Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Redfining pre-Ind-European language families of Bronze W Europe - csaba HORVATH 2019

  1. #1
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 members found this post helpful.

    Redfining pre-Ind-European language families of Bronze W Europe - csaba HORVATH 2019

    Have somebody read this amazing theory???:
    Y-R1b Basque, Y-J2 Thyrsenian, Y-E1b Celt (I just crossed(read it, maybe I 've been mistaken) -ATW I remain doubtfull before to read it seriously...

    https://research.amanote.com/publica...europe-a-study

  2. #2
    Regular Member Archetype0ne's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-06-18
    Posts
    1,033

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2b2-L283/FT29003

    Country: Albania



    That is quite intriguing, never would have crossed my mind...

    Wait did this guy publish this in 2019? That is wild, considering the recent autosomal and Ydna samples, especially the ones connecting BA-IA Italy and Balkans.

    I would reserve an opinion till I hear what Pax'es POV is on this. Could a Tyrsenian dialect been spoken in the Balkans pre IE?
    “Man cannot live without a permanent trust in something indestructible in himself, and at the same time that indestructible something as well as his trust in it may remain permanently concealed from him.”

    Franz Kafka

  3. #3
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    2 members found this post helpful.
    C.B.HORVATH: short (right?) digest of mine for the people who cannot read the paper.
    This fellow made already in 2019 a paper titled ‘Finno Scythian hypothesis’…
    Roughly said, the present hypothesis is focused on the 2800-1800 BC span of time. He pretends he based himself on Y haplo’s successions and propose three layers of language in this period : Vasconic (according to Th. Venneman’s theory), Tyrsenian and Indo-European (relying on Gamkrelidze/Ivanov ‘s theory). No use to say he doesn’t agree to the Steppes theory…
    He considers IE cannot have been spoken in Iberiatoo early, because there were there too much “pre-”IE languages (I would prefer to say: “not-”IE): Aquitanian, Tartessian, Iberian, and maybe Pictish and Ligurian he considers as not proved IE languages; based on Hickey 2002 he considers possible a vasconic was spoken in the British islands before Celts; for him, IE tongues of Western Europe are too homogenous to date to the 2500 BC, in his mind, they would have been as distinct as Latin and Sanscrit!
    So, looking at Y-haplo’s (no autosome) and MRCA’s he says: Y-R1b L21 & DF27 separated around 2500 BC and BB’s were Vasconic speaking; they covered the whole Western Europe from South to North as did R1b-U152 for Central Europe/Alps.
    Concerning Tyrsenians where he includes Lemnic speakers, he is not sure of their moves, maybe by Mediterranea from Aegea, but he seems prefering a lands road; he proposes that among the 12 primary subclades of U152, 8 have a MRCA of 2400/2000 BC in the Tumuli Culture of Central West Europe; culturally the Vasvonics would have been “tyrsenoised” by a group of Y-J2b-Z2507 (from Balkans?): he bases himself on the succession of subclades of this Y-J2b in Central Europe he considers as launchers of the subsequent Urnfield Culture; Rhaetians in Northern Alps and Etruscans in Villanova (Etruscans: 50% of Y-R1B, 25% of them U152).
    Concerning Celts, he thinks that a peripheric R1b-U152-L2 has been IE-ised/Celticised by a group of Y-E-V13-CT59320 from Balkans, going towards the Danube source and covering the whole Central Europe between 1000/500 BC, launching the final Hallstatt + La Tène cultures. He notices the relative lack of Y-R1b-U152 among Italics and their weight for J1 & J2 so considers they could have reached Italy across the Adriatic Sea, through South and not through North! Shortly said he thinks the Celtic-Italic cradle was in Western Balkans pre-Illyrians.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Archetype0ne's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-06-18
    Posts
    1,033

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2b2-L283/FT29003

    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    C.B.HORVATH: short (right?) digest of mine for the people who cannot read the paper.
    This fellow made already in 2019 a paper titled ‘Finno Scythian hypothesis’…
    Roughly said, the present hypothesis is focused on the 2800-1800 BC span of time. He pretends he based himself on Y haplo’s successions and propose three layers of language in this period : Vasconic (according to Th. Venneman’s theory), Tyrsenian and Indo-European (relying on Gamkrelidze/Ivanov ‘s theory). No use to say he doesn’t agree to the Steppes theory…
    He considers IE cannot have been spoken in Iberiatoo early, because there were there too much “pre-”IE languages (I would prefer to say: “not-”IE): Aquitanian, Tartessian, Iberian, and maybe Pictish and Ligurian he considers as not proved IE languages; based on Hickey 2002 he considers possible a vasconic was spoken in the British islands before Celts; for him, IE tongues of Western Europe are too homogenous to date to the 2500 BC, in his mind, they would have been as distinct as Latin and Sanscrit!
    So, looking at Y-haplo’s (no autosome) and MRCA’s he says: Y-R1b L21 & DF27 separated around 2500 BC and BB’s were Vasconic speaking; they covered the whole Western Europe from South to North as did R1b-U152 for Central Europe/Alps.
    Concerning Tyrsenians where he includes Lemnic speakers, he is not sure of their moves, maybe by Mediterranea from Aegea, but he seems prefering a lands road; he proposes that among the 12 primary subclades of U152, 8 have a MRCA of 2400/2000 BC in the Tumuli Culture of Central West Europe; culturally the Vasvonics would have been “tyrsenoised” by a group of Y-J2b-Z2507 (from Balkans?): he bases himself on the succession of subclades of this Y-J2b in Central Europe he considers as launchers of the subsequent Urnfield Culture; Rhaetians in Northern Alps and Etruscans in Villanova (Etruscans: 50% of Y-R1B, 25% of them U152).
    Concerning Celts, he thinks that a peripheric R1b-U152-L2 has been IE-ised/Celticised by a group of Y-E-V13-CT59320 from Balkans, going towards the Danube source and covering the whole Central Europe between 1000/500 BC, launching the final Hallstatt + La Tène cultures. He notices the relative lack of Y-R1b-U152 among Italics and their weight for J1 & J2 so considers they could have reached Italy across the Adriatic Sea, through South and not through North! Shortly said he thinks the Celtic-Italic cradle was in Western Balkans pre-Illyrians.
    Thanks for the short summary. If nothing else, his theories are at least entertaining.
    But no where testable sadly, hence would not take it as hard science.

