E-Z5018 and Vatin culture

That's something agreed upon, but your theory is likely truth as much as the others who insist on IE Danube links. And i personally believe the truth meets somewhere in the middle between your version and Danube IE. I remember asking you guys to what culture is Kapitan Andreevo related to, i even searched for material in Bulgarian but found none, can you please link us a source, be it in Serbian or Bulgarian that clearly indicates Kapitan Andreevo was part of Psenicevo-Babadag Cultural group?

It is not easy to find material on this, especially Kapitan Andreevo. But ofc it is in Bulgarian and it cannot be found just like that on google. There is plenty of Bulgarian material on Svilengrad complex, which included nearby Kapitan Andreevo. You remember that old E-Z1919 find (per some confirmed as V13+ and surely on hi res he is V13) from Svilengrad proper. So you should take that find also into account. Primary source for classification was knowledge of what Pshenichevo culture is. Burial customs, pottery found were all typical of that culture which at the time dominated the area. I could have but I didn't go into minute details on the finds, as I don't receive much credit for that already and as people do not follow evidence, why would I bother to explain? And ofc I'm thinking about possibly writing something on the topic so I don not want to reveal all. Good information on the entire Svielngrad find can be found in Bulgarian archeological chronicle.
You can find even English sources that do attribute Svilengrad complex to Pshenichevo culture.

Babadag is a sister culture of Pshenichevo. MJ12 "Thraco-Cimmerian" I have classified as belonging to Babadag culture. I went for this in Russian and Ukrainian archeological sources. Because that find from Dobruja is on the Ukrainian territory, even though it's to the South of Moldova.

Autosomally MJ12 shows affinities with Moldovan "Scythians" (Getae).

Rivermans theory about V13 being very related tu Urnfield and original Gava is done. So there aren't many options left. Sorry but my version is based on pure archeogenetic facts while yours and Rivermans contains lots of wishful thinking, often not paying attention to facts. Many Central/N.European V13's would like to be of more Northern origin so they could be "more white"..

E-V13 has nothing to do with deep Central Europe (S.Germany, Austria, Slovakia etc.) , Western Europe. Most of samples from there are related to newer migrations (Roman etc.).

Also, if we believe this guy: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...gh-Ancient-DNA&p=593903&viewfull=1#post593903

Most of Etruscans speculatively were R1b, with one I1, and confirmed J2b2-L283 so far. So, no E-V13 i guess among Etruscans or Pelasgians.

Pelasgians are very undefined. But as I was saying Pelasgians of Lemnos might be related to some modern G2a finds from there.


No, Angela asked you for peer reviewed paper, you quoted Aspar. :LOL:

And, despite that, Aspar was deducing the likelihood of Cardial Farmer spread and the logic behind why E-L618 spread with this culture and not directly from North Africa. Nowhere did he mention Proto-Berber language.

Angela sked for the paper and I added the link..

Well I haven't been reading that paper in great detail, but I have noticed how modern North Africans seem to have some visible EEF component, that is not related to any recent Spanish ancestry etc.

And also remember that I was finding evidence of Natufian cultural practices in Cardials from Dalmatia, and I claimed long ago they could have spoken an AA language.
 
What you talk about?! G2a are much older than Dacians and was overwhelming present in Starcevo-Cris, Vinca, Cucuteni cultures in Balkan / Europe long time before.

You said G is an old European hg while E isn't and yet E came to Europe at the same time as G2a or even slightly earlier. That G2a dominated is a fact ofc. I actually like G2a, but you might check what subclade you are. There are in Romanians some subclades that likely arrived with Romans or Byzantines from Anatolia.
Such as https://www.yfull.com/tree/G-Z17887/

One of the more common clusters in Romania. I believe they are G-FT108136 with Kuwaiti and Turkish sample. One did BigY.

And are you a... ha-ha! Putin lover... or What??

I suppose there are many Putin lovers in Romania? :grin:
 
This is Neolithic Vinca chariot.



