Neolithic Refuge and Continuity in Transylvania

I hope they present us uniparentals, because I don't trust general autosomal similarities anyway, they can be so misleading. If Roman legionaries from elsewhere came, they should have brought their yDNA as well. I'm sure they did, even Illyrian miners came, but the question is the proportion. Also which proportion of the local population practised cremation and how this might skew results, just like in Viminacium, where without cremation, the relative percentage of E-V13 would have been way higher.
 
I hope they present us uniparentals, because I don't trust general autosomal similarities anyway, they can be so misleading. If Roman legionaries from elsewhere came, they should have brought their yDNA as well. I'm sure they did, even Illyrian miners came, but the question is the proportion. Also which proportion of the local population practised cremation and how this might skew results, just like in Viminacium, where without cremation, the relative percentage of E-V13 would have been way higher.

I read up on the issue of Roman settlement, it looks like colonization was quite intensive, but Thracian and Illyrian settlers were quite minor, 5% combined. It's safe to say that if any E-V13 shows up, it has strong chance of being a local. It would be even more helpful if the samples from the Celtic period are published so we can have context in comparing aDNA and Y-DNA with pre and post-Roman period.
I don't want to see another Serbian style paper where samples from pre-Roman period are missing and they force chimera style models of Croatia IA plus a Anatolian+Levant component, most of these models did not even pass in Qpdam, but they still showed them.
 
In 2004 there were DNA samples taken from Babadag and Bessarabi cultures(at least Bassarabi region wise).

Paleo-mtDNA analysis and population genetic aspects of old Thracian populations from South-East of Romania


The samples sites are mapped in haplotree.info

I was able to find this quote of the study:
Computing the frequency of common point mutations of the present-day European population with the Thracian population has resulted that the Italian (7.9 %), the Albanian (6.3 %) and the Greek (5.8 %) have shown a bias of closer genetic kinship with the Thracian individuals than the Romanian and Bulgarian individuals (only 4.2%).

This is clearly a PCA type of comparison, similar to those G25 distance type of metric. This means Bassarabi can only plot where I proposed or even as south Thracians or in between.

iD8P7c1.png


Serbia Roman E-V13s for comparison
hk5HuVS.png



DIj3mf9.png

Some of the samples in question, there might have been more. 600 BC and 750 BC.
 
Last edited:
Some fraud checking analysis: as a comparison, this is how BA Romania samples plot, which rrenjet admin has tried to argue of continuity into the Iron Age, and thus E-V13s cannot be from the region. The north Thracian samples from 2004-2011 do not show any relationship to the prior EBA population, as these samples cannot possibly be analyzed as being most similar to Italians, Albanians and Greeks. Based on the indirect evidence from the older paper, there is zero chance of continuity between Danubian Romania BA samples and Iron Age Romania Danubian samples.
0EJjhyP.png
 
I agree in principle, but the mtDNA analyses are not that safe IMHO. For E-V13 there is currently yet another lull after the latest Avar paper, which samples being still not analysed by FTDNA if I haven't overlooked it.

The whole Danubian group of I2+G2 with high WHG (Encrusted Pottery, Monteoru, EBA Bulgarian samples in part) are largely a dead end, just like the Yamnaya pastoralists from the EBA.
Since they were kind of the middle, the only remaining question is whether the E-V13 was North (Transtisza-Transylvania-Transcarpathia) or South (Rhodopes) of it. I clearly lean towards the North, also because the Rhodope region and all of Bulgaria was resettled multiple times and shows not great continuity or demographic growth in the crucial MBA-LBA period AFAIK.

Whether the early Proto-Thracians plot North of the South Thracians or like them will also depend on the North or South scenario as hypothesised above.

All the later Daco-Thracian populations were "Balkan-like", that much is for sure. Even the fringe Gáva, Mezocsat and the single Vekerzug samples are not completely out of range, IMHO and the two Himera samples are there too. There is, in my opinion, no way, that all the Daco-Thracians and E-V13 carriers plotted the same, like the South Thracians.
And be it because a South Thracian post-Psenichevo like group moved North and mixed with locals, but variation there will be.
 
