E-Z5018 and Vatin culture

Yes. But this has nothing to do with Eurogenes. You can run any calculator you want on it, the DNA speaks for itself.
Did you read the paper by any chance?
7eX1nVj.png

As to what you said " Log02 is in thessally Greece ...............there is no "llyrian" with this marker"
1.Log02 is not a marker. Its what they named a sample.
2.Aegean MBA is not a marker. Its what they named a group of samples.
3.There was clear pure male line steppe introgression in the MBA into these Aegean populations. And here is why Log02 was different, an outlier from all the other samples, even the other outlier Log04.
2T9Mrcr.png

And yes, as you quoted yourself:
Distance to: Helladic_MBA:Log02
0.02346465 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5524
0.02348404 HRV_EBA:I3499
0.02366432 HRV_MBA:I4331
0.02473075 HUN_BA:I7040
0.02564430 HUN_BA:I7043
0.02668820 BGR_EBA:I2165
0.02867054 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5017
0.03055520 Bell_Beaker_CZE:I4885
0.03058513 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:E09538
0.03082012 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I3594
0.03132954 Bell_Beaker_HUN_EBA:I2364
0.03241867 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5520
0.03403351 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5529
0.03472535 BGR_EBA:I2176
0.03477039 HRV_MBA:I4332
0.03511965 TUR_Barcin_C:I1584
0.03545194 Bell_Beaker_CHE:I5759
0.03549620 Bell_Beaker_HUN:I7044
0.03570224 Bell_Beaker_HUN_EBA:I3529
0.03583462 Bell_Beaker_HUN_EBA:I5015
0.03592325 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I3590
0.03683640 Bell_Beaker_ITA:I2478
0.03756647 Bell_Beaker_CZE:I7275
0.03779669 HUN_Protoboleraz_LCA:I2788
0.03787862 BGR_Krepost_N:I0679_d

So yeah, given a patrilineal genetic introgression introgression from a northern vis a vis heterogeneous population to create Log02, one can indeed say that this could be an Illyrian marker.

And before people get butthurt for me using Illyrian marker, check yourself. Its fine to use Aegean MBA for Thessaly, but not fine to use Illyrian for populations stretching from HRV MBA to BG MBA? Double standards.

The age of the sample cannot indicate a "illyrian"......Illyrian in that time where found to be only in the northern Balkans ( is Pannonia north Balkans ?) and central Euope

North caucasus is not Iran ...........so I do not know what you are referring to ................Pontic and Caspian means black sea and caspian sea and everything in-between and states no steppe in the Mtdna of that sample, and then says it was a male dominated migration from the steppe/north caucasus

I did not mention Etruscans, it was the Eurogenes site ...........a site I do not follow ...............I thought you followed Eurogenes
 
Log02 Helladic-Logkas-MBA

K36

Distance to: x
1.59500972 IT_Ladinia ................south-Tyrol alps
1.67668337 FR_Provence
1.68069543 IT_Umbria
1.71909086 IT_Abruzzo
1.72958390 IT_Liguria
1.74136757 Portugal_South
1.75062196 IT_Piedmont
1.76722862 PT_Madeira
1.78631961 IT_Basilicata
1.78702379 IT_Lazio


K13
Components %
North_Atlantic 33,47
Baltic 2,92
West_Med 19,87
West_Asian 10,70
East_Med 26,03
Red_Sea 3,43
South_Asian 0,00
East_Asian 0,00
Siberian 0,00
Amerindian 0,70
Oceanian 1,86
Northeast_African 0,00
Sub-Saharan 1,03