Quite similar to Dubovac-Zuto Brdo Culture



The same motiv of bird head was added to the Aegean type ships from the Sea Peoples

Yes Girla Mare/Zuto Brdo had plenty of old Neolithic influence. Marija Gimbutas considered it non-IE, but Milutin Garašanin didn't mention such an option. He said they were probably ancestors of Mysians. Ultimately Girla Mare comes from the Transdanubian Enctrusted culture which stems from the Vučedol culture. This is where some Cetina/proto-Cetina element could have moved up to the North (and such movements did happen).

So definitely these cultures need more studying. Going by Gimbutas, and as obviously some influences of Girla-Mare/Gava existed in early Villanova, one could speculate Etruscan language moved alongside, but current results from Lemnos (where there were Etruscoid speakers) do not go in favor of E-V13, and a stray G-L497 as well as G-L91 clade as found, both EEF. Third find is some I1 (I think some Etruscan is rumored to be I1, though here Germanic ancestry is more likely ofc).
 
What does all of this mean regarding the Mycenaeans or later Dorians then?
 
Yes Girla Mare/Zuto Brdo had plenty of old Neolithic influence. Marija Gimbutas considered it non-IE, but Milutin Garašanin didn't mention such an option. He said they were probably ancestors of Mysians. Ultimately Girla Mare comes from the Transdanubian Enctrusted culture which stems from the Vučedol culture. This is where some Cetina/proto-Cetina element could have moved up to the North (and such movements did happen).

So definitely these cultures need more studying. Going by Gimbutas, and as obviously some influences of Girla-Mare/Gava existed in early Villanova, one could speculate Etruscan language moved alongside, but current results from Lemnos (where there were Etruscoid speakers) do not go in favor of E-V13, and a stray G-L497 as well as G-L91 clade as found, both EEF. Third find is some I1 (I think some Etruscan is rumored to be I1, though here Germanic ancestry is more likely ofc).

Cardial Pottery => Butmir Culture => Vucedol Culture ?

Butmir Culture was partially derived from Cardium: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butmir_culture

But, anyway i still trying to make sense out of your chronology.

You say Encrusted Pottery Culture + Gava formed Proto-Thracians, but then again Garla Mara/Zuto-Brdo Dubovac Culture was non IE.
 
Indeed. Very interesting results. Kudos to the Turkish researchers for doing such a massive thing. Some new L283 were also added with Turkish flags.

Regarding the new V13 samples, just had a look at them. There seems to be some consistency regarding 3.6k ya TMRCA ones that share clades with European samples. I would not mention this, but I think it could mean something, at least 4-5 diverse subclades showed this feature.
 
back in the day there was this research
https://www.academia.edu/5557321/Excavating_Y_chromosome_haplotype_strata_in_Anatolia

2-04991097c0.jpg

which found 5% e-m78 likely most of them were e-v13
like we see now with this university research ( we still waiting for leper from anthrogenica to anlayse all of them and other people to upload them to yfull )
it is very cool that now we have a chance thanks to WGS to see the exact branch under e-m78 and farther more under e-v13
 
Indeed. Very interesting results. Kudos to the Turkish researchers for doing such a massive thing. Some new L283 were also added with Turkish flags.

Regarding the new V13 samples, just had a look at them. There seems to be some consistency regarding 3.6k ya TMRCA ones that share clades with European samples. I would not mention this, but I think it could mean something, at least 4-5 diverse subclades showed this feature.


If you go through all the main subclades of E-V13, the Northern and Southern (generally Balkan, especially Albanian, Greek, Turkish) ones cluster together with a TMRCA between 1600-700 BC. After that time, there is practically no overlap. Remind you, the earlier dates don't mean they departe from each other immediately, its the latest dates which are decisive. And the latest are about the time of the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon and the beginning of Hallstatt, the full Iron Age. So its definitely all happening within the LBA-EIA transition. In that time span some moved to the West and East, or stayed in place, others moved down to the Balkans and beyond.
 
