MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 6,094
- Reaction score
- 1,446
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
The case for a Celtic raid seems quite plausible:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatian_culture
German and Polish camarades will know more, but if the Lusatian culture is an offshot of Urnfield it's evident that the dates are the same... well, I know Galitzians in Poland would keep a Celtic past, but all Poland and Belarus is a huge expansion.
to you Berun in some way but rather to others too:
Lusacian culture lasted long time; the first launchings seem come from Danube regions, and the cremation certainly from someplace in Hungary; I think it was at first a specific ethny which launched it, surely tied to religion questions; Tumuli tribes in Poland considered as Celtic by someones, not all, (maybe they were Italics stayed close to Y-R1b-U152 Celts) came also from a section of the Danube river, colonized South Bohemia and after that Moravia and parts of Poland just before the 'Lusacian' phenomenon. This last one seems culturally very different from the Tumuli culture concerning death and burying goods and general philosophy, and we can suppose a flesh and blood input preceding what seem having been a very progressive acculturation in Poland (religion + cultural-economic superiority?). I find a bit unprecise these maps showing Lusacian culture allover Poland, BTW.
It seems this alternance of colonisation + acculturation was the rule for Urnfield period (same in baviera, same in Untrut/Liechtenstein): newcomers, contacts, neighbouring and exchanges, not without problems (strong places in high places, densification of population in several countries). The Urnfields and associated Lusacian question could explain, added to the poor value of DNA data, the relatively great variance among these WEZ 'fellows or among one party at least; and a first origin in Hungary among pre-I-E people/pre-Steppes pople could explain too the relative height of EEF percentage in admixture, if reliable. Let's notice the admixtures %'s are very variable, what could check contacts and acculturation. First Urnfields dudes were maybe not I-E speakers (why not a Rhaetic/Etruscan languages, for the fun?); spite this, in Poland it seems the Lusacian territory contained a lot of considered "Illyrian" toponyms (H. Hubert); question: true cremators newcomers or preceding Tumuli? True Illyrian language? at H. Hubert time the whole Illyrium was considered united; in fact it could rather be some Dalmatian/ Liburnian pan-Italic languages (akin to Venetian, and not far to some Osco-Umbrian?) and it could check other links already found in archeology.
My post could seem a bit out of topic, but this period was so complicated and some old scholars used so generalizating labellings... Maybe all what we are saying now will be debunked by deeper auDNA analysis, if samples permit it? But I think we are not dealing here with proto-Slavs, maybe not more with proto-Germanics, and if strontium doesn't lie, someones were coming from South if not Mediterranea! Surely two sides, whatever the mean distance between them! So some differences between them, spite the within variance.
I don't put a penny on some of my hypothesis, just for the fun, but who knows?