The diverse genetic origins of a Classical period Greek army

Don't know why you assume that E-V22 had to come with Phoenicians. It's possible, of course, but if E-V13 could come on the Neolithic wave, why not E-V22, and how would you choose between the two possibilities?

The pattern so far has been that there are very few "Phoenicians" in the Phoenician sites, as I've always maintained. Perhaps that will change. We'll see.

The evidence we've seen would indicate that the mantra about how the Phoenicians had such a huge influence on Sicily, and heck, even in statements of utter stupidity, Campania, Lazio and anywhere the Phoenicians stored their goods. has turned out to be a fantasy.
 
There is some rumour, though i couldn't verify that 1 E-V13 sample will appear in Mesolithic Greece from Laluea-Fox paper on Balkans. It's a bit weird since i expect E-V13 to not be yet formed during Mesolithic time.
 
Don't know why you assume that E-V22 had to come with Phoenicians. It's possible, of course, but if E-V13 could come on the Neolithic wave, why not E-V22, and how would you choose between the two possibilities?

The pattern so far has been that there are very few "Phoenicians" in the Phoenician sites, as I've always maintained. Perhaps that will change. We'll see.

The evidence we've seen would indicate that the mantra about how the Phoenicians had such a huge influence on Sicily, and heck, even in statements of utter stupidity, Campania, Lazio and anywhere the Phoenicians stored their goods. has turned out to be a fantasy.
Indeed. What we are rather seeing is the prevelance and influence of European cultures (especially maritime ones) via the attestation of European haplogroups even beyond their continent.
 
There is some rumour, though i couldn't verify that 1 E-V13 sample will appear in Mesolithic Greece from Laluea-Fox paper on Balkans. It's a bit weird since i expect E-V13 to not be yet formed during Mesolithic time.

mesolithic is to early for e-v13
but maybe the rumor is about an e-L618 individual
either way if true would be cool:cool-v:
 
There is some rumour, though i couldn't verify that 1 E-V13 sample will appear in Mesolithic Greece from Laluea-Fox paper on Balkans. It's a bit weird since i expect E-V13 to not be yet formed during Mesolithic time.

Very interesting, and major, if true.
Even if it is an upstream clade, ancestral to E-V13 this could tell us a lot. Would somehow be in line with E-V13 more often than not having a relatively southern profile in the Balkans (ie similar to Kapitan Andreevo).
 
There is some rumour, though i couldn't verify that 1 E-V13 sample will appear in Mesolithic Greece from Laluea-Fox paper on Balkans. It's a bit weird since i expect E-V13 to not be yet formed during Mesolithic time.

The really big leap, according to FTDNA, is between the descendant of E-L618
E-CTS1975
6700 BCE

and

E-V13
3050 BCE

These are 3.700 years in between, that's as long as from the days of the Corded Ware expansion in Central Europe to our times! I mean its really, really huge. And we have no single find, either modern or ancient, in between as far as I know. That's really like a needle in the haystack. And even the first E-V13 we might find might be some sort of side branch which didn't really make it and didn't contribute to the big Bronze Age expansion.
 
Very interesting, and major, if true.
Even if it is an upstream clade, ancestral to E-V13 this could tell us a lot. Would somehow be in line with E-V13 more often than not having a relatively southern profile in the Balkans (ie similar to Kapitan Andreevo).

Yeah, but in this scenario E-L618 or whether it was E-V13 was picked up by Cardial Farmers (G2a, C, H) and was not the original marker of Cardial Farmers (this is surprising to me, i thought it was a straight shot knowing Cardium Pottery Culture had Iberomaurusian/Natufian influence, but you never know). Afterwards, after the spread with Cardial Farmers we come to the usual arguments from where it comes. Certainly not South considering Psenicevo archaeologically is foreign to the region.