  5. #5
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    first remarks, to ve continued



    I avow I had almost a cardiac attack when I have read it. But who knows?
    - argument of the too much not-IE dialects in Western Europe:
    . Pictish dominant dialect WAS P-Celtic IMO and others opinion more qualified than me, no way to contradict this – if another dialect was or had been spoken in Pictish lands before or by underclass people, the toponymy seems classifyig it in kind of “Old-Western-IE” - the Ligurian question could be of the same sort: two co-existing languages? - what we know would push one of them into the IE bag, maybe a more archaïc IE closer to a kind of Celtic-Italic? - Horvath doesn’t speak of Lusitanian: too late in time for him? Nevertheless it could have been a remnant of Celtic-Italic of pre-Celtic-Italic too? I regreat I dont know the first dates of supposed apparition of these languages – all that makes a good guess for IE dialects before Celtic and Italic in Western Europe, and then linked to BB’s (Vasconians for Horvath) even more if we rely on the Alt-Europaeisch hypothesis of N-W Europe in Benelux and RhaeticAlps as challenging dialect for Tyrsenian Rhaetic, all that covering for a big part the BB. All that makes a good bunch of IE dialects very widely distributed for a IA wave of permissive gentle I-Ean males leaving the monopole to give birth to Vasconic R1b’s.
    . Horvath doesn’t take in account the auDNA at all. The Steppic element is ignored or perhaps he thinks they were proto-Finns, proto-Vasconians or proto-Turks or both (Russians too like the Turks hypothesis North-East the Caucasus) – but even taking only the Y-haplo’s it’s surprising how the promoters of new cultures were a few handful of open-minded males not taking advantage of their position, except for Vasconians who imposed their P312 heritage (so Vasconians at first were high for ‘steppic’ auDNA) – Horvath relies a lot on MRCA’s : it isn’t stupid for huge populations and %’s, but when we speak of minorities?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    724


    Country: Austria



    E-V13 will have played an important role in the formation of Hallstatt via Channelled Ware -> Thraco-Cimmerian horizon -> Bosut-Basarabi -> Eastern Hallstatt. But the Celts came from Western Hallstatt, and even Eastern Hallstatt is more likely to have been North Illyrian-Pannonian speaking, rather than Daco-Thracian, with E-V13 being only a small influence on the main Celtic groupings of Western Hallstatt and La Tene.

    J2 was in the region before, but became one of the dominant lineages with J-L283 in the Illyrian core zone.

  7. #7
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    E-V13 will have played an important role in the formation of Hallstatt via Channelled Ware -> Thraco-Cimmerian horizon -> Bosut-Basarabi -> Eastern Hallstatt. But the Celts came from Western Hallstatt, and even Eastern Hallstatt is more likely to have been North Illyrian-Pannonian speaking, rather than Daco-Thracian, with E-V13 being only a small influence on the main Celtic groupings of Western Hallstatt and La Tene.



    J2 was in the region before, but became one of the dominant lineages with J-L283 in the Illyrian core zone.
    I try here a provisory partial contribution, without to fear ridicule, It's only for the fun.
    The northwestern (at first) IE groups were structured (and stayed in a part even later) in steppic/breeders-herders mode with a clannic system which favoured the "pure" homogenous Y-haplo's lineages, suppose. The southern Steppics who seem having found more evolved cultures of Central-South-East Europe, equally well structured if not so agressive, could have adopted more quickly sedentarised modes of life and incorporated sooner other males lineages, leaving gradually the monolithic clannic system. The more South, with heavy Neolithic and Eneolithic south-eastern influences, the less steppic genes and the more mixture of Y-haplo's?
    for Y-E-V13, without too many clues, I supposed an EN or even Mesolithic weak presence around Northern Albania and Montenegro, maybe southern Dalmatia, rather occidental as a whole; and then, a development which began around ChLC and EBA, around the rivers knot of central Balkans (with Danube) before to reach its maximum around IA. I regret I haven’t sufficient data for Y-haplo’s in these regions berween ChLC and IA, but I doubt Y-E-V13 behaved as a clannic herders CHLC group like first CWC’s and BB’s, I imagine easily this haplo bearers could have travelled with some sorts of Y-J2’s. I stop here for the moment, in search for data. ATW I suppose the Urnfields and Hallstatt periods have seen AND new believings/values AND people moves according to places and subperiods. The relatively similar phonetic mutations (~Kw/P) occurred in different IE languages families and radiating seemingly from around southern Hungary/Carpathian Bassin-North Balkans to almost every direction could very well have a similar origin and be linked to some common human factor, even if not at the very same time, in despite of the current dogma -

