E-V13 men as carriers of "Roman Imperial" Admixture

E

enter_tain

Banned
Messages
737
Reaction score
113
Points
0
Y-DNA haplogroup
J2B2-L283/Z638
I've wanted to make this thread for a few months now. Today there are millions of Italian, Greek, and Romanian men under EV13. In places like Albania, Kosovo, Hungary, Austria, Bulgaria, Serbia, they number ~ 1 million/each with some places frequencies as high as 40-50%. This Y-DNA has spread, not only in the Balkans, but all over southern, central and even northern/western Europe.

Haplogroup-E-V13.gif


I've never been a proponent of 1 ethnic group = 1 Y-DNA. That is stupid. You will only find such cases in very specific archeological sites, and not in large countries. As such, I do not believe there is only 1 source of E-V13. This will depend on individual branches. We have 3 EV13s in the Western Balkans during Roman times, but since that can be attributed to Roman Empire, we also have 1 Iron Age EV13. We also have the precursors to EV13 in a few different places like Spain and central Europe.

The point of this thread is not to determine where it arose initially. It is to point out the spread of this group during Roman Empire times. That is a clear undeniable fact. Places like Italy, Greece, Albania have shown 0 EV13 so far. Yet, people there number in the millions today. In fact, in the latest study even Serbia/Romania showed 0 samples. The only place with a noticeable amount of samples was south-east Bulgaria.

Like I said, it is a fact that this Y-DNA spread all over Europe during Roman times. But autosomally this is very interesting, because so did this elusive "Roman Imperial admixture".

F4.large.jpg


This is what the paper's authors say

"Consistent with this, we model the ancestry of this Balkans Iron Age Cluster as predominantly deriving from Iron Age (IA) groups from nearby areas in the Balkans, with 67% Aegean Bronze Age-related ancestry and the remainder Slovenia Iron Age-related ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.1). A local origin is supported by a high frequency of Y-chromosome lineage E-V13"

The issue here, is that they assume the E-V13 people were locals, while pointing out that 2/3rds of their ancestry was "Aegean". In fact, we have pure "Near Eastern"/"southeastern" men with E-V13. The "Balkan Iron Age Cluster" is a mixture of Western Balkan + Near-Eastern. These are probably Near Eastern EV13 men with local Balkan women.

4lRGPbn.png


How does it make sense for northern Serbia to be "67% Bronze Age Aegean" and be "locals"? This assumption the author's paper made seems to be erroneous.

Such a massive pan-European spread of E-V13 could only be facilitated by this "Roman Imperial" admixture, especially since it's mentioned these men had "high status" in European society.

"Individuals with Eastern Mediterranean ancestry could have high social status: 3 out of the 4 individuals buried in twosarcophagi (each containing a male-female pair) with exceptionally rich grave goods at the Ritnecropolis in Viminacium belonged to the Near Eastern-related cluster, while the remainingone belonged to the Balkans Iron Age-related cluster. This kind of burial was common in theEastern Roman settlements for aristocratic members of society "
 
Btw, in that Cosmopolitanism paper we have 2 individuals, not 1, that belong to the "Near Eastern" cluster with E-V13: I15525 and I15513.

They belong to the same E-V13 > E-Z1057 > E-CTS1273 a lot of those other half-Balkan/half-Near Eastern samples belong to.

This clearly shows these Near Eastern people are paternally related to the half-Near Eastern/half Balkan people there. This implies Near Eastern "Roman Cosmopolitan" men mixing with local Balkan women. Some of those mtDNA seem very European like too. Some further research would be great here.
 
Another addendum: There are also 2 E-V13 samples in North-Western Turkey as well dated to 600 AD in the Southern Arc paper as well. These are considered "Roman Byzantine" in the sample and are I8373 and I8371, at the site of Basilica (Marmara, Iznik). 2/3 male samples are E-V13 there.