They have considerable farmer ancestry, but it's not Aegean Neolithic, it's related something more western than Chalcolithic Bulgarian, and that points somewhere to Southern Pannonia/Northern Serbia/somewhere in Carpathian. The core Urnfielder culture originates there, Vatin-Vatya-Hatvan along the line. It's hard to pinpoint which specific sub-culture of Balkan-Carpathian Culture.

Notice, Gabor Vekony one of the most prominent and famous Hungarian archaeologist, a specialist for the region, concluded that Psenicevo, Babadag and Gava were cousin cultures. So far Psenicevo beared exclusively E-V13, no doubt about Babadag as well, Gava might be more mixed since the more southern colonizers probably mixed with Northern Carpathian people. 2 Himeran E-V13-ers were like half Central European half Balkan fitting the presuppositions.
 
The really big leap, according to FTDNA, is between the descendant of E-L618
E-CTS1975
6700 BCE

and

E-V13
3050 BCE

These are 3.700 years in between, that's as long as from the days of the Corded Ware expansion in Central Europe to our times! I mean its really, really huge. And we have no single find, either modern or ancient, in between as far as I know. That's really like a needle in the haystack. And even the first E-V13 we might find might be some sort of side branch which didn't really make it and didn't contribute to the big Bronze Age expansion.

That's different story, i didn't try to connect a Late Bronze Age phenomena of E-V13 with Mesolithic-Neolithic sample (if it's really from Greece and from Mesolithic). The analogy being just like I2a2-Din spread during Early Middle Age/Dark Ages. A complete cut-off from Mesolithic to Early Middle Ages.
 
Olalde et al proposed a common origin for all EEF, both Cardial and those who took the Danube route.
Common Genetic Origin for Early Farmers from Mediterranean Cardial and Central European LBK Cultures | Molecular Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic (oup.com)

In 2018 Mathiesen found the same thing.
"[FONT=&quot]We confirm that Mediterranean populations, represented in our study by individuals associated with the Epicardial Early Neolithic from Iberia[/FONT][FONT=&quot]7[/FONT][FONT=&quot], are closely related to Danubian populations represented by the [/FONT]Linearbandkeramik[FONT=&quot] (LBK) from central Europe[/FONT][FONT=&quot]7,45[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and that both are closely related to the Balkan Neolithic population. These three populations form a clade with the NW Anatolian Neolithic individuals as an outgroup, consistent with a single migration into the Balkan peninsula, which then split into two ([/FONT]Supplementary Information Note 3[FONT=&quot]).[/FONT][FONT=&quot]In contrast, five southern Greek Neolithic individuals (Peloponnese_Neolithic) – three (plus one from Ref. 26) from Diros Cave and one from Franchthi Cave – are not consistent with descending from the same source population as other European farmers. D-statistics (Supplementary Information Table 2) show that in fact, these “Peloponnese Neolithic” individuals dated to ~4000 BCE are shifted away from WHG and towards CHG, relative to Anatolian and Balkan Neolithic individuals. We see the same pattern in a single Neolithic individual from Krepost in present-day Bulgaria (I0679_d, 5718-5626 BCE). An even more dramatic shift towards CHG has been observed in individuals associated with the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures,26 suggesting gene flow into the region from populations with CHG-rich ancestry throughout the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze Age. Possible sources are related to the Neolithic population from the central Anatolian site of Tepecik Çiftlik,21 or the Aegean site of Kumtepe,11 who are also shifted towards CHG relative to NW Anatolian Neolithic samples, as are later Copper and Bronze Age Anatolians.10,26

The genomic history of southeastern Europe. - Abstract - Europe PMC

[/FONT]

What paper are you using for the proposition that the Cardial farmers were so different from the Danubian farmers?

If I missed it I obviously have to read it.
 
Yeah, but in this scenario E-L618 or whether it was E-V13 was picked up by Cardial Farmers (G2a, C, H) and was not the original marker of Cardial Farmers (this is surprising to me, i thought it was a straight shot knowing Cardium Pottery Culture had Iberomaurusian/Natufian influence, but you never know). Afterwards, after the spread with Cardial Farmers we come to the usual arguments from where it comes. Certainly not South considering Psenicevo archaeologically is foreign to the region.