Code:
Log02,33.47,2.92,19.87,10.7,26.03,3.43,0,0,0,0.7,1.86,0,1.03
 
k15

Log02,16.47,23.42,2.11,0,18.51,9.62,22.87,3.59,0,0,0,0.43,1.83,0,1.16

Distance to: Log02
7.40096615 Tuscan
7.69314630 France_Corsica
7.82740059 Italy_Tuscany
8.34017386 Italy_Marche
8.49748786 Italy_Emiliaromagna
8.60634650 Italy_Liguria
8.74878849 Italy_Lazio
10.41768208 Italy_Lombardy
10.60580973 West_Sicilian
12.03777803 Sicily_Syracuse
12.61178021 French_Provence
12.88009705 Sicily_Trapani
13.21559685 Italy_Veneto
13.55064574 Albanian-South
13.59731223 Italy_Abruzzo
13.90364341 Italy_Friuli
13.96006805 Italy_Piedmont
14.04677899 Sicily_Enna
14.14832499 Sicily_Caltanisetta
14.25975806 Italy_Apulia
14.28785498 Sicily_Ragusa
14.49337435 Albanian-North
14.68797127 Albanian-Kosovo
14.74337478 Sicily_Palermo
14.81100604 Italy_Central_Sicily
 
k12


Log02 Helladic-Logkas-MBA

Dodecad K12b
Code:
Log02,3.52,1.05,0,0,34.06,18.89,0,0.3,7.61,0,32.2,2.37
Distance to: x
6.05795873 Italian_Marche
6.88430824 Italian_Lazio
6.97276129 Italian_Romagna
7.91032869 Albanian
8.72847066 Greek_Athens
8.77753952 Italian_Abruzzo
8.86705701 Italian_Tuscany
8.89189519 Greek_Central
9.60879888 France_Corsica
9.71506047 Greek_Thrace
9.95195961 Greek_Thessaly
10.05953776 Greek_Peloponnese
10.29697528 Italian_Emilia
10.32281938 Italian_Campania
10.39122226 Greek_Thessaloniki
10.40767505 Italian_Apulia
10.53001425 Albanian_Kosovo
10.81624704 Greek_Foca
11.15741906 Italian_Liguria
11.67940067 Italian_Sicily
11.94210618 Greek_Lemnos
12.50726589 Bulgarian_Thrace
13.10651365 Italian_Lombardy
13.25768456 Ashkenazi_Jews
13.42894635 Italian_Veneto
 
That's the whole point torzio.

If you find an Neolithic Iranian individual in Neolithic Anatolia, he is still an Iran_N individual and not Anatolia_N individual. Or whatever example you took? Caspian or something...

The calculators you used pretty much prove my point, northern shift is obvious. Even though they agree with my point, I would be cautious using modern component calculators in this case. Since as the excerpts from the paper pointed, this was a mixed individual, with a mixing that only appeared in MBA.

Lastly, what difference does it make if its a he or a she? Besides the point we can't know the YDNA in the latter. The admixture still stands. And the fact that the Y is a mystery makes things even more interesting. Future samples will be needed, to make anything out of this.

If I was you I would not fall on the hill your falling.
 
If Riverman is right on his assumption, and he links the E-V13 with the blacksmiths and metal-workers of Carpathian Mountains then it's really hard to pinpoint to which ancient population it originated from.

I made a quick read on a paper that reads this profession was high on demand during that time, they could have been invited everywhere by local elites to work for them. But if Daco-Thracians were primary carriers then so be it. I would have bet my money that R1a was the main Y-DNA among Daco-Thracians based on their clothes similarity with Scythians and other Iranic people especially the trademark Phrygian cap, description on their appearance and customs. But aDNA doesn't cease to amaze us.

The only way to find out exactly is of course aDNA. And not only lonely wolfs but people on groups which indicate clearly their affiliations.

That's actually no contradiction, because just like in later times, some people were known to excel in specific professions. One late example being Italian architects or better master builder. Or some Bohemian glass workers etc. Everybody knew who they were and what they were specialised in. When iron processing became vitally important for every prince, tribe and clan, obviously, they knew where to look for. The sphere of the Channelled Ware was also known for good swords before and high end polished Ceramic with a metallic glance, which in some instances was in high demand on the elite also and was of high ideological, possibly even religious importance in large portions of Europe, in the Channelled Ware sphere, but also beyond, among related Urnfield groups in particular.

