Neolithic Refuge and Continuity in Transylvania

Irregardless, it's quite impressive we find couple of V13'ers so north in Ukraine in Iron Age. You can expect and imagine how Carpathian Basin will look like.
 
The culture associated with the sample is boldly stated Thracian Hallstatt which is the Soviet preferred label for Carpathian Hallstatt derived cultures. I don't know what else is left to say. 😉
 
Who knows how many samples are pending. Even the Germanic paper, the Es in nordic Bronze Age are likely E-V13 too. We probably will not see E-V13 in Albania until post 850 AD, and rrenjet is talking about Illyrian shifted E-V13s in Iron Age Ukraine. LMAO
 
Read more from the paper, this is a goldmine. This is what the papers has to say about the Potlava samples, where 75% of the men were E-V13.

9Rf8wo1.jpeg

XyKXY2D.png

hOsdeD6.png



For the illiterates who don't know what Bassarabi is, here you go. All E-V13 has Daco-Thracian basis, it was fathered by them.

1RHKT6B.png
 
Last edited:
Those Scythian IA samples seem to be from a site of people called Gelones.

According to Herodotus they were mixed Greek colonists and Scythian. Not sure how trustworthy is that. I prefer Bassarabi-derived better.

But it can be from a Greek settlement as well. These Greeks supposedly came from a site called Borysthenes/Olbia. It could also be that they were Hellenized Tauri. The Tauri were the indigenous people from Crimea. There is quite a debate on them since some people think they were kin to Thracians.

So, either one of them:

Bassarabi
Greek colonizers
Hellenized Tauri
 
Finally we can rule out E-V13 spreading with Urnfield. E-V13 was always further south than the Urnfield core, genetically different to the Urnfielders who had much more WHG and much less EEF. E-V13 expanded later during mid Hallstatt period and further south. These E-V13 had Kurgan graves like the Scythians, it is even possible they came to Europe from east around 9th century BC (Cimmerians or Scythians) which is why we have been unable to find E-V13 before this period.
 
Last edited:
UKR133 seems to be R1b-Z2105, first occurrence of this Y-DNA subclade in an Iron Age context.

Pisochin Kharkiv, Ukraine labelled as Scythian.
 
Looking at the data again I have a feeling these R-M198 were proto Thracians - do we have the sub clades?
 
UKR133 seems to be R1b-Z2105, first occurrence of this Y-DNA subclade in an Iron Age context.

Pisochin Kharkiv, Ukraine labelled as Scythian.

Yes and another Z2105 there too, seems to be a lot of ydna diversity in that area. I am struggling to understand which ydna are actually Scythian - initially we thought Scythians were R1a, now we are also seeing Q1B, E-V13 and Z2105. We need to know the sub clades
 
Last edited:
Read more from the paper, this is a goldmine. This is what the papers has to say about the Potlava samples, where 75% of the men were E-V13.

9Rf8wo1.jpeg

XyKXY2D.png

hOsdeD6.png



For the illiterates who don't know what Bassarabi is, here you go. All E-V13 has Daco-Thracian basis, it was fathered by them.

1RHKT6B.png

Great catch! Kind of overread it, but you are right, they basically make these first confirmed E-V13ers from a Basarabi context!
 
Those Scythian IA samples seem to be from a site of people called Gelones.

According to Herodotus they were mixed Greek colonists and Scythian. Not sure how trustworthy is that. I prefer Bassarabi-derived better.

But it can be from a Greek settlement as well. These Greeks supposedly came from a site called Borysthenes/Olbia. It could also be that they were Hellenized Tauri. The Tauri were the indigenous people from Crimea. There is quite a debate on them since some people think they were kin to Thracians.

So, either one of them:

Bassarabi
Greek colonizers
Hellenized Tauri

If they were Greeks, they are extremely unlikely to have had such frequencies of E-V13. Of course, we might deal with related males and skewed statistics, but if we assume that rate of E-V13, with the haplogroup being the main local non-Iranian/Baltoslavic branch in the region, we can be sure they were Basarabi derived.
We have not and we will not find any very early Greeks with such high (basically 100 % for the colonists) E-V13 frequencies. So either these samples are absolutely not representative, or they are no Greeks.

Concerning Urnfielders, we get ever closer to a confirmation, since all three groups (Basarabi, Psenichevo, Babadag) had a previous layer of Channelled Ware. And we already know that pre-Channelled Ware/Urnfield, E-V13 was not widespread in areas like Bulgaria or Maros region.
Also, the Basarabi group was in a direct tradition of Channelled Ware, in fact, at the end of their culture, they reverted back to traditional Channelled Ware and cremation! Why should they have done that, if they had nothing to do with Belegis II-Gáva and Vartop among other Channelled Ware groups? The origin of Basarabi is in South Eastern Romania, especially between Oltenia and the Banat.
 
If they were Greeks, they are extremely unlikely to have had such frequencies of E-V13. Of course, we might deal with related males and skewed statistics, but if we assume that rate of E-V13, with the haplogroup being the main local non-Iranian/Baltoslavic branch in the region, we can be sure they were Basarabi derived.
We have not and we will not find any very early Greeks with such high (basically 100 % for the colonists) E-V13 frequencies. So either these samples are absolutely not representative, or they are no Greeks.

Concerning Urnfielders, we get ever closer to a confirmation, since all three groups (Basarabi, Psenichevo, Babadag) had a previous layer of Channelled Ware. And we already know that pre-Channelled Ware/Urnfield, E-V13 was not widespread in areas like Bulgaria or Maros region.
Also, the Basarabi group was in a direct tradition of Channelled Ware, in fact, at the end of their culture, they reverted back to traditional Channelled Ware and cremation! Why should they have done that, if they had nothing to do with Belegis II-Gáva and Vartop among other Channelled Ware groups? The origin of Basarabi is in South Eastern Romania, especially between Oltenia and the Banat.