They have considerable farmer ancestry, but it's not Aegean Neolithic, it's related something more western than Chalcolithic Bulgarian, and that points somewhere to Southern Pannonia/Northern Serbia/somewhere in Carpathian. The core Urnfielder culture originates there, Vatin-Vatya-Hatvan along the line. It's hard to pinpoint which specific sub-culture of Balkan-Carpathian Culture.

Notice, Gabor Vekony one of the most prominent and famous Hungarian archaeologist, a specialist for the region, concluded that Psenicevo, Babadag and Gava were cousin cultures. So far Psenicevo beared exclusively E-V13, no doubt about Babadag as well, Gava might be more mixed since the more southern colonizers probably mixed with Northern Carpathian people. 2 Himeran E-V13-ers were like half Central European half Balkan fitting the presuppositions.

Could very well be. Do the cultures you mentioned have intrusions from Central Europe? Also, do they have any connection to Western Anatolia? Because, looking at the origin of E-V13, if it ultimately came from the mixing of a more northern Central European component, with a more Southern one, the southern component would have to be quite Southern. Otherwise profiles like Kapitan Andreevo can't be explained. It certainly could not come about from a Central Europe + BA/IA Balkans mix, as that would yield a profile way more northern.

So IIRC we have some EEF e1b1... from Iberia in the Neolithic, than we have a cold trail of missing ancient samples, then we get a lot of ancient samples from the IA from Hungary to the Bulgarian-Turkish border. One could hypothesize some farmer population, but we have quite a bit of early farmer samples from the Balkans and no V13... While at the same time the TMRCA of V13 leads me to think, some sort of steppe movements directly or indirectly lead to the huge demographic boom 4800 years ago. Could it be that V13 was incorporated around Cucuteni-Trypillia, and by the time IE expanded West it had already diverged into various branches? Could explain the TMRCA, demographic boom etc. But would not explain why we do not have way more V13 samples around the BA, from anywhere.
 
Could very well be. Do the cultures you mentioned have intrusions from Central Europe? Also, do they have any connection to Western Anatolia? Because, looking at the origin of E-V13, if it ultimately came from the mixing of a more northern Central European component, with a more Southern one, the southern component would have to be quite Southern. Otherwise profiles like Kapitan Andreevo can't be explained. It certainly could not come about from a Central Europe + BA/IA Balkans mix, as that would yield a profile way more northern.

So IIRC we have some EEF e1b1... from Iberia in the Neolithic, than we have a cold trail of missing ancient samples, then we get a lot of ancient samples from the IA from Hungary to the Bulgarian-Turkish border. One could hypothesize some farmer population, but we have quite a bit of early farmer samples from the Balkans and no V13... While at the same time the TMRCA of V13 leads me to think, some sort of steppe movements directly or indirectly lead to the huge demographic boom 4800 years ago. Could it be that V13 was incorporated around Cucuteni-Trypillia, and by the time IE expanded West it had already diverged into various branches? Could explain the TMRCA, demographic boom etc. But would not explain why we do not have way more V13 samples around the BA, from anywhere.

I would classify it more like Southern Central Europe, hence the archaeological classification as Balkan-Carpathian Cultural Complex, note that it's called complex and it's expected to find multiple Y-DNA's.

Here something from Milos Jevtic

Tools for ornamentation of pottery are iprecious and rare finds, mast
commonly discovered in settlements. Apart from individual finds of
small stamps made of bone or baker clay, we can mention sorne rare
tools wich, judjing by their shape, were probably used to polish ceramic
pots and to make shallow ·grooves. Several polished stane .tools in the
shape of short knives with thinned blade were discovered along with the
bone tools for the impression of the pseudo-cord, in Târpeşti settlement
(the iSabatinovka-Noua culture) in East Romania (T. 1/9-11)2.