Thraco-Cimmerian is a bit exotic culture to associate with E-V13, it might be the case for some specific subclades but not for most of E-V13 Z5018.
 
Thraco-Cimmerian is a bit exotic culture to associate with E-V13, it might be the case for some specific subclades but not for most of E-V13 Z5018.

Its like when I say "Celtic" or in some instances even "Slavic". It doesn't have to mean the majority was E-V13, but carriers of this haplogroup participated in this movements and especially Thraco-Cimmerian horizon and Hallstatt culture surely got involved in the spread of E-V13 from its original source region around the Carpathians. The timing is really ideal for most Western subclades for their departure from the Balkan route a huge portion of E-V13 was taking in the LBA-EIA transition. The Thraco-Cimmerian horizon pretty directly influenced the later Hallstatt sphere. E-V13 spread, especially in the regions North of the Danube, the most with Iron making technology.
 
I don't agree with Thraco-Cimmerian zone, i think it might be right for some specific E-V13 subclades like E-V13 CTS9320 but not for the other subclades, but then again more or less it looks like all of these culture come from a common bulk some migrated in Middle Bronze Age some in Late Bronze Age and some in Early Iron Age.

I am actually quite thankful to you Riverman, Aspurg and Aspar, also to rafc for your thorough look on E-V13 origin, i guess every E-V13 member should be thankful as well, i think more or less you might be right, with some exceptions.
 
How did so called pure thracian v13 (impossible by the way) romania go from 100% v13 to under 6%?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3547065/

LOL. You must begin your post by a display of utter degeneracy? Out of multiple studies of Romanians, you cherry-picked up a sample where E-V13 is at its lowest, and then you parade this sample of 54 Romanians as if it represents the entire population. This a sample from Romanian Moldova. But overall there are almost 900 Romanian FTDNA/Dante and scientific study samples from multiple regions of Romania and E-V13 overall stands at 15 %. Also in Bulgaria/Romania J-L283 + R-M269, L51- do not reach the V13 %. Far from it. In Albania they do.

I dont believe this nonsense about thracians being pure v13 in iron age, that is ridiculous.

They are thus far pretty pure in V13. If we add Getae, and they too were Thracian, 5/6. By "pure" I mean only spreaders of the language here ofc.

Where is the adna and how did east europe lose all that v13?

There is some E-V13 diversity and increased % in Western Ukraine, presumably much of that are remnants of some Free Dacian groups. Again even in Russia, Tatarstan there is some percentage of E-V13, looks to be higher than in Slovenia.

There are other factors that make the usage of modern day percentages as unsound. First is massive Slavic expansion, and for example Albania is one of the most Slavic-free places Y-DNA wise. So first one has to remove such influence..

I do not claim that all V13 are Thracian, but that significant portion of it took part in Thracian ethnogenesis.

E-V13 comes from the Western Balkans in the Neolithic, for a long time E-V13 haters tried to present E-V13 as some Pelasgian slaves, farmers, but a lineage so strong in MBA, LBA, EIA couldn't have been the one playing second fiddle to J-L283 or R-Z2103.

We left our lands, for proto-Illyrians to occupy them. We made our home elsewhere and we were the bosses. You for emotional reasons want to be firmly tied to Southern-western Balkan area even if it means that you willingly accept being a 3rd rate Illyrian, 1st rate Illyrian is an invader of the Western Balkans, not the native. (such as J-L283 or R-Z2103) IE or any other strong group expanding were invaders so for V13 to be an invader it must expand from elsewhere. Purely by logic its TMRCA and spread suggests that was the case and so does the aDNA.

Denying V13 its rightful place in ethnogenesis processes is slander. I've seen much of that. And whoever is a proud V13 will not be allowing it. And unfortunately, whether its an enormous desire to be Illyrian no matter what or more Illyrian than other hg's (some Albanian V13), or whether its pure hatred in the case of some others (non V13 mostly ofc as displayed by this Romanian here).
 