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    724


    Country: Austria



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    I try here a provisory partial contribution, without to fear ridicule, It's only for the fun.
    The northwestern (at first) IE groups were structured (and stayed in a part even later) in steppic/breeders-herders mode with a clannic system which favoured the "pure" homogenous Y-haplo's lineages, suppose. The southern Steppics who seem having found more evolved cultures of Central-South-East Europe, equally well structured if not so agressive, could have adopted more quickly sedentarised modes of life and incorporated sooner other males lineages, leaving gradually the monolithic clannic system. The more South, with heavy Neolithic and Eneolithic south-eastern influences, the less steppic genes and the more mixture of Y-haplo's?
    for Y-E-V13, without too many clues, I supposed an EN or even Mesolithic weak presence around Northern Albania and Montenegro, maybe southern Dalmatia, rather occidental as a whole; and then, a development which began around ChLC and EBA, around the rivers knot of central Balkans (with Danube) before to reach its maximum around IA. I regret I haven’t sufficient data for Y-haplo’s in these regions berween ChLC and IA, but I doubt Y-E-V13 behaved as a clannic herders CHLC group like first CWC’s and BB’s, I imagine easily this haplo bearers could have travelled with some sorts of Y-J2’s. I stop here for the moment, in search for data. ATW I suppose the Urnfields and Hallstatt periods have seen AND new believings/values AND people moves according to places and subperiods. The relatively similar phonetic mutations (~Kw/P) occurred in different IE languages families and radiating seemingly from around southern Hungary/Carpathian Bassin-North Balkans to almost every direction could very well have a similar origin and be linked to some common human factor, even if not at the very same time, in despite of the current dogma -
    E1b1b was never that strong in the Balkans it seems. They had founder effects along the Danube (Lengyel) and Rhine (Michelsberger), with a possible connection of the two through Jordanow/Jordansmhl in Bohemia and Mnchshfen culture in Bavaria, both being considered Lengyel colonies.
    We don't need to speculate about whether or not E-V13 adopted a very patrilinear clanish ideology, because we know it. Before the LBA-EIA transition, the locals were either from the main steppe lineages or local Neolithics in Pannonia, Carpathian zone and the Balkans. After the transition, after Channelled Ware spread, all three regions seem to have had a high E-V13 frequency, in some reaching 70-100 percent in the IA!
    We all know what that has so mean, its the same pattern as with Bell Beakers in Iberia and Britain, Channelled Ware did the same.

    On a sidenote, we have historical accounts and archaeological evidence for how it took place, they seem to have picked the local women up, often practised polygyny and widow death. For polygyny we have historical accounts about the Thracians, for the widow death also, plus archaeological finds up to Austria and Bohemia in that direction, with burials of big man with their widow. Whether this practise was introduced by Cimmerians and Scythians is unknown, but in the historical period we can see it in the Daco-Thracian and Thraco-Cimmerian sphere of influence.

    E-V13 did already almost disappear in the Neolithic in the Southern Balkans. The recent Southern Sopot samples yielded not a single E1b1b. E-V13 is in every respect an Urnfield, LBA-EIA phenomenon. And in the Middle Neolithic, even before being steppified, the ancestral E1b1b groups already did colonise and expand, replacing other clans, along the Danube and Rhine. Its even possible they influenced GAC and GAC influenced Corded Ware. They were all interconnected, different clans competing for dominance in the best regions. E-V13 ancestors lost, but being assimilated and recovered. Those subclades which did not are not in the per mill frequency or disappeared, like European Neolithic H, which was a powerful Neolithic lineage once.
    The steppe lineages were not fundamentally different, but just more successful in what they did. Michelsberger, Lengyel, TRB, GAC did replace other lineages wherever possible as well. That's why H disappeared and G2 went down long before the steppe migrations. The recent Bohemian paper makes that absolutely clear.

  9. #9
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Cannot answer these precise points just now. But what is this recent Bohemian paper? I'm interested. Thanks for sharing.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    724


    Country: Austria



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    Cannot answer these precise points just now. But what is this recent Bohemian paper? I'm interested. Thanks for sharing.
    You can read up on it here:
    https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...E-central-Euro

    Unfortunately almost all the Jordanow/Jordansmhler and Michelsberger samples being females and a large portion of the Bohemian Jordanow group did cremate its dead. Could have brought up another E1b1b sample, because in the Middle Neolithic, Lengyel and Michelsberger seem to have been the primary groups with a higher frequency.

    Edit: You already commented in that thread, so you should know.

  11. #11
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    @Riverman: you wrote:
    Edit: You already commented in that thread, so you should know.

    I had forgotten it! In fact, my posts in this other thread (Bohemia), until now, were to say: good subject (but I have not read the paper in its full extent) and to criticise some posts I disagreed with them, based on my previous knowings, not on the paper itself. I have to disentangle the diverse periods encompassed in it, the corresponding Y-haplo's. After that I 'll answer you for this present thread, where I disagree with you but only partially.

  12. #12
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    @Riverman
    My answer here could concern two threads, I put it here:
    Agree with you in your answer of the Dacian langage question to Torzio. Some common influence could have played on Dacian language if we suppose Romanians have important Dacian heritage ( ? supposed Illyrian’s influence ??? risky bet) as this influence did on others in the proximity of South-Hungary plain and more southernly but otherwise the allover phonetic of Romanian (and Albanian, if some common substrata) does not evok too tight links with Celtic or Germanic.
    But concerning Y-E1b-V13 I need more. I don’t discard the Fluted/Channelled ware culture as an important element in this region as a whole, but I don’t see the link with Y-E-V13 or better said a by force link ; it’s true I lack Y-haplo’s of Lengyel, Michelsberger, Baden. ATW I read the Channelled Ware culture was born rather in Western Hungary (Gàva) in a post-Otomani environment before gaining ground towards southern Danube and Dniestr in East, covering Transylvania. Its spreading occurred between LBA and EIA so around Urnfield period roughly said. Were they THE spreaders of UFC ? Not sure. ATW UFC saw moves and/or cultural transfers and densification of settlements in some places : surely not a monolithic phenomenon. In West (Celts) it seems the elites are not been erased if they have accepted new ones in some proportions. In Southern Poland, a move occurred from Bohemia, of Tumuli tribes akin to the Bavarian ones (Celts rather than Italics, or if para-Italics, N-E Veneti or close?), which did not mix with UFC people moving just South of them, before kind of UF-isation later which gave way to the Lusacian Culture. I think the complete replacement of elites did no more occur at these times, compared to LN/ChL/EBA.
    The archeologic description tends towards a contamination through « religious » or « feast » exceptional events ware, in specific places, before to become a common enough ware in ordinary settlements, all this occurring in several territories of this large enough region having different cultures before, and after too. To my eyes, it doesn’t ressemble a strong demic colonisation but rather a cultural transfer of symbols so cultural influence maybe religious, what doesn’t exclude the « import » of some bearing elites, very possibly males mediated. We know some new elites made their place among ancient elites in more than a place at IA, but apparently without sweap these ones off. Or we can imagine a conquerant elite penetrating these regions but staying apart the common people before kind of « democratisation » and interpenetration of winners and losers ? Uneasy to say, but often a cultural/religious phenomenon come with flesh and bones people, rather at the top of the society ; the question remains : what density of newcomers then ?