That means to me people most likely related to Daco-Thracian, if not even larger with some kind of a Thraco-Illyrian network, were in charge, as they did form the Hallstatt sphere too, and dominated in the East for long. If a Celtic tribe or Western Hallstatt Celtic prince wanted to get access to better weapons and prestige tools, obviously, he would call in individuals or even whole clans from the Eastern sphere, from the areas dominated by the Channelled Ware people and Thraco-Cimmerians, so especially Daco-Thracian and later also Illyrian specialists. And I guess, especially after getting under pressure from the North, that a lof them were actually on the move and might have offered their expertise at least in the whole Hallstatt sphere.

From Eastern Hallstatt to Western Hallstatt, from there for sure to Celts, even up to Britain, probably even individuals trickling into Germanic territory, but that's less certain and could have happened later with Celtic contacts during the first and second Latenisation of Germanics.

I would imagine some colonies of Eastern Hallstatt people, especially in the princely residences, of the West. Merchants, blacksmiths, potters, mercenaries etc. First they brought their own culture, later they brought Greek customs and imitations. And among those, for sure some E-V13 carriers, some originally Dacian, Thracian, Illyrian, Greek. But they became Celtic before the La Tene period.

I am E-V13 and my line moves North and ends in GB. I am listed on YFULL as E-S2979* I am an American and am Predominantly Scandinavian and Celtic Autosomal. I think there are branches like mine that do not fit the overwhelming Balkan Lines. I am not even remotely an expert in this area and am simply trying to figure out my path like everyone else. Any help or advice is appreciated

You are very upstream and undefined at the moment, yet your situation is not that dissimilar to many downstream ones, because even if falling into the Iron Age, that's still quite some time left for migrations between different geographical and ethnolinguistic groups. I'd say you have to patient and hope for more testers, like so many others, which will bring you into a distinct lineage. Before that, the possible explanations are innumerable, though if I would have to, I would bet on a very Late Bronze Age to very Early Iron Age spread with Urnfield related groups as the most likely scenario. But only by a bit in comparison to the many other ones.
 
I don't know the population affiliation of Log02, it was during MBA, it could very likely be Proto-Greek, or Proto-Illyrian-like (not neccessarily Proto-Illyrian), or Proto-Thracian-like as well. Who knows.

Anyway, it's close to me from ancient samples, i guess the same case applies to other Albanians as well.

Distance to:Hawk_scaled
0.03299762HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ43
0.03438320IND_Roopkund_B:I6936
0.03482785HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ36
0.03608238GRC_Helladic_MBA:Log02
0.03749184DEU_MA_Alemanic_Byzantine:NIEcap3b
0.03756047HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ37
0.03832633ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR55
0.03939553IND_Roopkund_B:I3404
0.03943402Scythian_MDA:scy192
0.03964654ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR33
0.04018759ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR36
0.04031992Scythian_MDA:scy197
0.04085139DEU_MA_ACD:NW_54
0.04117742ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b
0.04135765ITA_Tivoli_Renaissance:RMPR970
0.04139234Migration_POH:pOH27
0.04174284HRV_MBA:I4331
0.04180661SRB_Mokrin_EBA:MOK17A
0.04206426HUN_BA:I7043
0.04220230DEU_MA_Alemanic_Byzantine:NIEcap3c
0.04226506VK2020_ITA_Foggia_MA:VK538
0.04232969HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ28
0.04239937ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR1287
0.04250456GRC_Helladic_MBA:Log04
0.04252108ITA_Proto-Villanovan:RMPR1
 
I don't know the population affiliation of Log02, it was during MBA, it could very likely be Proto-Greek, or Proto-Illyrian-like (not neccessarily Proto-Illyrian), or Proto-Thracian-like as well. Who knows.

Anyway, it's close to me from ancient samples, i guess the same case applies to other Albanians as well.

