More on the Tollensee Valley battle site inc. genetics

Has Y DNA been posted or said to be available later?

That's right about the time of rapid I1 DF29 expansion within the Germanic tribes so we could get some interesting info.
 
Definetively there were recent migrants, in page 59 fig 4.29 a K2 Admixture displays Bell Beakers, Unetice and Corded Ware with less EEF share than the warriors of Tollense, even three warriors are 100% EEF (LBK) and I can't believe about surviving pure EEF pockets in North Europe. We know something about their weaponry?
 
hum, maybe the no-IE vocabulary in Germanic is not from its substrate but from an unknown adstrate? (just like French in English)
 
I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion from the paper that the parties were "relatively local and more closely related." The Isotopic analysis pretty much confirms they had separate diets and areas of origin. I'm not sure of the genetic distance between people from the Rhineland and Hessen but I'm guessing it's not much.

"Four outliers were identified and the sum of the results points in the same direction: Three of the four outliers WEZ16, WEZ54 and WEZ57 show closer affinities to neolithic populations than the grouped Welzin individuals and WEZ56 shows closer affinities to hunter-gatherers. Any interpretation regarding possible parties that might have been involved in the conflict in the Tollense valley∼3200 ago can only be speculative with regards to the here shown data. With the resolution given here, an educated guess for different involved parties could be, that both parties were relatively local and more closely related than any ancient DNA study was able to separate so far. Maybe similar to people from Hessen versus people from Rhineland-Palatinate in modern German."


berun said:
Definetively there were recent migrants, in page 59 fig 4.29 a K2 Admixture displays Bell Beakers, Unetice and Corded Ware with less EEF share than the warriors of Tollense, even three warriors are 100% EEF (LBK) and I can't believe about surviving pure EEF pockets in North Europe. We know something about their weaponry?
Click to expand...

Yeah we do, but they say it gives them no clue as to the origins or cultures of the people involved:
"The artifacts that have been found, include weapons such as wooden clubs, bronze spear and axe heads as well as bronze and flint arrow heads, but also bronze arm and finger rings. So far those findings allow no correlation between skeletal remains and separate cultures or the identification of different parties involved in the conflict."

Also I highly doubt the two southern Europeans from the battle were Neolithic leftovers, that seems really improbable.
 
Let's see if there is autosomal or Y-DNA groupings by weapon and injury, it seems that some skulls were beaten by clubs, some clubs were found on the site, and others received mortal arrowhead impacts... others uses spears, others axes, there were chevaliers... if the battle was arrows vs clubs I can understand a massacre of 4000 men.
 
LeBrok said:
Could you please put more samples into gedmatch? Thanks.
Click to expand...
When I'll finish second PCA with added other ancient samples (like RISE569, Sunghir6). I want to be first to do that:)
 
mlukas said:
When I'll finish second PCA with added other ancient samples (like RISE569, Sunghir6). I want to be first to do that:)
Click to expand...
I'm cool with this, and glad you will post kit numbers. :)
 
Yeah, Y DNA isn't available everyone.
 
Promenade said:
Early Slavs were much more primitive than the Bronze age cultures that preceded them
Click to expand...

No. Early Slavs were an Iron Age society, not Bronze Age. They had iron-made weapons.
Promenade said:
Slavic speakers from modern Greece could communicate with Slavic speakers of Poland and the Czech Republic as recently as the ninth century AD which points to a recent diversification.
Click to expand...

The migration of South Slavs into the Balkans is documented in historical sources.

I'm not claiming that there were any Slavs in the Balkans already in 1250 BC.

But Poland is a possible homeland of Proto-Slavs during the Late Bronze Age, even if later they all emigrated to the east (remember that the Zarubintsy culture was created by "Polish" immigrants from the west - from Lusatian-Pomeranian cultures).

The "recent diversification" thingy is only related to vast geographical expansion.

As long as a population occupies a relatively small area, or a large area but connected by strong ties, its language will not diversify. For example Latin only diversified after the collapse of the Roman Empire, despite existing altready in 750 BC.

 
Tomenable said:


No. Early Slavs were an Iron Age society, not Bronze Age. They had iron-made weapons.



The migration of South Slavs into the Balkans is documented in historical sources.

I'm not claiming that there were any Slavs in the Balkans already in 1250 BC.

But Poland is a possible homeland of Proto-Slavs during the Late Bronze Age, even if later they all emigrated to the east (remember that the Zarubintsy culture was created by "Polish" immigrants from the west - from Lusatian-Pomeranian cultures).