This is from the link in researchgate, from the pdf:

We should underline that there are some aDNA sequences which have the same point
mutations, such as: IBA and 8BA samples have the same insertion of G between 16152-16153
bp
in the first fragment of HVRI; 7BA, 1BA, 5BA have the same G ® A (16388) substitution in the
second fragment of HVRI. These samples proceed from the same archeological site or a near by
vicinity. It is possible that these individuals are close related in the maternal lineage. This fact is
more obvious in the case of 1IA and 2IA samples which have the same two substitutions: T ® C
(16359) and C ® A (16360) and they proceed from the same pit. Moreover, the substitution T?C
(16359) has also been encountered in four Romanian modern DNA sequences. Two other aDNA
sequences show similar point mutations with some modern DNA sequences, namely the 5BA
sample with C ® T (16183) and T ® C (16186) substitutions, the 7BA sample with the C ® T
(16220) substitution and the 8BA sample with the T ® C (16308) substitution. We have not yet
come across similar point mutations in both Iron Age and Bronze Age DNA sequences.
We can not yet draw a conclusion about the degree of the genetic kinship between the old
Thracian populations and the Romanian modern population. More mtDNA sequences from
Thracian individuals are needed in order to perform a statistical analysis. Up to now we can just
suppose, that the old Thracian populations would have been able to contribute to the foundation
of the Romanian modern genetic pool.

I would think they were doing a primitive form of aDNA comparison that would function like a G25 single distance comparison, but without the 25 coordinates.
Stenislav Stamov did a new interview two days ago and it was posted in youtube and some people translated in twitter. Similar information was disclosed to that Bulgarian forum, though no focus at all on E-V13. Given that the public disclosures match forum leaks, I deem the Bulgarian poster is legit. Wanted to share this, as it is a strong indication how far the paper has progressed, hopefully we will see it by a year time frame.

The only thing Stamov mentioned relating to Thracians, was that a native population was detected around Timok river and parts of north-western Bulgaria, dating 6-7th centuries and their burials were still pagan. In the Bulgarian forum, the poster expressed his opinion that this population moved to Albania.
 
North Western Bulgaria was throughout most of prehistory closer to North Eastern Serbia and Southern Romania, more of a core Thracian/Urnfield territory than the Rhodopes and Thrace proper. It was part of the Vartop zone where Channelled Ware largely replaced Encrusted Pottery, but did pick up some elements which later pop up in the new fusion of Stamped Pottery, like in later Babadag, Insula Banului and Psenichevo as well.
Therefore if there would have been any sort of continuity in North Western Bulgaria, this should be a nearly completely E-V13 dominated population, which received additional Dacian elements in later periods from the North.
 
North Western Bulgaria was throughout most of prehistory closer to North Eastern Serbia and Southern Romania, more of a core Thracian/Urnfield territory than the Rhodopes and Thrace proper. It was part of the Vartop zone where Channelled Ware largely replaced Encrusted Pottery, but did pick up some elements which later pop up in the new fusion of Stamped Pottery, like in later Babadag, Insula Banului and Psenichevo as well.
Therefore if there would have been any sort of continuity in North Western Bulgaria, this should be a nearly completely E-V13 dominated population, which received additional Dacian elements in later periods from the North.

Stamov was referring to the survival of a unaltered Thracian population in 7-8th century AD, their data detected such a population around Timok. I personally think they did not take more samples, as this population would likely be present in other parts of western Bulgaria. Location wise they could easily be the post-Roman period Bessi. The news is exciting nevertheless as the data sounds promising.
 
I saw the Stamov youtube video. IDK if he is just confused, but he mentions that the Thracians closest modern people are Maniots. But he also mentions that Scandinavians carry some Thracian similarity.

In what sense did he say that? That Thracians had some weird Aegean + minor Baltic/Scandinavian-like? Not sure i can follow his logic.

I just think he mixes stuff quite a lot, that's my perception.
 
For me, i am putting my bet in Neolithic origin on Criș Culture. It fits the bill from what the guy revealed, these were the high altitude cattle herders to which they taught the Bug-Dniester Mesolithic descended people about herding and domesticating cattle. They tamed the wild Aurochs of Europe with the cattle of Near East and created a new breed of cow.
Some of their northern spinoffs went into Eastern Carpathians, while some of their South/Eastern spinoffs contributed in Chalcolithic Balkans. But i think modern E-V13 descends from the core group of Criș.

Screenshot-2024-05-13-at-13-44-27.png


Let's see if i am correct.
 
I saw the Stamov youtube video. IDK if he is just confused, but he mentions that the Thracians closest modern people are Maniots. But he also mentions that Scandinavians carry some Thracian similarity.

In what sense did he say that? That Thracians had some weird Aegean + minor Baltic/Scandinavian-like? Not sure i can follow his logic.

I just think he mixes stuff quite a lot, that's my perception.

Honestly I think uniparentals and IBD sharing are more important within the European context for determining exact ancestral relationships. Would be great if they would have used those methods, but I kind of doubt it.