Cardial Pottery => Butmir Culture => Vucedol Culture ?

Butmir Culture was partially derived from Cardium: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butmir_culture

But, anyway i still trying to make sense out of your chronology.

You say Encrusted Pottery Culture + Gava formed Proto-Thracians, but then again Garla Mara/Zuto-Brdo Dubovac Culture was non IE.

In Insula-Banului culture. LBA. From Insula-Banului can Pshenichevo, Babadag, Basarabi be traced. Insula-Banului is close to where Gava-Belegis II (which Riverman has been mentioning often) is from.
So lineage is Garla Mare->Insula Banului-> Pshenichevo
-> Babadag (some derive Babadag out of Pshenichevo too)

How old is Pshenichevo culture itself? One measure is Troy VIIb2 when its finds are found there. About 1100 BC. Some of these new Turkish samples could be related to that. Pshenichevo people were the second wave of settlers at Troy after the destruction of Troy VIIa in 1180 BC.
 
I don't agree with Thraco-Cimmerian zone, i think it might be right for some specific E-V13 subclades like E-V13 CTS9320 but not for the other subclades, but then again more or less it looks like all of these culture come from a common bulk some migrated in Middle Bronze Age some in Late Bronze Age and some in Early Iron Age.


CTS9320 does look with Thraco-Cimmerian links, one reason is an Ossetian CTS9320* branch. Another is a recent Central Asian Kangju CTS9320 sample, thus far he is still CTS9320*, maybe he is related to this modern Ossetian sample. He can only be Cimmerian related or descendant of Alexanders army. Autosomally he was totally Kangju/Sarmatian-derived. Of Z5018 in the East most prominent is FGC11450. These two have significant Danubian-Carpathian links.


I am actually quite thankful to you Riverman, Aspurg and Aspar, also to rafc for your thorough look on E-V13 origin, i guess every E-V13 member should be thankful as well, i think more or less you might be right, with some exceptions.

I think all of us made contributions that contained degrees of truth. You too suggested more Western Pannonian point. Girla-Mare does point to that Encrusted pottery culture. I thought numerous Hungarian finds from MBA in Pannonia do not point towards V13 but again most of them are from the NE, and TEW people were not tested.

Strong Pshenichevo connection does clearly imply Garla-Mare. Pshenichevo is actually how some of these clades could have (and most likely did) reached Albania. Albanian areas did not receive significant Urnfield waves. They did receive Brnjica and Mediana elements. Pshenichevo came to dominate the Mediana III phase (Mediana II had Gava links). I was mentioning Brnjica-Mediana migrations even when I was mentioning Vatina, in this instance not much has changed.
 
Marija Gimbutas noted that Proto-Illyrians migrated into Illyria during Late Bronze Age from Middle Danube, we also see during this time that cremation was introduced into Glasinac:

However, in the Late Bronze Age, occasional cremation burials started to appear in communitieswith long inhumation tradition. Prominent examples are cremation graves from the Glasinac regionin eastern Bosnia6 or the region of Lika in Croatia.7 The sporadic and unusual incinerations indicateinfluences from the bordering Urnfield culture complex. Within the study region, grave finds from thefinal stages of the Late Bronze Age (the 9th century BCE) point to increased interaction of groups thatpractice different mortuary body treatments.

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...-Carpathian-Basin-and-the-Western-Balkans.pdf

Already in the Early and so more in the Middle amd Late Bronze Aegean ceramics and weapons are imported and imitated. But there is also a strong influrence from the Danubian Urnfield culture.


https://www.oeaw.ac.at/en/oeai/publ...a/20181108-symposium-greek-and-roman-albania/

So, the picture you portray is not so black vs white or right vs left.

There was clearly a Late Bronze Age intrusion among Illyrians and i believe E-V13 subclades, especially under E-V13 Z5018 played a major role.

It was long though Liburnians were Early Bronze Age descended but deeper archeological researched showed cremation as well. Gavranovic noted the not so deep research on Balkan archeology and very un-mature conclusions.