The "recent diversification" thingy is only related to vast geographical expansion.

As long as a population occupies a relatively small area, or a large area but connected by strong ties, its language will not diversify. For example Latin only diversified after the collapse of the Roman Empire, despite existing altready in 750 BC.
Click to expand...

ok, but it is not usefull to label the northern group as Slavic, the date is to old for that
the northern group has more CW than the southern group, who is more BB
and early Slavs probably also had quite some CW
but that is where similarities stop
if Slavs have some Polish origin, it is more probable southern Poland than northern
I think northern Ukraine is a more likely origin
 
Bicicleur,

I don't know why do you think that it was a battle between a "southern" and a "northern" groups?

I rather see it as a battle between a "western" and an "eastern" group. Of course genetically, North-Western Europeans are "more southern" than North-Eastern Europeans, due to having more of Neolithic admixture.

So Nordic Bronze Age would be genetically more "southern" than Lusatian culture. Just like modern Germans are genetically more "southern" than modern Poles, as explained long ago by Davidski on hi blog:

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2014/01/poles-more-indigenous-to-europe-than.html

But geographically, of course Poles are more eastern, not more southern.

Genetic "southernness" vs. "northernness" is only about the amount of ENF vs. HG.

Here is a good map showing the amount of Northern Euro admixtures in K36:

Bez-nazwy-2.jpg


This includes the following admixtures:

North_Atlantic
French
North_Sea
Central_Euro
East_Central_Euro
Fennoscandian
Eastern_Euro
Volga-Ural
 
First version of PCA with WEZ and Ancients. This time Wielbark and early Slavs added. RISE569 position is clearly in WEZ-Germanic and Wielbark cluster so I didn't group them it in early Slav cluster...

The olive cluster is modern North Slav.

After adding those samples WEZ53 was shifted from Austria proximity to Balkan cluster...

pca3.png
 
Tomenable said:
Bicicleur,

I don't know why do you think that it was a battle between a "southern" and a "northern" groups?

I rather see it as a battle between a "western" and an "eastern" group. Of course genetically, North-Western Europeans are "more southern" than North-Eastern Europeans, due to having more of Neolithic admixture.

So Nordic Bronze Age would be genetically more "southern" than Lusatian culture. Just like modern Germans are genetically more "southern" than modern Poles, as explained long ago by Davidski on hi blog:

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2014/01/poles-more-indigenous-to-europe-than.html

But geographically, of course Poles are more eastern, not more southern.

Genetic "southernness" vs. "northernness" is only about the amount of ENF vs. HG.

Here is a good map showing the amount of Northern Euro admixtures in K36:

Bez-nazwy-2.jpg


This includes the following admixtures:

North_Atlantic
French
North_Sea
Central_Euro
East_Central_Euro
Fennoscandian
Eastern_Euro
Volga-Ural
Click to expand...

If I recall well, it was the isotope study that distinguished a local northern group and a southern group from Bohemia/Southern Germany/The Carpathian Basin.
Furthermore south-north makes much more sense than east-west because the battle was on a road connecting the Baltics with the south.
Comparing anciant DNA with modern populations cannot be done straightforward.
 
Polako PCA with added WEZ numbers and cluster names.

pca-polako1.png


Polako PCA without Finn outliers (Karelians, Verpsians, Komis, I didn't have them on my PCa also because they are far away from WEZ).

PCA-polako-nofinns.png
 
The case for a Celtic raid seems quite plausible:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatian_culture

German and Polish camarades will know more, but if the Lusatian culture is an offshot of Urnfield it's evident that the dates are the same... well, I know Galitzians in Poland would keep a Celtic past, but all Poland and Belarus is a huge expansion.
 
Ward's tree with values from second PCA (without Vepsians, Karelians, Komis).

ward-tree.png
 
WEZ kits on Gedmatch, K36 values

wez.jpg
 
berun said:
The case for a Celtic raid seems quite plausible:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatian_culture

German and Polish camarades will know more, but if the Lusatian culture is an offshot of Urnfield it's evident that the dates are the same... well, I know Galitzians in Poland would keep a Celtic past, but all Poland and Belarus is a huge expansion.
Click to expand...
I was thinking about this too. Perhaps we are witnessing ethnogenesis of Germanics, when "nordics" mixed with celts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 59554 times.

Back
Top