What are you on about? These V13 were using Kurgans, Urnfield had nothing to do with Kurgans.

These V13 are heavy on EEF and very low WHG, the Urnfielders had high WHG (30-40%, highest we have seen in bronze and iron age) and low EEF. It is clear from Tollense battle and these samples that the Urnfielders had nothing to do with Basarabs or Scythians genetically, Urnfield was breaking down by 800BC and only survived through the Lusatians at this point.
 
Last edited:
This is the best model the prep-print has, rrenjet chose to promote a model of EHG shifted farmers, for fraudulent reasons.

iB6PNHc.png


The early E-V13 has 1-2% east Asian, the "Greek" sample has under 1% of such admixture. If they ran tests for levant admixture I would have to look at the supplemental again(excel docs). But I am certain the early sample will not have any levant/anatolian admixture.

I also want to point out, many of these bar graphs are not individuals but averages. The Thracian-Hallsat is made of 5 samples and the outlier stands alone(Thracian-Hallsat_2). Based on the PCA graph the samples will range 25% to 44% Yamnaya. They will encircle the original group I coined as Bassarabi cluster on a PCA. The Gelon E-V13s are just slightly shifted, they range 47-50% Yamnaya with the exception of one individual who seems to either be half Greek or an actual Greek woman that was married to the local elites, this is without a doubt the result of an friendly interaction with the Greek Black sea ports.
 
Those Scythian IA samples seem to be from a site of people called Gelones.

According to Herodotus they were mixed Greek colonists and Scythian. Not sure how trustworthy is that. I prefer Bassarabi-derived better.

But it can be from a Greek settlement as well. These Greeks supposedly came from a site called Borysthenes/Olbia. It could also be that they were Hellenized Tauri. The Tauri were the indigenous people from Crimea. There is quite a debate on them since some people think they were kin to Thracians.

So, either one of them:

Bassarabi
Greek colonizers
Hellenized Tauri

Poltava is just south-west of Kharkiv, it is no where near the sea, this is quite far into eastern Ukraine. One of the samples seems Greek shifted or just plain ancient Greek. Maybe they started marrying Greek woman at some point after developing good relations with the Black sea ports, hence Herodotus clumsy legends.
 
What are you on about? These V13 were using Kurgans, Urnfield had nothing to do with Kurgans.

These V13 are heavy on EEF and very low WHG, the Urnfielders had high WHG (30-40%, highest we have seen in bronze and iron age) and low EEF. It is clear from Tollense battle and these samples that the Urnfielders had nothing to do with Basarabs or Scythians genetically, Urnfield was breaking down by 800BC and only survived through the Lusatians at this point.

You constantly mix up different Urnfield groups.

Lusatians - Central European Urnfielders (Tumulus culture derived) and Gáva as the main groups, are very different people, with the same religion.
In fact, even the Lusatians were quite diverse among themselves, with some having the high WHG+I2, others more Bell Beaker like (Tumulus culture derived) and a 3rd group, which got even more clear with the new samples, being basically Baltoslavs.
 
Poltava is just south-west of Kharkiv, it is no where near the sea, this is quite far into eastern Ukraine. One of the samples seems Greek shifted or just plain ancient Greek. Maybe they started marrying Greek woman at some point after developing good relations with the Black sea ports, hence Herodotus clumsy legends.

What's your take on two Iron Age "Scythian" R1b-Z2105 finds here?

UKR133 Pisochyn Kharkiv UkrEIA_Scythian_SivDon_NomEl 500–300 BCE XY T1b R1b-Z2105 0.925

UKR110 Vesele Kharkiv UkrEIA_Scythian_SivDon_Nom 400–300 BCE XY U3a1b R1b-Z2105 0.430
 
This is the site in question

rVMc2B4.png



The authors state the settlements were founded by Bassarabi groups that lived south of Kiev.

6oRJ4Aw.png
 
You constantly mix up different Urnfield groups.

Lusatians - Central European Urnfielders (Tumulus culture derived) and Gáva as the main groups, are very different people, with the same religion.
In fact, even the Lusatians were quite diverse among themselves, with some having the high WHG+I2, others more Bell Beaker like (Tumulus culture derived) and a 3rd group, which got even more clear with the new samples, being basically Baltoslavs.

I am pointing out that we already have Urnfield DNA from 1300-1200BC which is when Urnfield was expanding. They plotted nothing like Basarabs and were closest to Polish people of today.

I don't know why you are obsessed with Urnfield, by the time Basarabs or Thracians were expanding Urnfield had ended and was only surviving with Lusatians. Kurgans had nothing to do with Urnfield which is what these E-V13 people were using, why are you ignoring that fact?
 
What's your take on two Iron Age "Scythian" R1b-Z2105 finds here?

UKR133 Pisochyn Kharkiv UkrEIA_Scythian_SivDon_NomEl 500–300 BCE XY T1b R1b-Z2105 0.925

UKR110 Vesele Kharkiv UkrEIA_Scythian_SivDon_Nom 400–300 BCE XY U3a1b R1b-Z2105 0.430

I prefer to hold off, we have to see for deeper clades, they are likely no different than the Moldova's R-Z2103, meaning unrelated to us. R-Z2105 does not mean much as it is branching that is pre 2,000 BC.
 

This thread has been viewed 17164 times.

Back
Top