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    724


    Country: Austria



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    @Riverman
    My answer here could concern two threads, I put it here:
    Agree with you in your answer of the Dacian langage question to Torzio. Some common influence could have played on Dacian language if we suppose Romanians have important Dacian heritage ( ? supposed Illyrian’s influence ??? risky bet) as this influence did on others in the proximity of South-Hungary plain and more southernly but otherwise the allover phonetic of Romanian (and Albanian, if some common substrata) does not evok too tight links with Celtic or Germanic.
    Romanian is a Romance language, presumably with a Daco-Moesian substrate and Albanian influence when large groups of the Vlachs sought refuge close to Albanian strongholds in Late Antiquity, which probably spread from there to other Vlachs further away, which in turn did assimilate a lot of other groups, mainly Slavic, but also some Turkic and Germanic remnants most likely.

    But concerning Y-E1b-V13 I need more. I don’t discard the Fluted/Channelled ware culture as an important element in this region as a whole, but I don’t see the link with Y-E-V13 or better said a by force link ; it’s true I lack Y-haplo’s of Lengyel, Michelsberger, Baden. ATW I read the Channelled Ware culture was born rather in Western Hungary (G va) in a post-Otomani environment before gaining ground towards southern Danube and Dniestr in East, covering Transylvania.
    I wrote about that already, Otomani is a candidate from which Pre-Gava could have emerged, but some authors said it rather replaced Otomani. In any case, the centre of Gava was Eastern Slovakia and North Western Romania, as well as territories around that core region. From there Gava expanded and found various daughter groups so to say, which is what the Channelled Ware/Fluted Ware horizon is about. The only question which remains is how Gava came up and whether E-V13 was dominant in Gava from the start, or just in one of its groups, or even one of its daughter groups. I think it was Gava from the start, because we have now knowledge of samples from Pannonia, Bulgaria and Serbia before Channelled Ware and in all three regions: No E-V13. Yet the impact of Channelled Ware was huge, so if it wasn't E-V13, what other lineages did they spread? Just connect the two dots: You need a lineage which spread with Channelled Ware, E-V13 wasn't present before and big afterwards = clear case scenario for me.
    Its however possible that E-V13 became really dominant in just one or more of the daughter groups. We know for sure Psenichevo and Basarabi had a lot of E-V13. Related Eastern Hallstatt groups are very likely, Getae likely too. Also we have, according to Huban who looked at the sample distribution, one possibly Gava related find of E-V13 in very North Eastern Hungary. This needs to be confirmed from the Pannonian paper, but its in any case quite telling that E-V13 didn't appear in the EBA-MBA in any other region than close to the later core of Gava/Channelled Ware.

    Western Hungary is not the primary source region at all. Different cultures no finds. Both E-V13 and Gava originated rather further to the North, in a zone from Silesia to Western Ukraine, with an ultimate centre in Eastern Slovakia-North Western Romania, where we find some of hte biggest elite burials of the early phase too by the way and also some traditions started there. If you want to know what Channelled Ware people were about, they spread Naue II swords and iron weapons, they were metallurgists and warriors. Even the pottery, the typical Gava/Channelled Ware is typical, because it represents in its elaborated form a black burnished ware, which looks like iron. They might even have had a religious cult around iron and swords it seems. Up to the Daco-Thracians and Eastern Hallstatt, the iron sword bearers were the elite, the leaders and it was not just about the swords being expensive. They also offered hoards of weapons to gods, something which starts in the North and moves all the way down to Greece.

    Its spreading occurred between LBA and EIA so around Urnfield period roughly said. Were they THE spreaders of UFC ?
    Urnfield culture is a religious phenomenon and multi-ethnic. Its Gava/South Eastern Urnfield, which is Daco-Thracian and spread E-V13. Its closest relative and associated group being the Lusatians, with which they had minimum as much in common as with the Middle Danubian group, which bordered them in the South and from which Pannonians seem to come from.
    Not sure. ATW UFC saw moves and/or cultural transfers and densification of settlements in some places : surely not a monolithic phenomenon. In West (Celts) it seems the elites are not been erased if they have accepted new ones in some proportions. In Southern Poland, a move occurred from Bohemia, of Tumuli tribes akin to the Bavarian ones (Celts rather than Italics, or if para-Italics, N-E Veneti or close?), which did not mix with UFC people moving just South of them, before kind of UF-isation later which gave way to the Lusacian Culture. I think the complete replacement of elites did no more occur at these times, compared to LN/ChL/EBA.
    There was a near complete replacement, not just of the elites in some regions. Channelled Ware really did take over, in some regions, that is very obvious. In others they mixed, so it kind of depends. Like Belegis II-Gava centres, right close to Mokrin, which was dominated by I2, R1b and J2, and close to later Viminacium, both Belegis II-Gava and later Bosut-Basarabi had their centre and that was a true replacement of the local population. You also see that in the record, because some of the defeated groups fled to the South and East, where they were finally caught and either annihilated, assimilated, or tried to flee even further. You see that in the record, like for Incrusted Ware, which being squeezed in between Western (Glasinac-Mati-Illyrian) and Eastern (Gava-Daco-Thracian) expansions from the North. In some regions they fused and new mixed cultures emerged, in others they seem to have tried to escape the newcomers.