In the northern Dalmatia region where there were only two cultural systems throughout the Bronze and Iron Ages, four moments are crucial in the use of cremation ritual during the 2nd/1st centuries BC: in the Early Bronze Age (Cetina culture: Ervenik, Podvršje − Matakov brig, Nadin, Krneza − Duševića glavica), in the Early Iron Age (Nadin, mound 13, Krneza − Jokina glavica), in Hellenism (Dragišić, gr. 4 A-C), and finally, for the first time very intensively during the Romanization of Liburnians. Newly discovered cremations in ceramic urns (gr. 3, 13) in burial mound 13 (9th – 6th cent. BC) from Nadin near Benkovac are the first example (after Dragišić) of Liburnian cremation; more precisely, burial mound 13 with 19 graves represents a form of biritualism in the Liburnians. It is also an example of the greatest number of Liburnian burials under a mound, with crouched, extended and cremated skeletons and many ritual remains (traces of fire on the ground and on animal bones: funerary feast?; numerous remains of ceramic vessels (libation?). Although typical Liburnian burial "inherits" many formal and symbolic elements (stone cist, enclosing wall, libation, etc.) from the (Early) Bronze Age (and probably Eneolithic as well), cremation in the Liburnian burial mound 13 from Nadin cannot be explained in terms of continuity from the Early Bronze Age; links are missing, particularly those from the Middle Bronze Age in the study of the cultural dynamics of the 2nd millennium BC in the northern Dalmatia region. Squat form of the Nadin urns with a distinct neck has analogies in the Liburnian (Nin) and Daunian funerary pots for burying newborns (ad encytrismos), and also in the typology of pottery (undecorated or decorated) in a wider region (Ruše, V.Gorica, Dalj/Vukovar, Terni II, Este, Bologna I-II, Roma II, Cumae I, Pontecagnano IA, Histrians, etc.), i.e. in the forms widespread from the Danubian region, Alps, and Balkans to the Apennine Peninsula between the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages (10th/9th – 8th cent. BC). Although appearance of cremation in the Picenian culture has not been completely clear (Fermo necropolis, burials from Ancona, Numana, Novilara: graves Servici, 29, 39 from Piceno II-III, from the 8th/7th.cent. BC), Liburnian culture is most similar to the Picenian culture in the Adriatic world by the intensity and period of cremation, and form of urns. Specifically, decorated urn in a male grave 52 from Numana from the 9th century BC is analogous to the Nadin urns. This grave from Numana is usually mentioned as an example of trans-Adriatic, Picenian-Liburnian (Balkanic) i.e. Picenian-Histrian relations. Liburnian urns are similar to the urn from the grave in Numana, 495, Davanzali, from the late 9th century by their profilation. "Genesis" of both Liburnian and Picenian cremation is unknown. They are two convergent phenomena, reflecting the "unity" of the late Urnenfelder world of the 10th/9th centuries BC and resulting from cultural-ethnical contacts in a "closed circle" from the Danubian region – southeastern Alpine region – Apennine Peninsula, supported by smaller migrations in the first centuries of the Iron Age, from the trans-Adriatic direction in Picenum (with definite Villanova influence), and in Liburnia probably from the hinterland. In this Adriatic circle in the first centuries of the Iron Age multiple cultural contacts between Liburnians, Histrians and Picenians are for now a good (initial) context for a more detailed interpretation of Liburnian cremation. Despite the aforementioned, it is not necessary to relate directly the structure (ritual, goods) of gr. 52, Numana – Qualiotti to Histrian patterns nor the grave 495, Numana-Davanzali to the Iapodian ones. Cremated Liburnian burial from the Early Iron Age represents a certain continuity and a "reflection" of the late Urnenfelder circle, which was manifested in different ways in the beginnings of the Liburnian, Picenian, and Histrian cultures and elsewhere. The latest excavations on a planned Liburnian-Roman necropolis in Nadin (Nedinum) provided us with new information about the spatial, chronological and symbolical relation (religious, social) between the autochtonous Liburnian and Roman component in the period of Romanization of northern Dalmatia.
https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=108746

We also now know that actually the Illyrian tribe Enchelei which are noted to create the earliest state among known Illyrian tribes used cremation on a pyre, and this is noted by most known Macedonian archeologist Pasko Kuzman.