Distance to:Hawk_scaled
0.03299762HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ43
0.03438320IND_Roopkund_B:I6936
0.03482785HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ36
0.03608238GRC_Helladic_MBA:Log02
0.03749184DEU_MA_Alemanic_Byzantine:NIEcap3b
0.03756047HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ37
0.03832633ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR55
0.03939553IND_Roopkund_B:I3404
0.03943402Scythian_MDA:scy192
0.03964654ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR33
0.04018759ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR36
0.04031992Scythian_MDA:scy197
0.04085139DEU_MA_ACD:NW_54
0.04117742ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b
0.04135765ITA_Tivoli_Renaissance:RMPR970
0.04139234Migration_POH:pOH27
0.04174284HRV_MBA:I4331
0.04180661SRB_Mokrin_EBA:MOK17A
0.04206426HUN_BA:I7043
0.04220230DEU_MA_Alemanic_Byzantine:NIEcap3c
0.04226506VK2020_ITA_Foggia_MA:VK538
0.04232969HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ28
0.04239937ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR1287
0.04250456GRC_Helladic_MBA:Log04
0.04252108ITA_Proto-Villanovan:RMPR1

Similarities always depend on the main vectors for the comparison. Like I often get Celtic as being my closest ancient, yet that's not the case for me in reality, because I'm rather Germanic-Slavic-Balkan, in that order of appearance. But on the North : South gradient I end up where many Celts were if there is no more differentiation. Yet my actual Celtic is much below average for a Central European, even my Slavic part is bigger.
I guess the same is true for Albanians, which can be much better explained by more recent admixture events. The Balkan shifted Szolad and DEU-ACD samples however might already be recent enough and actually related.
 
Yes. But this has nothing to do with Eurogenes. You can run any calculator you want on it, the DNA speaks for itself.
Did you read the paper by any chance?
7eX1nVj.png

As to what you said " Log02 is in thessally Greece ...............there is no "llyrian" with this marker"
1.Log02 is not a marker. Its what they named a sample.
2.Aegean MBA is not a marker. Its what they named a group of samples.
3.There was clear pure male line steppe introgression in the MBA into these Aegean populations. And here is why Log02 was different, an outlier from all the other samples, even the other outlier Log04.
2T9Mrcr.png

And yes, as you quoted yourself:
Distance to: Helladic_MBA:Log02
0.02346465 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5524
0.02348404 HRV_EBA:I3499
0.02366432 HRV_MBA:I4331
0.02473075 HUN_BA:I7040
0.02564430 HUN_BA:I7043
0.02668820 BGR_EBA:I2165
0.02867054 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5017
0.03055520 Bell_Beaker_CZE:I4885
0.03058513 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:E09538
0.03082012 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I3594
0.03132954 Bell_Beaker_HUN_EBA:I2364
0.03241867 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5520
0.03403351 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5529
0.03472535 BGR_EBA:I2176
0.03477039 HRV_MBA:I4332
0.03511965 TUR_Barcin_C:I1584
0.03545194 Bell_Beaker_CHE:I5759
0.03549620 Bell_Beaker_HUN:I7044
0.03570224 Bell_Beaker_HUN_EBA:I3529
0.03583462 Bell_Beaker_HUN_EBA:I5015
0.03592325 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I3590
0.03683640 Bell_Beaker_ITA:I2478
0.03756647 Bell_Beaker_CZE:I7275
0.03779669 HUN_Protoboleraz_LCA:I2788
0.03787862 BGR_Krepost_N:I0679_d

So yeah, given a patrilineal genetic introgression introgression from a northern vis a vis heterogeneous population to create Log02, one can indeed say that this could be an Illyrian marker.

And before people get butthurt for me using Illyrian marker, check yourself. Its fine to use Aegean MBA for Thessaly, but not fine to use Illyrian for populations stretching from HRV MBA to BG MBA? Double standards.