The remains of a pottery shop from the .Early Iron Age ,settlement
(VIII-VII century) in the village of Sava (Vama district), in S-E of Bul-
garia, deserve particular attention 3 • Along with a rectangular room, the
remains of a kiln and numerous finds of badly baked, deformed vessels,
there were discovered several 'tools for ornamentation of pottery macle of
baked clay, bone and polished stone. Along with smaller stone polishers,
a stone tool with a very thinned, arched end was found, wich was pro-
bably also used to ornament vessels. A short, cylindrical bone iStamp is
at , the one end shaped to leave small impressions of double hexagons.
Two small, cylindrical tools ·made of 1baked ~lay terminate at both ends
in starnps for the impression into the wet clay of a vessel (T. 1/1, 2) .. 0ne
stamp was used to impress two small concentric circles, with/or without
a point,in the center. Another stamp terminates atone end oin plastically
modelled double circles, with a point in the center, and at the other, in
a narrow and short rib in the shape of letter „S". It 1 can be noted that

the imprint of the „S" stamp, if it is drawn ·correctely, belongs to the
so-called angular „S" motif (the upper parts of the letter „S" are an-
gulary broken) wich is most commonly impressed in the upright posi-
tion into the vessels of the Psenicevo culture. According to the find of
fibula with so-called :nodular appendage on the arch, discovered in the
waste pit near a kiln, the shop for the making of baked clay vessels da-
tes from the end of VIII or the first half/ of VII century. Let us remark
that a ceramic stamp for the impression of the pseudo-cord motif from
the Sava settlement was published (T. •Il/2) 4 •


Stamps for the ornamentation of pottery were mostly discovered in
the Early Iron Age settlements on the territory of Eastern Europe. As
far as we know, the majority consists of itools for the impression of the
so-called pseudo-cord motif, while among the others, the stamps with
stamped motifs rarely were the subject of a special paper, such as 1the
find of ceramic tool for the impression of the pseudo-cord motif from
the Cozia settlement (Iaşi county), ,wich iis classified as belonging to the
Babadag group (Babadag II phase) (T. II/3) 5 . B. Hansel has collected se-
vera! ceramic and bone stamps from the early and developed phase iof
the older Iron Age settlements in the area from Gate to East Molda-
via6. We have attemped, :without any pretension to completeness, to
apend the list of finds of this kind, limiting ourselves mainly to the ba-
bed clay tools, also discovered in the Basarabi culture settlemen'ts
(Map. 1).

Ceramic stamps for ornamentation of vessels are of small dimens-sions, only a few centimeters (most ,commonly 3-5 cm). Beside above
mentioned ceramic :stamps from Sava settlemeni in S-E Bulgaria, un-usual appearance distinguishes the stamps from the Early Iron Age for-tified settlement in the village of Grigorovka, ·near Vinica, ~n the cen-
tral Dniester area {S-W Podoli) Le. a part of Western Ukraine. On the
pre-Scythian horizon of Grigorovska gradina, ralong ,with intented and
stamped pottery of so-cal1ed early Zabotin type of the Cernoles culture,
three ceramic stamps were found 14 • Two stamps by their appearance re-
semble bear's paws, while only a half of the third stamp was preserved,
of usual appearance in the iform of a small iknife wi•th a short handle and
the arch shaped blade. Along with obliquely serrated functional part of
the damaged stamp, and clearly distinguished teeth in the form of nails
of the bear's paws, in the text are menJtioned the stamps in the form .of
the letter „S", probably modelled ,with the same tools, wich are not vi-
sible in the drawings (we must admit that the text in not quite dear
to us, as it is rather succint 'and speaks of baked clay bear's paws as
being figurines). This seems particularly significant if one bears in mind
that the stamped pottery from Grigorovska gradina (fortified settlement)
is connected with the break-,through of the younger Babadag and Basa-
rabi culture from the lower Danube area.