I noticed this since the S. Arc paper came out: The E-V13 distribution is tied to south-eastern Balkans/north-western Anatolia, i.e. the area around Constantinople. The Cosmopolitanism paper mentioned the area of Constantinople was one of the prime sources of this "Roman Imperial admixture".

AEJ17-Nicaea-Turkey-680x380.png


These samples actually just place slightly more south than the Palace of Nestor Greek "Aegean" samples.

That makes 4 E-V13 near Eastern/Roman Imperial samples. All in/near major Roman urban centers. 2 in Serbia. 2 in Turkey. I think it's pretty clear at this point that the primary Y-DNA of this "East Med" component was this Balkano-Anatolian E-V13.
 
Hawk said:
Why bother yourself with so many analysis and not mention Thracian people as one of the major carriers of this lineage.
Click to expand...

Because like I said, I'm not concerning myself with its origin or Bronze Age/Iron Age migrations pathways. There are threads for that.

I specifically was talking about Roman-era expansions. Thracians have nothing to do with Italy.

All E-V13 men in an early Roman/Byzantine context are either

(1) Pure Southeastern/Near Eastern "Roman Imperial"

(2) Half "Roman Imperial"/Half Balkanite from their mother's side

And it's clear the "hotspot" is the bridge between the Balkans and Anatolia i.e. the area around modern day Istanbul.

P.S. I think Bruzmi on Anthrogenica has always pointed out that there is a "southern" shift to Hungarian E-V13 samples, but he's not saying it's a "south-eastern"/Roman Imperial shift. It's not just an old Balkan EEF shift.
 
enter_tain said:
Because like I said, I'm not concerning myself with its origin or Bronze Age/Iron Age migrations pathways. There are threads for that.

I specifically was talking about Roman-era expansions. Thracians have nothing to do with Italy.

All E-V13 men in an early Roman/Byzantine context are either

(1) Pure Southeastern/Near Eastern "Roman Imperial"

(2) Half "Roman Imperial"/Half Balkanite from their mother's side

And it's clear the "hotspot" is the bridge between the Balkans and Anatolia i.e. the area around modern day Istanbul.

P.S. I think Bruzmi on Anthrogenica has always pointed out that there is a "southern" shift to Hungarian E-V13 samples, but he's not saying it's a "south-eastern"/Roman Imperial shift. It's not just an old Balkan EEF shift.
Click to expand...

the Cosmopolitan paper makes it clear that roman cultural influence changed the burial rites, with E-V13 being exposed. we do not know how efficient, how local and how much time it took for this change to take place. what we know is that roman influence created cosmopolitan people, among them E V13 's.
i am not sure if you can conclude from these emancipated Ev13s, the story of the others (unemancipated or old fashioned ones).

basically, finding no E V13 bones is not proof that there were no people with that Haplogroup .... just an intrinsic complication to connect the dots. I really hope they benefited somehow from cremations in terms of plagues because they really made it hard to bring light to their game over time.
 
Bergin said:
the Cosmopolitan paper makes it clear that roman cultural influence changed the burial rites, with E-V13 being exposed. we do not know how efficient, how local and how much time it took for this change to take place. what we know is that roman influence created cosmopolitan people, among them E V13 's.
i am not sure if you can conclude from these emancipated Ev13s, the story of the others (unemancipated or old fashioned ones).
basically, finding no E V13 bones is not proof that there were no people with that Haplogroup .... just an intrinsic complication to connect the dots. I really hope they benefited somehow from cremations in terms of plagues because they really made it hard to bring light to their game over time.
Click to expand...

That's what the Urnfield paper 2022 concludes, it's their theory/hypothesis.