The 2 x Dalmatian samples are always linked to the bavarian bell_Beaker sample

and

R1 ( female ) sample in Marche Italy is always linked with SZ1 sample and other ancient Hungarians

What are you trying to indicate by stating these are Illyrian markers ............they are central european or Northern Balkans or ???
 
Last edited:
I am considering to incline a similar view as Aspurg lately.

The likes of Enchelei whose burial rituals were cremation on a pyre were the earliest "Illyrian" state from Early Iron Age, and as we are taught by archeologists the last thing to change in a culture are burial rites. According to legends Enchelei were being attacked by intruding Illyrians which could have been a remnant memory of Glasinac-Mat expansion in Early Iron Age, they probably went in war with Enchelei/Sesarethi who were related to Dardanii and the ruling dynasty Peresadyes whom Bardyllis belonged to (and during Hellenistic times subjucated previous rulers, Glasinac Illyrian tribes), Taulantii as well and some other South Illyrian tribes.

Enchelei during classical Hellenistic times were already a memory of the past. But during Early Iron Age they were one of the strongest Balkan tribe. But then, this interpretation leaves a lot of question-marks, there always must be a connecting dot which is currently missing in Balkan bronze/iron age history.

From my current point of view, i will consider heavy-rich Paleo-Balkan tribes with E-V13 the likes of: Enchelei, Dardanii, Messapians, Taulantii, Paeonians, Macedonians, Epirotans, Thracians and probably as the root source.
 
I am considering to incline a similar view as Aspurg lately.

The likes of Enchelei whose burial rituals were cremation on a pyre were the earliest "Illyrian" state from Early Iron Age, and as we are taught by archeologists the last thing to change in a culture are burial rites. According to legends Enchelei were being attacked by intruding Illyrians which could have been a remnant memory of Glasinac-Mat expansion in Early Iron Age, they probably went in war with Enchelei/Sesarethi who were related to Dardanii and the ruling dynasty Peresadyes whom Bardyllis belonged to (and during Hellenistic times subjucated previous rulers, Glasinac Illyrian tribes), Taulantii as well and some other South Illyrian tribes.

Enchelei during classical Hellenistic times were already a memory of the past. But during Early Iron Age they were one of the strongest Balkan tribe. But then, this interpretation leaves a lot of question-marks, there always must be a connecting dot which is currently missing in Balkan bronze/iron age history.

From my current point of view, i will consider heavy-rich Paleo-Balkan tribes with E-V13 the likes of: Enchelei, Dardanii, Messapians, Taulantii, Paeonians, Macedonians, Epirotans, Thracians and probably as the root source.

Sorry but a lot of these conclusions from Hammond and co about Peresades etc are flimsy and come from very superficial comparisons.

I'm not even going to go into referring to Aspurg as a reference on these matters. Totally unreliable posturing on matters he knows nothing about.
 
I am considering to incline a similar view as Aspurg lately.

The likes of Enchelei whose burial rituals were cremation on a pyre were the earliest "Illyrian" state from Early Iron Age, and as we are taught by archeologists the last thing to change in a culture are burial rites. According to legends Enchelei were being attacked by intruding Illyrians which could have been a remnant memory of Glasinac-Mat expansion in Early Iron Age, they probably went in war with Enchelei/Sesarethi who were related to Dardanii and the ruling dynasty Peresadyes whom Bardyllis belonged to (and during Hellenistic times subjucated previous rulers, Glasinac Illyrian tribes), Taulantii as well and some other South Illyrian tribes.

Enchelei during classical Hellenistic times were already a memory of the past. But during Early Iron Age they were one of the strongest Balkan tribe. But then, this interpretation leaves a lot of question-marks, there always must be a connecting dot which is currently missing in Balkan bronze/iron age history.

From my current point of view, i will consider heavy-rich Paleo-Balkan tribes with E-V13 the likes of: Enchelei, Dardanii, Messapians, Taulantii, Paeonians, Macedonians, Epirotans, Thracians and probably as the root source.