Before pointing to several baked clay tools discovered on the Early
Iron Age in Serbia, we canal.so mention bone tool originating from the
Orm<>Z settlement on the Drava20 • Transversally serrated 'longer side of
the tool, in the ;shape of ablunted blade, may bave ·been used for the
stamping of wet clay of a vessel in order to produce the pseudo-cord
found on vessels frorn .the late phase of the Ru5e group. Let us note that
the pottery decorated with the pseudo-cord, along with rare vessels -or-
namented with the impressions of „S" motif and small concentric circles,
connected by tangents of the pseudo-cord, was found in this settlement
belonging to the younger Urnenfelder and the Early Iron Age cultures.
The manner of the organization of the pseudo-cord strings and other
shapes of the impressed motifs point to the similarities to the pottery of
Insula Banului and Babadag groups, wich probably came to those parts
in the time of Thraco-Cimmerians invasion. We even think that some
of the appenda is in the shape of semicircular thin tablets made of
bronze with finely serrated base side, like the one found on the Early
Iron Age site in Vinica, south of Bela Krajna, were possibly used for
the ornamentation of pottery by the pseudo-cord technique2 1 . In any case
it would be useful to compare the impressions of those bronze, comb-
like appendages, found in several Early Iron Age cultures in N-E Bal-
kans and S-E Alpine region, with the impression of the pseudo-cord
on vessels from the same cultures. E. Voss (a professional conservator)
has recently, while investigating manners of ornamentation of the hall-
statt poterry, supposed that the pseudo-cord motif technique, as a part
of pottery encrustation technique, consists in the impression of a
tool made of bone, metal or wood 22 • The author has also presupposed the
appearance of a wooden tool for the impression of the pseudo-cord motif,
in the form of a small knife with the serrated blade (T. I/5), pointing
out the erroneus term Rollrădchenzier, i.e. that is not the case of orna-
mentation by a small wheel.

ON TOOLS FfOR ORNAMENTATION OF THE POTTERY
IN THE BASARABI CULTURE

Milos Jevtic

Jevtic clearly links the S Stamped and Grooved Pottery as a younger Urnfielder phenomena.

On top of it, here is what Hungarian archaeologist Gabor Vekony wrote regarding Late Bronze Age:

The new conquerors, groups of people of the Gáva culture, occupied the Küküllő region (Medgyes), then the Olt valley (Réty), the Mezőség, and the Szamos region (Oláhlápos). Some of their dwellings were built of wood beams or on wooden foundations, others were oval or square, sunken huts with a central, plastered fireplace; some of their settlements were fortified. They bred mainly cattle but also kept many horses. Although many bronze sickles have been found, agriculture was not a major activity, and they obtained much of their meat by hunting.


Their arrival sparked off a renaissance of bronze craft in the region of the Érc Mountains. Almost all of their implements, weapons, and jewellery was fashioned from bronze; huge stores of axes, sickles, swords, lances, belts, pins, and vessels have been unearthed at Ispánlaka, Felsőmarosújvár, Nagysink and Marosfelfalu (Cincu-Suseni 'horizon').


By the end of the Late Bronze Age, the people of the Gáva culture, who buried cremated remains in urns, and related groups had expanded their domain. Their settlements and burial places are found not only in Transylvania, but also in the Banat, in areas east of the Tisza, and, east of the Carpathians, in Galicia and Bessarabia (Holihrad and Kisinyov cultures). Some of their groups travelled across the wooded steppes as far as the Dnieper River. Judging from the material evidence, peoples who lived at this time south of {1-36.} the Carpathians, in Wallachia and northern Bulgaria, spoke a language related to that of the Gáva culture (Babadag and Pšeničevo cultures). This region is roughly contiguous with the subsequent settlement areas of the Dacians, Gaetians, and Mysians.

https://mek.oszk.hu/03400/03407/html/9.html


IMO, they were neither Southern neither Central-Eastern European, they were right in the vicinity of the borders between Balkan-Carpathian/Southern Central Europe. I do expect high EEF, why not. Some of them could be more EEF, some more Northern like those two E-V13 from Himera. So, they could have expanded both North and South from somewhere in Balkan-Carpathian sphere.


