during iron age many more tools were made, like an iron tip under the ploughs, it made agriculture much more productive and caused population to rise

the Yakut cow race is a special race, able to survive in cold climates, there is some logic that Finnish cows are the same

if the Finns are present so long, why did they not mix and spread into the same areas as I1-L22 ?
 
Arvistro, you should read this article: http://www.sarks.fi/fa/PDF/FA13_51.pdf

On page 2, there is a map that shows the extension of Net Ware (textile ceramic). It also covers northern Scandinavia and Central Sweden. The origin is in Novgorod and Tver oblasts, i.e. at the entrance of the landbridge to Fennoscandia. The artefacts show the following styles: Type A pottery → Fatyanovo; Type B → Pozdnyakovo culture and indirectly Srubnaya; Type C plain pottery without any particular style.

Here is the conclusion of the paper: ”Archaeological research over the past few decades has shown that the Net Ware culture in the territories to the north of the Volga was completely overlapped by and mixed with the Urallc Ananyino culture during the Early Iron Age. (…) A comparative analysis of the strata of ancient place names in Karelia suggests the conclusion that the earliest 'Volgic' layer of local names for bodies of water most probably corresponds to the Net Ware culture, while the Lapp (Sami) hydronyms correspond to the Ananyino stratum of the Iron Age and the Baltic-Finnish place names to the early medieval culture of the 10th and 11th centuries in southeastern Karelia (Kosmenko 1993).”

This could be interpreted that it was the Saami language that spread to Finland with an Iron Age package while the Finnish language developed on the coastal areas and had tight connections with Estonia and the southern rim of the Baltic Sea.
 
Arvistro, you should read this article: http://www.sarks.fi/fa/PDF/FA13_51.pdf

On page 2, there is a map that shows the extension of Net Ware (textile ceramic). It also covers northern Scandinavia and Central Sweden. The origin is in Novgorod and Tver oblasts, i.e. at the entrance of the landbridge to Fennoscandia. The artefacts show the following styles: Type A pottery → Fatyanovo; Type B → Pozdnyakovo culture and indirectly Srubnaya; Type C plain pottery without any particular style.

Here is the conclusion of the paper: ”Archaeological research over the past few decades has shown that the Net Ware culture in the territories to the north of the Volga was completely overlapped by and mixed with the Urallc Ananyino culture during the Early Iron Age. (…) A comparative analysis of the strata of ancient place names in Karelia suggests the conclusion that the earliest 'Volgic' layer of local names for bodies of water most probably corresponds to the Net Ware culture, while the Lapp (Sami) hydronyms correspond to the Ananyino stratum of the Iron Age and the Baltic-Finnish place names to the early medieval culture of the 10th and 11th centuries in southeastern Karelia (Kosmenko 1993).”

This could be interpreted that it was the Saami language that spread to Finland with an Iron Age package while the Finnish language developed on the coastal areas and had tight connections with Estonia and the southern rim of the Baltic Sea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 56569 times.

Back
Top