    But what you see, in the archaeological record already and is known from historical accounts (Sea Peoples, Dorians etc.) as well, the Urnfield expansion caused a migration period and the final collapse of the old Bronze Age system. And the primary agent of this, for the whole Balkan and East Mediterranean, was Gava/Channelled Ware. Because they did first mass produce Naue II swords in their Carpathian workshops, and then they were among the first in the world to start a mass production of iron swords. Read up on Teleac:

    In an attempt to explain the immense size of
    the fortress at Teleac unusual by Central European
    measure
    [...]

    Thus, it seems reasonable to associate this
    advance with the onset of the extraction and production
    of iron. Moreover, it was the time of the
    technological transition from the use of bronze to
    iron as the material employed to make weapons
    and tools. The comparatively large amount of iron
    fi nds in Transylvania in general and in Teleac in
    particular imply that iron extraction and production
    played an important role early on
    .
    The oldest
    object made of iron found in Europe a knife or
    sickle comes from Ganovce, district of Poprad,
    Slovakia, in a fortifi ed settlement of the Otomani
    culture.
    Gava pottery was ideologically and religiously important, even beyond the Gava culture itself, which being proven by rare, highly expensive imports in Germany for example - the most likely background is a cult around iron and metal:
    Th e technically demanding,
    black-polished pottery of the Gva culture
    decorated with garland patterns or channels
    displays an unmistakable metallic aspect
    Even Greece was profoundly changed:
    Since Submycenaean times (c. 10801020 BC)
    a profound transition in the handling of the deceased
    took place: the transition from inhumation
    burial to cremation.
    The connection to the Carpathian sphere is obvious:
    The blade is made of iron, the
    socket of bronze.61 Aside from these weapons,
    note should be made of the eye-catching spectacle
    fi bulae, which were a widespread element of dress
    at that time and possibly illustrate the mobility of
    larger or also smaller groups of peoples between
    the Carpathian Basin and Greece
    .
    Thus, the fortifi cation at Teleac comes all the
    more into focus. Th e immensity of the fort refl ects
    the potential of violence of that time. Obviously,
    there was a suffi ciently large population for mobilising
    an attack on the massive fortifi cation and to
    set it on fi re. At present we only know that the walls
    were a wood-earthen construction, but there are
    many details of the fortifi cation that must still be
    investigated.92 Furthermore, the burnt walls presage
    insight in a martial violence, which has hitherto
    been attested in only few places in Central Europe.93
    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...outhern_Europe

    Teleac was later destroyed in one huge siege, which can, at that time, only be compared with the bigger battles of the Sea Peoples or the siege of Troy. If they would have had a written history, everybody would know about it, because it was a major central point for all of Eastern Central Europe and the Balkans, controlling trade routes, resources and iron weapons production. The E-V13/Channelled Ware did spread also because of their metallurgical innovations. They were top notch for their time and this position survived even the fusion with Cimmerians-Scythians, in the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon and going on into Early Hallstatt. Only with La Tene, which came up also because of Scytho-Thracian influences on Celts, the tide changed and now the Celts pushed forward. Up to this point, especially if talking about iron weapons, the Carpathian zone was on top of things for quite some time, especially in the transitional period from the LBA to the EIA.

  14. #14
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    I 'm still hesitating concerning your straight-on conclusions about Y-E1b-V13 expansion and kind of "one-man-show" in the spreading of Iron. Concerning Channelled ware I haven't read as much papers as you, but I read the Gàva style began in western Hungary, what doesn't exclude it spread further towards southern Slovakia very soon after, before repating it more southeastwards. ATW it isn't so important.
    Concerning swords, according to old readings, it seems Hungary, as for a lot of other protohistoric phenomenon, was a center where were found a lot of diverse styles of swords, not only one. What is curious is that at roughly the same period or at periods following closely one antother it seems these diverse kinds of swords were spread allover Europe, BUT WITH VERY SPECIFIED DISTRIBUTIONS out of Hungary, except some rare cases: I haven't any presupposed think here, but it could imply Hungary was as well a sink or transit place than a source for that?
    I 'll try to stay on a global view: some phonetic phenomenons and some other facts you evoke and even some new phenotypes could show a radiating influence from Hungary (not by force a monoblock) at these dates almost on every direction, the Urnfield phenomenon being one the markers of it, I think (cremation was an endemic mode of burying there since long ago, if not exclusive). I don't exclude that a special ethny was at the beginning of these events, but it seems that aside a possible first specific demic impulse, some inter-elites exchanges with religious believings could have launched more moves of diverse ethnies or mixes as you said, at diverse scales (numbers, length of moves).
    Concerning Iron, which seems having been the strength of "Carpathians" I wonder if a population of the rivers knots between Balkans and southern Carpathians where Y-E-V13 has begun its densification at LBA had not profited of the first technics imported from South-East (through Anatolia?) and then progressed northwards for more mountainous ores? Wiki speaks of Iron use from Caucasus, but I suppose it transited through Anatolia, without more clues. ATW whatever arrived, possible south to north and then north to south moves between LBA and LIA notwithstanding other moves, it seems to me dubious that a lone Y-haplo was still forming a complete ethny, even more dubious there, and I think too the big region covered by developments of Channelled Ware culture was previously multiethnic and only accepted some convenient "marriage" between their elites, and a new elite of Iron smithes plus some paganist religion based upon Iron and power. This phenomenon of intrusion of new elites is confirmed in Hallstatt of southern Germany/Austria, until Silesia, what doesn't mean it is the same as in southeastern Europe of the time.