To be honest I am surprised you fall for his nonsense, but I get the impression that you are corresponding with him in private and who knows what you talk about.
 
To be honest I am surprised you fall for his nonsense, but I get the impression that you are corresponding with him in private and who knows what you talk about.

I am not corresponding with him in private, don't make things out of your mind. It's a reasonable conclusion if we consider the differences in burial rites in Early Iron Age. Make a comparison between legends/myths of Enchelei foundation and actual differences, i wouldn't be surprised about this.

I also have differing opinions from him of course, which is attested in the posts here. For instance there was a Late Bronze Age influence in Glasinac from Koszidor hoards which seems to be totally ignored by him either intentionally or unintentionally.

Sorry but a lot of these conclusions from Hammond and co about Peresades etc are flimsy and come from very superficial comparisons.
I'm not even going to go into referring to Aspurg as a reference on these matters. Totally unreliable posturing on matters he knows nothing about.

What about your mythological character comparisons? Atleast Hammond was talking about historical tribes.

I didn't refer him, i said inclined to similar not identical or making a reference out of him. His sole Daco-Thracian theory was not something i agreed upon, and i was the one who opposed him the most. What's wrong with what i said? Because most of those tribes heavily populated Central Balkans. You have to give your explanation.
 
I am not corresponding with him in private, don't make things out of your mind. It's a reasonable conclusion if we consider the differences in burial rites in Early Iron Age. Make a comparison between legends/myths of Enchelei foundation and actual differences, i wouldn't be surprised about this.

I also have differing opinions from him of course, which is attested in the posts here. For instance there was a Late Bronze Age influence in Glasinac from Koszidor hoards which seems to be totally ignored by him either intentionally or unintentionally.



What about your mythological character comparisons? Atleast Hammond was talking about historical tribes.

I didn't refer him, i said inclined to similar not identical or making a reference out of him. His sole Daco-Thracian theory was not something i agreed upon, and i was the one who opposed him the most. What's wrong with what i said? Because most of those tribes heavily populated Central Balkans. You have to give your explanation.

I always preface mythological historical comparisons with saying something like "very speculative, but a possible connection" etc, to try make it clear that this is all speculative, and not dogmatic or psychopathic like some users on these forums.

Whereas you just wrote Bardylis was from the Peresades as if this is a fact. There is no actual evidence of this, nor is it ever claimed in any ancient source. Maybe it's possible but just claiming it like that is incorrect.
 
I always preface mythological historical comparisons with saying something like "very speculative, but a possible connection" etc, to try make it clear that this is all speculative, and not dogmatic or psychopathic like some users on these forums.
Whereas you just wrote Bardylis was from the Peresades as if this is a fact. There is no actual evidence of this, nor is it ever claimed in any ancient source. Maybe it's possible but just claiming it like that is incorrect.

I doubt Hammond just made it up, he must have had a reliable source for his claim, either indirectly or directly. Either way a connection between Enchelei and Dardanii makes sense on material culture (similar burial customs?!). I wouldn't be surprised hence why i think Hammond might be right on hinting a connection.
 
To be honest I am surprised you fall for his nonsense, but I get the impression that you are corresponding with him in private and who knows what you talk about.

Have you been walking through desert? You need to se a MD for hallucinations you seem to be having. I haven't been logged in here in weeks.

There is hardly someone with so many internet posts and with so many wrong assumptions. You use facts but your extreme bias distorts most of you attempts at explaining Albanian-related matters.

I'm not even trying hard, yet I am aware of some evidence concerning proto-Albanians that neither you nor any internet-Albanian is aware. This is not much but it is at least something pretty reliable going by most of mainstream views on Albanian origin, and something one can work with. This evidence points towards me being correct, as were you in various ways.

I'm going to explore this with other sorts of evidence, and see if we can find some other connection to this.
 

This thread has been viewed 41150 times.

Back
Top