The earliest ‘urnfields’ can be identified in central Hungary, among the tell communities of the late Nagyrév/Vatya Culture, around 2000 BC. From the nineteenth century BC onwards, the urnfield model is documented among communities in northeastern Serbia, south of the Iron Gates. During the subsequent collapse of the tell system, around 1500 BC, the urnfield model spread into some of the neighbouring regions. The adoption, however, appears more radical in the southern Po plain, as well as in the Sava/Drava/Lower Tisza plains, while in Lower Austria, Transdanubia and in the northern Po plain it seems more gradual and appears to have been subject to processes of syncretism/hybridization with traditional rites. Other areas seem to reject the novelty, at least until the latest phases of the Bronze Age. We argue that a possible explanation for these varied responses relates to the degree of interconnectedness and homophily among communities in the previous phases.
Click to expand...

As you can see from their quote above, it's interesting how that potentially the earliest E-V13 we will have to date will be precisely from Nagyrev/Vatya border cultures, then those Iron Age Bulgarian E-V13 we saw, archaeologically they should have come from North-East Serbia among Grla-Mara/Dubovac Zuto Brdo Culture who split into Insula Banului in Romania and Psenicevo-Babadag further south. West of this culture was their inter-related culture, so called Vatin, if we exclude Encrusted Pottery influence. All these cultures all lumped into a label called Balkan-Danubian or Balkan-Carpathian Cultural Complex, scretching from Vatin South-West to Gava North-East, and they are all variants of South-East/East Urnfielder Cultures.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10963-022-09164-0

And, finally, the authors are not really sure whether the spread of Urnfield was cultural or demic diffusion, we might never know.

To what extent the spread of the urnfield model is the result of cultural transmission rather than (at least partially) a demic diffusion can be debated, but unfortunately not easily verified, since cremation destroys DNA and therefore the identification of any population movement via aDNA analysis.
Click to expand...

Or, there is a harder way of finding out, Early Christian grave, modern DNA TMRCA, irregular burials in pits which could be few but still telling. Though, not to be taken as literal ultimate truth table.
 
Hawk said:
Why bother yourself with so many analysis and not mention Thracian people as one of the major carriers of this lineage.
Click to expand...


And which seems to have absolutely nothing to do with any kind of proto-Albanians, let's not forget that most important here. Let's also not forget those Thracians belonged to a bunch of other Y-DNA completely non-existant in the modern Albanian population, not a single site in the Balkans so far that has been found to be pure E-V13 or E-V13 + R1b mainly, though some people seem to love inventing theories that proto-Albanians were these Y-DNA and picked up J2b2 when we already have Albanian R1b branches found in Iron Age Northern Albania together with J2b2. According to these people, this is all a coincidence, somehow actual proto-Albanians were E-V13 + R1b that only picked up J2b2 and not the actual R1b branches that were already there :laughing: Though isn't interesting how E-V13 hasn't been found in Ancient Greeks either .... Who were most likely J2a + R1b.

E-V13 is simply a Neolithic Y-DNA, like J2b2 which was absorbed by incoming Yamnaya / Steppe people, that Classical Greeks or Classical Illyrians were E-V13 so far is not supported by any evidence nor that it was spread by Proto-Albanians. It is nothing but a dead end theory.
 
enter_tain said:
Another addendum: There are also 2 E-V13 samples in North-Western Turkey as well dated to 600 AD in the Southern Arc paper as well. These are considered "Roman Byzantine" in the sample and are I8373 and I8371, at the site of Basilica (Marmara, Iznik). 2/3 male samples are E-V13 there.

I noticed this since the S. Arc paper came out: The E-V13 distribution is tied to south-eastern Balkans/north-western Anatolia, i.e. the area around Constantinople. The Cosmopolitanism paper mentioned the area of Constantinople was one of the prime sources of this "Roman Imperial admixture".

AEJ17-Nicaea-Turkey-680x380.png


These samples actually just place slightly more south than the Palace of Nestor Greek "Aegean" samples.

That makes 4 E-V13 near Eastern/Roman Imperial samples. All in/near major Roman urban centers. 2 in Serbia. 2 in Turkey. I think it's pretty clear at this point that the primary Y-DNA of this "East Med" component was this Balkano-Anatolian E-V13.
Click to expand...