  15. #15
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Concerning languages shifts, it seems some people compare situations very different. Shifts could occur (in my mind):
    - when there is a more evolved culture helped by military superiority and well structured and centralised society, there no need of a strong demic colonisation; losers elites are generally incorporated in the winners society, lower social layers follow after a stage of bilinguism / disglossy often.
    - where there is a strong demic imput; if this imput is weak, and solely a military elite imposes itself by females captation, bilinguism can perdure a very long time; here the complete shift can occur only if there are possibilities to change social level and if the majority of children born by this captation are not kept in too inferior social position; a sexually agressive gang of young warriors, if they can pass their Y-haplo's, are not sure to pass their language to the whole controlled population and the languages balance can change back by time, if the local conditions of life do'nt favour their previous life style and so they are obliged or pleased to change it and to learn from locals. The winners pass their language with certainty only if they incorporate losers or their wives very progressively generation after generation: it has been discussed about Mycenian language versus DNA (but here the question of the region of transmission of IE: steppes or Anatolia, can play!).
    - another occasion for a language to take the strong side is when the stronger side builds a new organisation with the others elites and that a common language (lingua franca) becomes necessary: it could explain the magyarisation in Hungary in a multi-ethnic melting pot?
    Just some hypothesis.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    724


    Country: Austria



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    I 'm still hesitating concerning your straight-on conclusions about Y-E1b-V13 expansion and kind of "one-man-show" in the spreading of Iron. Concerning Channelled ware I haven't read as much papers as you, but I read the G va style began in western Hungary, what doesn't exclude it spread further towards southern Slovakia very soon after, before repating it more southeastwards. ATW it isn't so important.
    Concerning swords, according to old readings, it seems Hungary, as for a lot of other protohistoric phenomenon, was a center where were found a lot of diverse styles of swords, not only one. What is curious is that at roughly the same period or at periods following closely one antother it seems these diverse kinds of swords were spread allover Europe, BUT WITH VERY SPECIFIED DISTRIBUTIONS out of Hungary, except some rare cases: I haven't any presupposed think here, but it could imply Hungary was as well a sink or transit place than a source for that?
    The Pannonian territory was hard fought for, always, and there were two groups competing with each other or partitioning it, from Tumulus to Urnfield, the Middle Danubian to the West, the Carpathian group/Channelled Ware/Gava to the North East. The technologically more important, especially for the Iron Age transition, was Gava, you just have to look at their production of swords and earliest iron swords. They were absolutely among the first, even more so doing it on a grande scale. Concerning Gava from Hungary: Not really. Only the very North East being part of the early distribution, and even that can be seen as intrusive, which is however debatable. Much of Hungary was taken later by Gava and its successors or partitioned betweeen them and their Urnfield Western counterpart of the Middle Danube. You have an elite in Eastern Slovakia-North Western Romania, a very powerful and rich elite and clans, which built huge fortresses and produced swords en masse. And they did expand South in large waves or infiltrating slowly in some other regions, it depends. But you see them coming in, as an intrusive element and that's what spread E-V13.

    I 'll try to stay on a global view: some phonetic phenomenons and some other facts you evoke and even some new phenotypes could show a radiating influence from Hungary (not by force a monoblock) at these dates almost on every direction, the Urnfield phenomenon being one the markers of it, I think (cremation was an endemic mode of burying there since long ago, if not exclusive). I don't exclude that a special ethny was at the beginning of these events, but it seems that aside a possible first specific demic impulse, some inter-elites exchanges with religious believings could have launched more moves of diverse ethnies or mixes as you said, at diverse scales (numbers, length of moves).
    Urnfield is bigger than Gava/Channelled Ware and was multi-ethnic, if you concentrate on Channelled Ware/Gava its much more obvious.

    Concerning Iron, which seems having been the strength of "Carpathians" I wonder if a population of the rivers knots between Balkans and southern Carpathians where Y-E-V13 has begun its densification at LBA had not profited of the first technics imported from South-East (through Anatolia?) and then progressed northwards for more mountainous ores?
    The inhabitants of the Carpathians basin and mountainous region were very close to the ores needed and excellent smiths for long. It was a metallurgical centre even before the steppe people came and it was staying one for thousands of years. They had the expertise of a multitude of generations. What you can see is that they first did, in part, help to destroy the old Bronze Age networks and world, and then quickly spread iron instead, moving out to other regions and selling their expertise. There are studies, some I quoted, which prove some expert blacksmiths did migrate from the Northern Carpathians to Greece. Whole groups of warriors did so as well, they moved up and down in the networks they established since marching South.

    Wiki speaks of Iron use from Caucasus, but I suppose it transited through Anatolia, without more clues. ATW whatever arrived, possible south to north and then north to south moves between LBA and LIA notwithstanding other moves, it seems to me dubious that a lone Y-haplo was still forming a complete ethny, even more dubious there, and I think too the big region covered by developments of Channelled Ware culture was previously multiethnic and only accepted some convenient "marriage" between their elites, and a new elite of Iron smithes plus some paganist religion based upon Iron and power. This phenomenon of intrusion of new elites is confirmed in Hallstatt of southern Germany/Austria, until Silesia, what doesn't mean it is the same as in southeastern Europe of the time.
    No watered down scenario can explain the shift. Its like it is with Bell Beakers in Britain and Iberia, its too big and radical. Concerning the adoption of iron swords: They were already superiour metallurgists and sword makers before, because the Channelled Ware group was one of the primary producers of Naue II swords.



    https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...fig2_292397599

    The very centre is right around the main fortresses, hoards and elite burials of Gava/Channelled Ware. They produced thousands of swords and equipped whole armies with the best swords which existed on the planet at that time. The iron was so important for them, not necessarily because they got it first, but they knew what to do with this new resource. They were among the first to develop a mass production of next level iron swords.

    Note it wasn't just an elite phenomenon, especially with Belegis II-Gava. You just see wave after wave of Gava-warriors and specialists coming in and replacing the locals males. In some regions this a process which happens abruptly, in others it takes generations, but the end result is the same. Before E-V13 is non-existent, afterwards 50-100 percent. The Bell Beakers had their copper daggers and arrows, Channelled Ware had Naue II and iron swords.