Note that he says Psenicevo and Babadag were related groups to Gava and not descended. The view that Psenicevo is descended directly from Gava is the view of old Bulgarian archaeologists. I don't know about the new ones, generally they refuse to talk anything about it's origin, they never mention whether it's local or foreign.

Then we have Draga Garasanin who was of the opinion that Psenicevo had close contacts with Mediana group.

In Thrace at this time we have the appearance of the new group, the so called Psenicevo which kept close contacts with the peoples of the Morava Lands area as can be seen from the finds in the Mediana group. It can also be noticed that the people, who during this period lived in the Morava Lands area took part if only partially in the movements attributed to the so called Aegean Migration. In this manner, the Bronze Age evolves as a very important stage in the process of formation of the Paleobalkan peoples, their ethnogenesis, and the historical events that have left their imprint, in a sense on the historical evolution of the old Balkans. Until now, enough attention has not been paid to this very important period in the ancient history of southeastern Europe except among the small circle of interested specialists. It is the purpose of this exhibition, to try and fulfill this gap, and offer a more understanding picture of this, not too well known period. We shall be very pleased if this exhibition and this short accompanying survey helped in any way to achieve this aim.

https://www.rastko.rs/arheologija/dgarasanin-the_bronze.htm

I recommend reading her intake about all Balkans.

My safer bet on those SE Bulgarian E-V13 are these two:

The region of Vojvodina, just like the Morava Lands area, is for the most part related to the Balkano-Carpathian complex. However, on the other hand there are certain factors which are more closely related to the region of Pannonia. Today, in general, in this region we can distinguish two cultural groups: the Vatin group named after the type site at Vatin near Vrsac and the Dubovac-Zuto Brdo group after the types sites of Dubovac near Kovin and Zuto Brdo in the village of Vinci near Golubac in Serbia. It must be immediately noted that the characteristics of these groups can be traced in the Serbian region of the Danube Lands, in the same form as in Vojvodina, however they don't extend more south than Central Serbia and the Morava Lands area. The events in Western Serbia, on the basis of the material culture are closely related to Vojvodina, even though the burial rite is different and connected to the west Balkan complex, and shall be treated later in this survey.
 
Olalde et al proposed a common origin for all EEF, both Cardial and those who took the Danube route.
Common Genetic Origin for Early Farmers from Mediterranean Cardial and Central European LBK Cultures | Molecular Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic (oup.com)

In 2018 Mathiesen found the same thing.
"We confirm that Mediterranean populations, represented in our study by individuals associated with the Epicardial Early Neolithic from Iberia7, are closely related to Danubian populations represented by the Linearbandkeramik (LBK) from central Europe7,45 and that both are closely related to the Balkan Neolithic population. These three populations form a clade with the NW Anatolian Neolithic individuals as an outgroup, consistent with a single migration into the Balkan peninsula, which then split into two (Supplementary Information Note 3).In contrast, five southern Greek Neolithic individuals (Peloponnese_Neolithic) – three (plus one from Ref. 26) from Diros Cave and one from Franchthi Cave – are not consistent with descending from the same source population as other European farmers. D-statistics (Supplementary Information Table 2) show that in fact, these “Peloponnese Neolithic” individuals dated to ~4000 BCE are shifted away from WHG and towards CHG, relative to Anatolian and Balkan Neolithic individuals. We see the same pattern in a single Neolithic individual from Krepost in present-day Bulgaria (I0679_d, 5718-5626 BCE). An even more dramatic shift towards CHG has been observed in individuals associated with the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures,26 suggesting gene flow into the region from populations with CHG-rich ancestry throughout the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze Age. Possible sources are related to the Neolithic population from the central Anatolian site of Tepecik Çiftlik,21 or the Aegean site of Kumtepe,11 who are also shifted towards CHG relative to NW Anatolian Neolithic samples, as are later Copper and Bronze Age Anatolians.10,26

The genomic history of southeastern Europe. - Abstract - Europe PMC


What paper are you using for the proposition that the Cardial farmers were so different from the Danubian farmers?