It's unlikely that E-V13 just appears like like a newly arrived migrant to a Cosmopolitan city. During that time, Nicaea was days of travel away from Constantinople. Being near that place in modern travel distance means nothing. If anything, Nicaea was colonized by Macedonian Greek tribes during the Hellenistic era. There you probably have the first E-V13 Greeks. Their autosomal DNA also matches other Greeks. They were bound to pop-up at some point.
 
AliBaba said:
And which seems to have absolutely nothing to do with any kind of proto-Albanians, let's not forget that most important here. Let's also not forget those Thracians belonged to a bunch of other Y-DNA completely non-existant in the modern Albanian population, not a single site in the Balkans so far that has been found to be pure E-V13 or E-V13 + R1b mainly, though some people seem to love inventing theories that proto-Albanians were these Y-DNA and picked up J2b2 when we already have Albanian R1b branches found in Iron Age Northern Albania together with J2b2. According to these people, this is all a coincidence, somehow actual proto-Albanians were E-V13 + R1b that only picked up J2b2 and not the actual R1b branches that were already there :laughing: Though isn't interesting how E-V13 hasn't been found in Ancient Greeks either .... Who were most likely J2a + R1b.

E-V13 is simply a Neolithic Y-DNA, like J2b2 which was absorbed by incoming Yamnaya / Steppe people, that Classical Greeks or Classical Illyrians were E-V13 so far is not supported by any evidence nor that it was spread by Proto-Albanians. It is nothing but a dead end theory.
Click to expand...

Another one, enter_tain?
 
Dianatomia said:
It's unlikely that E-V13 just appears like like a newly arrived migrant to a Cosmopolitan city. During that time, Nicaea was days of travel away from Constantinople. Being near that place in modern travel distance means nothing. If anything, Nicaea was colonized by Macedonian Greek tribes during the Hellenistic era. There you probably have the first E-V13 Greeks. Their autosomal DNA also matches other Greeks. They were bound to pop-up at some point.
Click to expand...

It's a Thracian clade and Nicaea was colonized by Thracians too.
 
ihype02 said:
It's a Thracian clade and Nicaea was colonized by Thracians too.
Click to expand...

How can we know it's Thracian? We don't have specimens from Ancient Greece. And also take note that Nicaea was colonized from North Greeks. We have zero specimens from North Greeks so far. Besides, if these people from 2000 years ago were Greek speakers, they're Greek in my book.
 
Dianatomia said:
How can we know it's Thracian? We don't have specimens from Ancient Greece. And also take note that Nicaea was colonized from North Greeks. We have zero specimens from North Greeks so far. Besides, if these people from 2000 years ago were Greek speakers, they're Greek in my book.
Click to expand...

It's a subclade found in Thracians. With the Thracian colonization happening it makes it even a stronger hypothesis. I am not saying that the subclade being Northern Greek is out of question but it's more likely to be Thracian. Let's look at the facts and speculate.

Even if you turn out to be right, it's merely luck. I gave my analysis.
 
Can you borrow me some of your many throwaway emails, enter_tain? Just in case I need a throwaway email. They take some time to open and I am lazy.

As for Bithynia, since you asked:
Bithynia is named for the Thracian tribe of the Bithyni, mentioned by Herodotus (VII.75) alongside the Thyni. The "Thraco-Phrygian" migration from the Balkans to Asia Minor would have taken place at some point following the Bronze Age collapse or during the early Iron Age. The Thyni and Bithyni appear to have settled simultaneously in the adjoining parts of Asia, where they expelled or subdued the Mysians, Caucones and other minor tribes, the Mariandyni maintaining themselves in the northeast. Herodotus mentions the Thyni and Bithyni as settling side by side.[1]
 
E-V13 sample from Bulgaria 400 AD I checked out does not show any Near Eastern admixture. Neither does sample from Nish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top