Körös-Cris is interesting, but kind of too old. Doesn't mean it couldn't harbour some E-L618, even the ancestral one, but I think we have to look at succesors from later periods to deal with something meaningful (like Petresti and Tripolye-Cucuteni etc.).
 
Last edited:
Honestly I think uniparentals and IBD sharing are more important within the European context for determining exact ancestral relationships. Would be great if they would have used those methods, but I kind of doubt it.

Körös-Cris is interesting, but kind of too old. Doesn't mean it couldn't harbour some E-L618, even the ancestral one, but I think we have to look at succesors from later periods to deal with something meaningful (like Petresti and Tripolye-Cucuteni etc.).

I know it's old but interesting nevertheless, especially since archaeologists find it very hard to detect Criș Culture burials.
 
Stamov guy is crazy. Can’t believe this guy works on these papers:

‘‘Thracian samples share more SNPs with contemporary Greeks and even contemporary Icelanders than with contemporary Bulgarians.’’

A quote of his ^^
 
Stamov guy is crazy. Can’t believe this guy works on these papers:

‘‘Thracian samples share more SNPs with contemporary Greeks and even contemporary Icelanders than with contemporary Bulgarians.’’

A quote of his ^^

Crazy or not, he provides some leaks. We have nothing from Serbia, no idea what samples are being processed from there, other than 1,200 BC project. One can back in to what rrenjet knows by listening carefully to what they say and how they say it. And what they chose to leave out.
But if you are doubting Timok interpretations. Alban Lauka dropped a new interview a week or two ago in your neck of the woods. He said something along the lines of "kur permen Dardani, nuk e kena fjalin per Kosoven, por dhe trevat e tjera qe i perputhen Dardanis". Cilat jan kto treva, sigurisht ne lindje, dhe pse do patjeter ti puthi me iliret? ;)
Se projekti rrenjet ngelet pa E-V13 dhe pa R-Z2705 = pa rrenje.
 
Crazy or not, he provides some leaks. We have nothing from Serbia, no idea what samples are being processed from there, other than 1,200 BC project. One can back in to what rrenjet knows by listening carefully to what they say and how they say it. And what they chose to leave out.
But if you are doubting Timok interpretations. Alban Lauka dropped a new interview a week or two ago in your neck of the woods. He said something along the lines of "kur permen Dardani, nuk e kena fjalin per Kosoven, por dhe trevat e tjera qe i perputhen Dardanis". Cilat jan kto treva, sigurisht ne lindje, dhe pse do patjeter ti puthi me iliret? ;)
Se projekti rrenjet ngelet pa E-V13 dhe pa R-Z2705 = pa rrenje.
That’s probably just to cover their asses because of their earlier comments linking all our V13 to Illyrians. Some subclades I guess could have been present among Dardanians but seems to me that probably at least a good portion moved west with Romans, just like in the rest of Europe, and some also after their collapse.

For Z2705, we spoke about before. Zero chance it came from Timok Valley or from that far East.
 
That’s probably just to cover their asses because of their earlier comments linking all our V13 to Illyrians. Some subclades I guess could have been present among Dardanians but seems to me that probably at least a good portion moved west with Romans, just like in the rest of Europe, and some also after their collapse.

For Z2705, we spoke about before. Zero chance it came from Timok Valley or from that far East.

I don't know what Stamov has seen. It could be the IBD analysis with Shtike(likely an early Vlach) and the post-Kukes samples. Could be based on specific haplogroup branche reads. He also plays around with G25(as seen in his first video where he leaked E-V13) and might have unofficial coordinates.
R-Z2705 is either Paeonian or the mystery Pcinje culture(E-V13 related block) which had elements of Brnjica in it, MKD I10379 could be such a sample. But this is Iron Age. In post-Roman period R--Z2705 had likely joined a pastoral E-V13 population as the two haplgroups are inseperatable among Albanians.
 
Some aDNA from Dalmatian Island of Hvar Roman Late Antiquity.


two E-V13, the other E1b is misaligned but should be E-V13 really.

4 other J2a, 1 J2b, 1 J1, 1 G2a.

As you know I posted about those samples on Genarchivist, but I really think we should be careful about their haplogroups, because of the distinctive South Eastern trend in the whole sample group. Before we don't get a confirmation, we can't be sure they are E-V13. The two likely are, but even those aren't for sure.
 
The Romans really did a number on Dalmatians, looks like it wasn't the Slavs that wiped out the illyrians

On general yes, they were punished pretty bad for the revolt but this is Pharos Island which was colonized by the Greeks, so the picture is more complex. Otherwise inland Dalmatia you still find Illyrians here and there. There is no chance all of them were decapitated. A good portion were enslaved by Romans, others were left free.
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 4548 times.

Back
Top