  17. #17
    Regular Member torzio's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,384

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - SK1480
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    The Pannonian territory was hard fought for, always, and there were two groups competing with each other or partitioning it, from Tumulus to Urnfield, the Middle Danubian to the West, the Carpathian group/Channelled Ware/Gava to the North East. The technologically more important, especially for the Iron Age transition, was Gava, you just have to look at their production of swords and earliest iron swords. They were absolutely among the first, even more so doing it on a grande scale. Concerning Gava from Hungary: Not really. Only the very North East being part of the early distribution, and even that can be seen as intrusive, which is however debatable. Much of Hungary was taken later by Gava and its successors or partitioned betweeen them and their Urnfield Western counterpart of the Middle Danube. You have an elite in Eastern Slovakia-North Western Romania, a very powerful and rich elite and clans, which built huge fortresses and produced swords en masse. And they did expand South in large waves or infiltrating slowly in some other regions, it depends. But you see them coming in, as an intrusive element and that's what spread E-V13.



    Urnfield is bigger than Gava/Channelled Ware and was multi-ethnic, if you concentrate on Channelled Ware/Gava its much more obvious.



    The inhabitants of the Carpathians basin and mountainous region were very close to the ores needed and excellent smiths for long. It was a metallurgical centre even before the steppe people came and it was staying one for thousands of years. They had the expertise of a multitude of generations. What you can see is that they first did, in part, help to destroy the old Bronze Age networks and world, and then quickly spread iron instead, moving out to other regions and selling their expertise. There are studies, some I quoted, which prove some expert blacksmiths did migrate from the Northern Carpathians to Greece. Whole groups of warriors did so as well, they moved up and down in the networks they established since marching South.



    No watered down scenario can explain the shift. Its like it is with Bell Beakers in Britain and Iberia, its too big and radical. Concerning the adoption of iron swords: They were already superiour metallurgists and sword makers before, because the Channelled Ware group was one of the primary producers of Naue II swords.



    https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...fig2_292397599

    The very centre is right around the main fortresses, hoards and elite burials of Gava/Channelled Ware. They produced thousands of swords and equipped whole armies with the best swords which existed on the planet at that time. The iron was so important for them, not necessarily because they got it first, but they knew what to do with this new resource. They were among the first to develop a mass production of next level iron swords.

    Note it wasn't just an elite phenomenon, especially with Belegis II-Gava. You just see wave after wave of Gava-warriors and specialists coming in and replacing the locals males. In some regions this a process which happens abruptly, in others it takes generations, but the end result is the same. Before E-V13 is non-existent, afterwards 50-100 percent. The Bell Beakers had their copper daggers and arrows, Channelled Ware had Naue II and iron swords.
    how does it merge with halstatt lands in the eastern balkans
    ?

    Fathers mtdna ...... T2b17
    Grandfather mtdna ... T1a1e
    Sons mtdna ...... K1a4p
    Mothers line ..... R1b-S8172
    Grandmother paternal side ... I1-CTS6397
    Wife paternal line ..... R1a-Z282

  18. #18
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    @Riverman.
    Thanks for answer(s). I haven't strong opposition for the scenario; I need more proofs concerning the Y-E-V13 increase as late as IA, spite I haven't proofs of the contrary; but it seems to me we lack more dense AND local Y-haplo's since ChL/BA to IA everywere between Central and Southeast Europe to be sure. Just to close this question in my mind; and I should be glad to can have the precise ethnies envolved in all these changes

  19. #19
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    ATW after these tries to precise things about Y-E-V13, we have to weight the reality of the scenario propose by Csabor Horvath: E-V13 Celts, J2 Tyrsenians and R1B-P312 Vasconic... I 'll post my opinion later, others can stick to it now.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    724


    Country: Austria



    Quote Originally Posted by torzio View Post
    how does it merge with halstatt lands in the eastern balkans
    ?
    Along the Alps and Danube was the connection Western Hallstatt/Northern Italian Hallstatt related groups <-> Eastern Hallstatt <-> Thraco-Scythians <-> Basarabi/Daco-Moesians <-> Thracians (proper).
    At the starting point was most likely the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon, which left a lasting impression and connected all those areas. For the formation of Hallstatt, especially Eastern Hallstatt, Basarabi was of great importance.

    The connection was however more going along the Danube, than the the Adriatic or Dinaric Alps, which were Illyrian dominated. In Austria-Slovenia there were groups which were more Basarabi influenced (Frg) or more Illyrian (Unterkrainer group). Daco-Thracian influences were strong especially in the Frg group of Eastern Hallstatt, but visible in the whole Eastern Hallstatt sphere and even down to Este, the Veneti. From the start the Daco-Thracians held horses and horse warriors in high esteem, but even more so after the Cimmerian-Scythian incursions and influences. This being also evident in the Veneti and Frg, which even used steppe-derived gear. Cimmerians and Scythians introduced new tactics, gear and horse breeds to the Daco-Thracians, the Pannonians and in the end the Celts, which adopted trousers, larger horse breeds, heavy cavalry and animal style art from the East, as did the Germanics.
    Its not by chance that early on the Veneti were known for their horse breeds, because through Hallstatt-Basarabi, they were well-connected to the steppe world, unlike some of their neighbours:
    Strabo records that Dionysius I of Syracuse (c. 432 367 BC), desiring the famed horses of the Veneti, founded trading colonies along the Adriatic coast.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriatic_Veneti

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    724


    Country: Austria



    By the way, if you use Google translate for this interesting paper, you can find something about the burial customs of Lăpuș II, which was at the core of Gava.

    https://www.austriaca.at/0xc1aa5576%200x002debec.pdf

    It was an elite which controlled the mining of ores and production of metal goods, especially weapons. A large portion of the population was not buried, but the elite was buried in huge tumuli of, in part, exceptional size for the time. Channelled Ware appears there from 14th, safely the 13th century, so much earlier than in the Balkans. The early Gava-related cultural formations in the region being closely connected to the Transcarpathian region of the Ukraine and Eastern Slovakia, of Hungary its only the very North Eastern part which being related at that time, but this changes once they start to expand Southward and Eastward. Intriguingly, they don't really expand big time, only fuse and influence a bit, into the territory of related Urnfield groups to the North and West, like Lusatians and Middle Danubians. Probably both because they had not the same advantages, leverage and were all part of the same religious-cultural wider network of the Urnfield system.
    The Gava-people primarily expanded South and East, that's where they headed once the core was finally formed and homogenised from different local influences and small groups. I'd assume that a specific tribe had taken over, homogenising the region, and then started to expand outward. An ideal scenario for a paternal lineage spread and replacement.