On this occasion, special attention is given to the Tomb of the Warriors (Tomb 1) in which 6 warriors were buried together with their complete military armor. The tomb (dimensions: 5.50 x 4.50 m) was built with a row of larger limestone blocks, and after the cremation burial it was filled with amorphous stones and earth, shaping a low mound-like structure. The pyre was set in the central part of the tomb, and around it, embedded and arranged in a specially brought lake sand, were the military attributes: 6 bronze helmets, 11 greaves, and 15 iron spears, with features suggesting some military subordination or simply warriors who have died in a battle being “the Leader and his comrades.”

https://pebasite.wordpress.com/peba-2020/representations-of-power-an-ancient-macedonian-elite/
 
All in all, i expect a more complex picture of Illyrians, as noted by various archeologists.
 
Marija Gimbutas noted that Proto-Illyrians migrated into Illyria during Late Bronze Age from Middle Danube, we also see during this time that cremation was introduced into Glasinac:





So, the picture you portray is not so black vs white or right vs left.

There was clearly a Late Bronze Age intrusion among Illyrians and i believe E-V13 subclades, especially under E-V13 Z5018 played a major role.

It was long though Liburnians were Early Bronze Age descended but deeper archeological researched showed cremation as well. Gavranovic noted the not so deep research on Balkan archeology and very un-mature conclusions.



We also now know that actually the Illyrian tribe Enchelei which are noted to create the earliest state among known Illyrian tribes used cremation on a pyre, and this is noted by most known Macedonian archeologist Pasko Kuzman.

But cremation at Glasinac was introduced by the Urnielders. Based on what we know now, it is not likely V13 were among them. Most likely R-L51 and we do have some strong diversity of R-L51 in Bosnia/Serbia. It is more likely there were some local pre-Urnfield V13 among Glasinac people (such as the E-Y37092 clades, among them only BY14150 seems Thracian related).

Urnfielders used cremation but so did the Vatina, Garla-mare and related cultures. Enchelei are very interesting and quite possibly E-v13 related but their cremation traditions were probably of different origin to those at Glasinac. Also Glasinac people generally resisted the Urnfield wave.

Liburnian cremation again was of Western Urnfield origin. R1b likely Venetic speakers.

What you should rather focus is this
article_prehistoric-pottery_1-1024x918.jpg

Look at this map. Illyrians were divided in two groups archeologically. The Norhtern one (brown) was generally Glasinac related. Most likely dominately J-L283. And that is suggested by aDNA, Dalmatian J-L283 find (pre proto-Glasinac), rumored N.Albanian MBA/LBA J-L283 find.

Southern Albanian areas were dominated by the Matt-Painted pottery (yellow). This is where there is some very strong E-V13 diversity of clades having LBA relatives to the North, this is where there were migrations of Brnjica and Mediana types.

And you see this pottery dominates Messapian areas. Per Ratzinger Messapians and Glasinac Illyrians were not same. And Albanian language leans far more towards Messapian direction.

Possibly Southern Albania was populated prior to LBA by the Phrygians (likely R-Z2103, Armenian clades).

My proposal is
yellow - significant E-V13 % (Kuc i Zi etc., plenty of LBA/EIA migrants from the North)
brown - dominance of J-L283 (Glasinac-Mati)

Ofc some presence of the other hg in other areas.. Enchelei that you mention, and I agree with you there, fit ofc in yellow zone.

So actually J-L283 looks more Glasinac, but the Albanian language is more Messapian related and per this it shows more of E-V13 (and ofc likely R-Z2705) connection.
 

This thread has been viewed 41123 times.

Back
Top