If I missed it I obviously have to read it.

Only influence and not sole origin.

[FONT=var(--nova-font-family-sans-serif)][COLOR=var(--nova-color-grey-800)][FONT=var(--nova-font-family-sans-serif)]Archaeological data show that in the Eastern Mediterranean impressed pottery appears at the end of the Neolithic Period and disappears with the emergence of Halafian elements. Recently it became evident that this type of pottery appeared simultaneously on either side of the Aegean by 6100-6000 BC. As it has been previously noted by Perles and Özdoǧan, there are a number of common traits shared among the early farming communities of the Eastern Mediterranean an the Aegean such as subsistence patterns, some components of the material assemblages and use of specific technologies in daily life. In spite of the lack of data from the southern coastal strip of Turkey, in an overall assessment, it is evident that the simultaneous appearance of impressed pottery in the Eastern Mediterranean - implying the Levant and Northern Syria - and the Aegean was not coincidental.

[/FONT]
[/FONT][/COLOR]
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289138313_The_appearance_of_impressed_pottery_in_the_Neolithic_Aegean_and_its_implications_for_maritime_networks_in_the_Eastern_Mediterranean
 
Keep in mind what Babadag and the Bulgarian Fluted ware horizon and later Psenichevo essentially are: They are the result of Channelled Ware/Knobbed Ware (Thracian Hallstatt, G?va-related) influences fusing with local Coslogeni elements (related to Noua-Wietenberg, Noua-Sabatinovka from the steppe, related to Srubna). And that's what we see, E-V13 (Carpathain basin) plus a minority of R-Z93 (steppe, Srubna-related) in a couple of Thracian-related samples, like recently the two Caucasian shifted individuals or the Bulgarian Southern Thracians.
In the EBA-MBA there was a hiatus in Bulgaria and afterwards many groups came in, of which those two (Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni and Fluted/Knobbed Ware) being the most important.
Also interesting that some aspects of Knobbed Ware being particularly similar to Lapus II-G?va, which emerged from the local Suciu de Sus-Lapus I tradition in North Western Romania and these influences being particularly pronounced in the ceramic material of Psenichevo (larger, more pointed knobs etc.).

Since in between the two (Lapus II-G?va/G?va-Holigrady and Southern Knobbed Ware into Psenichevo) is Babadag, which transitioned slowly from cremation to inhumation, at the beginning with a lot of irregular burials, we can hope for a lot of Babadag samples. From the, from my point of view, absolutely crucial Suciu de Sus culture we have only exceptional, irregular burials from sacrificed people. So no safe group members, but I hope they get tested eventually.
 
There is some rumour, though i couldn't verify that 1 E-V13 sample will appear in Mesolithic Greece from Laluea-Fox paper on Balkans. It's a bit weird since i expect E-V13 to not be yet formed during Mesolithic time.


[E-V13 to not be yet formed during Mesolithic time]
I have the opposite thought. But I can be wrong. Wait end see, ATW it could be very exciting!
 
I precise, because I think I have been a bit audacious: E-V13 or a very close upstream clade, and rather at Mesolithic end, if true.
I see its ancestors coming from Anatolia at some previous stage. developped at small pop size in Adriatic regions before a densification which take place around the Danube rivers knot and more northern, between BA and IA. Only bets.
 
I precise, because I think I have been a bit audacious: E-V13 or a very close upstream clade, and rather at Mesolithic end, if true.
I see its ancestors coming from Anatolia at some previous stage. developped at small pop size in Adriatic regions before a densification which take place around the Danube rivers knot and more northern, between BA and IA. Only bets.

Or the hunter gatherer of the Mediterranean niche.
 

This thread has been viewed 46589 times.

Back
Top