    It might help to stress the speed of the expansion, once it started:
    In terms of relative chronology, the early Gva
    phase in Central and Southern Transylvania is later
    than the Lăpuş II-Gva I horizon in North-West Romania
    (K a c s 1990, 49; M a r t a 2009, 102) and
    it is partially contemporary to the Susani group from
    Banat (S t r a t a n, Vu l p e 1977, 5658; G umă
    1993, 169170; Vu l p e 1995, 8386). The finds
    from Hunedoara (L u c a 1999, pl. 4:56,16, 5:6,910;
    S r b u et al. 2005, fig. 4:5) and Simeria (B a s a 1970,
    fig. 46; A n d r i ţ o i u 1996) point to an expansion of
    the Susani group towards South-West Transylvania (the
    Haţeg-Deva area), where no early Gva sites are known
    so far, a situation similar to the one of the Banat region

    (G umă 1993, 190194).
    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...n_Transylvania

    They appeared at roughly the same time in Southern Transylvania and at the Danube and in both regions, unlike the core area to the North, there is no regional continuous development towards Gava/Channelled Ware. These are massive changes, with grande scale expansions and replacements taking place in just about 100-150 years. Like I said before, in some cases the grandfather which settled in Serbia, Greece or Bulgaria, could still tell his grandchildren about the homeland in the North, that was the speed of the expansion, within just a couple of generations.

    Almost all the main splits of E-V13 fall in the same time span: 1.300-900 BC. The rest happened in the Hallstatt, after that, the macro-regions of Europe show only limited overlap in their TMRCAs, mainly attributable to historically known migrations and individual migrants in the historical period. That's hardly a coincidene, that the main branching events and expansions of E-V13 date exactly, really exactly, to the main expansion and branching events of Gava/Channelled Ware. Actually it can't be, since E-V13 was simply not there in many regions we have proof of its abundant existence just some generations later, AFTER Channelled Ware.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-01-09
    Posts
    720

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z36

    Country: UK - Scotland



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    C.B.HORVATH: short (right?) digest of mine for the people who cannot read the paper.
    This fellow made already in 2019 a paper titled ‘Finno Scythian hypothesis’…
    Roughly said, the present hypothesis is focused on the 2800-1800 BC span of time. He pretends he based himself on Y haplo’s successions and propose three layers of language in this period : Vasconic (according to Th. Venneman’s theory), Tyrsenian and Indo-European (relying on Gamkrelidze/Ivanov ‘s theory). No use to say he doesn’t agree to the Steppes theory…
    He considers IE cannot have been spoken in Iberiatoo early, because there were there too much “pre-”IE languages (I would prefer to say: “not-”IE): Aquitanian, Tartessian, Iberian, and maybe Pictish and Ligurian he considers as not proved IE languages; based on Hickey 2002 he considers possible a vasconic was spoken in the British islands before Celts; for him, IE tongues of Western Europe are too homogenous to date to the 2500 BC, in his mind, they would have been as distinct as Latin and Sanscrit!
    So, looking at Y-haplo’s (no autosome) and MRCA’s he says: Y-R1b L21 & DF27 separated around 2500 BC and BB’s were Vasconic speaking; they covered the whole Western Europe from South to North as did R1b-U152 for Central Europe/Alps.
    Concerning Tyrsenians where he includes Lemnic speakers, he is not sure of their moves, maybe by Mediterranea from Aegea, but he seems prefering a lands road; he proposes that among the 12 primary subclades of U152, 8 have a MRCA of 2400/2000 BC in the Tumuli Culture of Central West Europe; culturally the Vasvonics would have been “tyrsenoised” by a group of Y-J2b-Z2507 (from Balkans?): he bases himself on the succession of subclades of this Y-J2b in Central Europe he considers as launchers of the subsequent Urnfield Culture; Rhaetians in Northern Alps and Etruscans in Villanova (Etruscans: 50% of Y-R1B, 25% of them U152).
    Concerning Celts, he thinks that a peripheric R1b-U152-L2 has been IE-ised/Celticised by a group of Y-E-V13-CT59320 from Balkans, going towards the Danube source and covering the whole Central Europe between 1000/500 BC, launching the final Hallstatt + La Tène cultures. He notices the relative lack of Y-R1b-U152 among Italics and their weight for J1 & J2 so considers they could have reached Italy across the Adriatic Sea, through South and not through North! Shortly said he thinks the Celtic-Italic cradle was in Western Balkans pre-Illyrians.
    There's no lack of U152 in the recent Italic (or Etruscan) samples!!!

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    724


    Country: Austria



    Quote Originally Posted by Vallicanus View Post
    There's no lack of U152 in the recent Italic (or Etruscan) samples!!!
    And the most important non-R1b haplogroup in Rhaeto-Etruscans is G2.

  24. #24
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    72
    Posts
    5,080

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Vallicanus View Post
    There's no lack of U152 in the recent Italic (or Etruscan) samples!!!
    Agree.
    I haven't the more recent %'s of surely labelled Y-haplo's for Etruscans and IA Italics, if there are new samples; the ones I seen contained U152 for sure. I only posted the Horvath's interpretation. ATW, if the autosomes we have can be enough for a rough drawing by time and place, for the Y-haplo's more volatile, we need more before to make serious %'s out. For Etruscans and Italics as well as for other pop's in Balkans and Hungary. The Roman empire period is too late and saw too much changes in life and colonisations to help us to identify true genuine Italics, so their possible geographical origin and pathes, I think.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •