To burn or not to burn: LBA/EIA Balkan case

[Riverman]

It seems these are two of these seven LBA samples that I mentioned! Just they have the new codes, more typical for studies instead of HUNG. If I can find grave numbers that would be a clear clue. One LBA sample from Pannonian study is indeed R-Z2103, and two are I2a.. Too bad the E1b1b1a sample is not among them yet.
This sample has moderate to high Steppe, so he could be one Pacin sample with the usual LBA Hungary profile.




Actually there are two, there is one EBA sample. V13 in both EBA and LBA East/NE Hungary is very significant. The issue is not the number here, but the sites. Some areas of Hungary are overtested, Western Hungary, West of Danube, Kisapostag, Encrusted pottery, Füzesabony. These have a huge number of samples, and they are useless for modern DNA. As they are mostly dead I2a, R1a clades. There is only one such I2a clade surviving found in Bulgaria. The numbers would have been better had they tested more the Eastern areas.

Only east Hungary is interesting for V13, or far East. And this area has much less samples. Nevertheless crucial is the autosomal situation which points V13 not to be associated with the WHG admixed autosomal profile present in most of Hungary, but with the profile on the EEF-Steppe cline present only in Eastern (or extremely E/NE ) areas of Hungary.

The areas along but even more so East of the Tisza are most important. All key sites of the local cultural development which contributed to G?va like Berkesz, Demecser, Suciu de Sus, Lăpuș are East of the Tisza river.

Suciu de Sus (NW Romania):
https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comuna_Suciu_de_Sus,_Maramureș

Berkesz (very NE Hungary):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkesz

Felsődobsza and P?cin are already more Eastern, but still West of the Tisza. That's no core area and the burial context needs to be looked at very carefully too, since usually the important cultures for these questions, especially those of North Eastern Hungary, mostly cremated.

The F?zesabony lineages should be more related to Nitra than to the Eastern Carpathian basin locals and Carpathian inhabitants on the patrilinear side, but we'll see.

Too bad they didn't publish the E1b1b results. Would really love to know whether they are from the Transtisza area of pre-G?va and G?va-related groups. But doesn't look like they have sampled males from actual Suciu de Sus, Berkesz-Demecser, Lăpuș and G?va.

The F?zesabony got a strong injectoin of more pastoralist and warlike Epi-Corded clans, probably from the direction of Nitra or the North. Should be a mix of the earlier Pannonian Tell-culture groups (like Encrusted and Otomani) with this newcomers. Then pushed, from the West, the Tumulus culture in, they should have brought mainly Southern Bell Beaker lineages.

What all these results show, so far, is how volatile the environment was, how quickly whole populations could move or being annihilated, like in the case of Encrusted Pottery people, of which only splinters survived in their homeland, many died out, many others moved to the South East, as far as the Lower Danube in Bulgaria to evade the two-fold pressure from Tumulus Culture/Middle Danubian Urnfield and Channelled Ware/G?va.

The R1b "Scythians" look like descendents from these Tumulus culture warriors, the two samples from between the Danube and Tisza are harder to pin down, but look like locals of Encrusted Ware or Otomani indeed. Couldn't find some quick information on the sites and finds in more detail, but they could be from the Channelled Ware horizon and rather between Kyjatice and G?va in position, closer to Kyjatice rather. I wonder why they weren't cremated though.

Kyjatice culture ? A ceramic style attested in the region of the B?rzs?ny, the M?tra and the B?kk Mountains as well
as in eastern Slovakia between the twelfth and ninth centuries BC. The distinctive pottery assigned to this style
such as cups with interior decoration and funnel-necked, biconical amphoras decorated with shallow fluting and
punctates has been found on the region?s hillforts and the cemeteries containing cremation burials in their area.

G?va culture ? A ceramic style distributed east of the Tisza on the Hungarian Plain and in the Transylvanian Basin
from the twelfth?eleventh centuries onward, characterised by vessels with a black exterior and yellow interior.
The vessels are carefully polished to lend them a metallic sheen. They often have scalloped rims and are decorated
with fluting or incised bundles of lines.

https://www.academia.edu/43113142/B..._and_Jewellery_2019_the_full_text_in_English_

If they were related to the Kyjatice group, this could mean that the Kyjatice group was indeed fairly mixed (an older sample was J2a).

 

[Riverman]

The closest parallels to the T?llya-V?rhegy hoard are two hoards from Felsődobsza (Hoard A, for example, contained similar conical
sheet metal pendants: Fig. 53),81 and the assemblages of sickles, spearheads and bronze phaleras from Tiszabezd?d, Pap and Kemecse-Hamvaspart.

https://www.academia.edu/43113142/B..._and_Jewellery_2019_the_full_text_in_English_

If they were related to the Kyjatice group, this could mean that the Kyjatice group was indeed fairly mixed (an older sample was J2a). I guess E-V13 will be in Kyjatice as well, but on a lower level than in G?va. But that's just my best guess at the moment and every find needs to looked at with care, since the regular burial of both Kyjatice and G?va was cremation.

At this point I don't even know for sure whether the find being related to the hoard from the same site or not. Because that's quite a range for the date too.

 

[Hawk]

Hitting the rabbit hole is easy, but trying to reason exactly why some things ended up the way they are requires much thourough thinking.

I am of the opinion E-V13 participated in forming Southern Illyrians. I am just of the opinion that these were Late Bronze Age newcomers with the Kanellure phenomenon. How true is this is yet to be revealed. Enchelei were the first attested Illyrian tribe and their burial rite with cremation on a pyre and using pits( rectangular ) resembles Channeled-Ware/Eastern Urnfielders.

Though, these related tribes mostly concentrated in migrating in Mycenean Greece rather than Illyria.

On the other hand, Thracians as a whole per Herodotus were the largest nation in the world second only to Indians. So, i would not be surprised E-V13 to be solely Thracian.

These are just options in the table.

 

[Riverman]

Gornea-Kalakača

Hitting the rabbit hole is easy, but trying to reason exactly why some things ended up the way they are requires much thourough thinking.

I am of the opinion E-V13 participated in forming Southern Illyrians. I am just of the opinion that these were Late Bronze Age newcomers with the Kanellure phenomenon. How true is this is yet to be revealed. Enchelei were the first attested Illyrian tribe and their burial rite with cremation on a pyre and using pits( rectangular ) resembles Channeled-Ware/Eastern Urnfielders.

Though, these related tribes mostly concentrated in migrating in Mycenean Greece rather than Illyria.

On the other hand, Thracians as a whole per Herodotus were the largest nation in the world second only to Indians. So, i would not be surprised E-V13 to be solely Thracian.

These are just options in the table.

The data distribution we have means that Thracians are impossible to imagine as a low E-V13 people. Rather, its about where they picked it up on the route from pre-G?va -> G?va -> Belegis II-G?va -> Gornea-Kalakača/Insula Banului -> Psenichevo-Babadag and Bosut-Basarabi horizon.
Fix is, that the Psenichevo-Basarabi horizon was full of E-V13, the question is whether original pre-G?va groups (which? all?) were packed with E-V13 or whether it grew in a series of Southern expansion founder effects or even was picked up along the route. To know that, we need a solid number of samples from the respective groups.
Its likea surprise package, you don't know for sure what's in even if you know it roughly...

 

[Oroku Saki]

Indeed, it is confirmed these two samples are from the Pannonian study


HUNG137 S62 Felsődobsza-2.lelőhely LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 34–42 Adult-Mature M M P,G
Hung137 S62, 2012.06.12/I11665 Felsődobsza-2. lelőhely




HUNG144 1010 Oszlár-Nyárfaszög (M3-32. lelőhely) LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 20–39 Adult – M P,G
HUNG177 154. objektum Mezőkeresztes-Cethalom (M3-10.lelőhely) LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 6–10 Infant I–Infant II U – P √
HUNG863 S67 Köröm-Kápolnadomb LBA Gáva culture 20–39 Adult – F P,G BM
HUNG967 S64A Pácin-Alsókenderszer LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 1–6 Infant I M –
HUNG968 S64B Pácin-Alsókenderszer LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 15–39 Juvenile–Adult M M P,G √


HUNG969 S100 Pácin-Alsókenderszer LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 30–60 Adult–Mature M M P,G
Hung969 S100/I11695 Pácin-Alsókenderszer




So the E1b1b1a sample is from Pácin-Alsókenderszer (2 samples left), Oszlár-Nyárfaszög 1 sample, or Méra-Bélus-patak, should be also with 2 samples.


So E1b1b1a, R-L51, I2a, R1a and J2a are distributed among these.


In Pacin the remaining two are both from grave S64, if these are those atuosomal outliers (as E1b looks like), they could be arrivals from elsewhere (from the East).


Méra-Bélus-patak I located myself, as this site wasn't in the study where others were mentioned, as it was more to the West. This was a Piliny culture site. I located it at Méra and then I guessed it should be the the site of Méra-Bélus-patak.

 

[Riverman]

Indeed, it is confirmed these two samples are from the Pannonian study


HUNG137 S62 Felsődobsza-2.lelőhely LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 34–42 Adult-Mature M M P,G
Hung137 S62, 2012.06.12/I11665 Felsődobsza-2. lelőhely




HUNG144 1010 Oszlár-Nyárfaszög (M3-32. lelőhely) LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 20–39 Adult – M P,G
HUNG177 154. objektum Mezőkeresztes-Cethalom (M3-10.lelőhely) LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 6–10 Infant I–Infant II U – P √
HUNG863 S67 Köröm-Kápolnadomb LBA Gáva culture 20–39 Adult – F P,G BM
HUNG967 S64A Pácin-Alsókenderszer LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 1–6 Infant I M –
HUNG968 S64B Pácin-Alsókenderszer LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 15–39 Juvenile–Adult M M P,G √


HUNG969 S100 Pácin-Alsókenderszer LBA pre-Gáva Period, R BD—Ha A1 30–60 Adult–Mature M M P,G
Hung969 S100/I11695 Pácin-Alsókenderszer




So the E1b1b1a sample is from Pácin-Alsókenderszer (2 samples left), Oszlár-Nyárfaszög 1 sample, or Méra-Bélus-patak, should be also with 2 samples.


So E1b1b1a, R-L51, I2a, R1a and J2a are distributed among these.


In Pacin the remaining two are both from grave S64, if these are those atuosomal outliers (as E1b looks like), they could be arrivals from elsewhere (from the East).


Méra-Bélus-patak I located myself, as this site wasn't in the study where others were mentioned, as it was more to the West. This was a Piliny culture site. I located it at Méra and then I guessed it should be the the site of Méra-Bélus-patak.

These are areas of contact between Piliny-Kyjatice and G?va and related pre-G?va cultures.
Most likely:
R1a = Nitra/F?zesabony-Epi-Corded
R-L51 = Tumulus Culture
I2a = Local substrate
J2a and E1b most likely local too, but rather from Otomani and Eastern related formations probably. Clearly, the G?va substrate/formative elements had a lot from those groups of Berkesz-Demecser/Suciu de Sus, I would guess that's where higher E1b1b should come from.
Key for the E-V13 debate is if its really from the Tisza/Transtisza area and a culture related to pre-G?va/G?va or not.

A key aspect for the whole debate is the connection between G?va proper and Csorva/Belegis II-G?va. That they are related is without a doubt, but to which degree one descends from the other or replaced it being debated since decaded. Like I said before, I see no viable path other than
- G?va proper
- Belegis II-G?va

We will see, hopefully rather sooner than later and still in my lifetime, whether the G?va proper have a high frequency of E-V13, or it rises to the levels we know from Viminacium just in the Belegis II-G?va group. It surely will be present in both, its really more about exact clades/subclades and frequencies.
I have little hopes that these Pannonian samples, once they come out, will have a decent high resolution to talk about that. The cremation horizon remains a huge problem for this problem.

But let's hope, since the first samples being now published in a paper, that the whole samples taken will come out soon and we finally know from which group exactly the E1b1b carrier comes from. And hopefully it can be proven that he is indeed E-V13, if nothing more about his subclade can be said.

 

[Hawk]

As can be seen from this translation which was translated from Serbian to English, it states what was Draga Garasanin thinking.

The character of the pottery of the West Serbian variant of the Vatin group, indicates close contacts with this group in Vojvodina. The distribution of this group during the Middle and Late Bronze Ages has already been mentioned earlier in this survey. The metal finds which can be chronologically divided into several phases, illustrates here as well, that this bronze industry is very closely related to Central Europe and the Carpathian region. On this basis, these finds can without any difficulty can be attributed as a whole to the Vatin group, i.e. the Balkano-Carpathian complex of the Bronze Age. The important difference here, however, is the method of tumulus burial. According to the traditions, that can be traced in these parts from the Early Bronze Age, the burial rites practiced in southern Pannonia must have known a different evolution. In western Serbia the rites that were performed along with the local variations could be found on the whole area of the western Balkans all the way south to Marathon, and can be traced even during the Iron Age when we have the complete development of the Illyrian population of these parts. It must not be forgotten that burial rites, as has already in archaeological literature been pointed out, always remain rather conservative. Therefore, they offer very often a much sounder basis for the ethnic interpretation of a population, than is the case with movable grave goods that can be much more easily adapted to the existing local forms. If one keeps this in maid, especially the existing cultural continuity and development in the western portion of the Balkan Peninsula, it is not difficult to see that we are dealing with the Indoeuropeanization of the indigenous population that later is to be the foundation for the Illyrian tribes. This assimilation and regrouping of ethnic elements on the western part of the Balkan Peninsula took place at the end of the Aegean Migration, during the transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age around the year 1200 BC***

In the above survey, we have tried to offer, on the basis of the available archaeological material, a picture of the Bronze Age and its cultural and chronological development during the centuries that this important period in prehistory belongs to. The distinction between cultural areas, depends to a great deal on the geographic and topographic character of the land, and indicates the basis for finer distinctions of the written sources that pertain to the Paleobalkan peoples. It is very important, that during the whole Bronze Age a continuity can be followed that extends to the period of transition into the Iron Age. This is characteristic of all the cultural groups of this area, including the Dubovac-Zuto Brdo, which in Oltenia is followed by the Insula Banului group and later the Bassarabi group in these parts and Transylvania (compare also some of the finds from Saraorci near Smederevo). 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

But by about the fourteenth century fundamental changes had begun to affect both regions. In the north expansion had been replaced by
contraction to its Carpathian core, in which the long lasting Otomani-
Wietenberg culture was yielding to the Gava-Holihrady. Agriculturally and
metallurgically the area was still wealthy but internal unrest appears to
have been considerable 46 and fortified settlements were increasing in






" N. Tasic, "The Problem of "Mycenaean influences" in the Middle Bronze Age Cultures
in the Southeastern part of the Carpathian Basin', Balcanica 4, 1973, 19-37.


46 M. Rusu, 'Die Verbreitung der Bronzehorte in Transsilvanien vom Ende der Bronzezeit
bis in die Mittlere Hallstattzeit', Dacia NS 7, 1963, 177-210.






64 R. F. HODDINOTT






number, size and importance. 47 An achievement of the Gava culture was
its breaching of the lower Danube-Stara Planina barrier, and the
influence of its bossed and channelled pottery spread southwards to affect
the Chatalka and the Pshenichevo cultures of the Thracian Plain, the
Babadag of the West Pontic coastline and the Megalithic of the eastern Rhodope and Strand j a hills. 48




https://archive.org/stream/ThraciansAndMycenaeansProceedingsOfFourthInternati onalCongressOf/bulgaria_thracian-mycenaean_djvu.txt

Kapitan Andreevo and on general Svilengrad especially the pit burials which were secondary burials are very well known to be classified as Psenicevo Culture.

We see E-V13 right into the Early Iron Age. And not in Late Neolithic or Early Bronze Age.

We have no doubts to think that Psenicevo, Babadag, Mediana group, Paracin, Dubovac Zuto Brda, and possibly the Vatin evolved from similar Danubo-Carpathian origin and specific culture, as has been written all over it was likely related to the generalized Channeled-Ware, there is absolutely no doubt Thracians were E-V13, the question so far is whether Southern Illyrians and Ancient Greeks had E-V13 which if we follow archaeological publications and studies dots they should have. So, E-V13 was a Pan-Balkanic lineage which spread and expanded during Late Bronze Age which if we want to further generalize, it did with the Eastern Urnfielders which urn burials and cremation on a pyre can be found among the more Central/Southern Balkan tribes, like in Iron Age Greeks, Dardanians, Enchelei.

 

[Riverman]

I think the main source will be Belegis II-G?va. G?va proper will have it too, but at which frequency has to be seen.

 

[Hawk]

I think the main source will be Belegis II-G�va. G�va proper will have it too, but at which frequency has to be seen.

Definitely, we already have aDNA that Psenichevo directly derived from Belegis II-Gava is packed with E-V13, one Y-DNA Q from the screenshot is from Bulgar times and that E is from Classical Antiquity, so historical Thracian.

 

[Papayaseeds]

Interesting thread.

 

[Hawk]

Facebook page ArchaeoSerbia usually likes to post stuff from Middle Bronze Age to Iron Age.

Composite gold necklace and crescent-shaped pendants, Dubovac-Žuto brdo cultural group, middle Bronze age, around 1500 years BC, found in Velika Vrbica, vicinity of Kladovo, eastern Serbia.The necklace consists of 9 strings made of several hundred gold beads of various shape and size.


Seven pendants have crescent-shaped ornament on one ending, while opposite ends are perforated for attaching pendants on the clothes.


Collection of National Museum of Serbia in Belgrade.


These items are part of group find which, besides this necklace and pendants, consisted of one gold plate and 2 snake-shaped hair rings. They were made in a local workshop, and were worn by a woman who was a high-ranked member of prehistoric society

Snake-shaped hair ring, gold, middle Bronze age, around 1500-1200 years BC, found in Velika Vrbica, vicinity of Kladovo, eastern Serbia.The ring is decorated with small circles and wavy ornament, representing snake skin.
Collection of National Museum of Serbia in Belgrade.
It belongs to group find of gold jewelry, which consisted of one lavish composite necklace made of 9 strings with several hundred gold beads of various shape and size, gold plate and 7 crescent-shaped gold pendants. They were made in a local workshop and used to be worn by a woman who was a high-ranked member of prehistoric society.
The motive of a snake is very common in many prehistoric cultures from the Balkan region. Wide outspread of snake motif, especially on jewelry, indicates that this animal had a special religious and cult significance for tribes in this part of Europe

I am wondering something though, whether we will find E-V13 among Middle Bronze Age Serbian sites, cultures like Vatin, Grla Mare, Dubovac Zuto Brdo, Cruceni-Belegis or E-V13 should be linked exclusively with the Gava/Channeled-Ware phenomenon?!

Would be hard to get data from these sites though, all of them used cremation.

 

[Riverman]

Facebook page ArchaeoSerbia usually likes to post stuff from Middle Bronze Age to Iron Age.

I am wondering something though, whether we will find E-V13 among Middle Bronze Age Serbian sites, cultures like Vatin, Grla Mare, Dubovac Zuto Brdo, Cruceni-Belegis or E-V13 should be linked exclusively with the Gava/Channeled-Ware phenomenon?!

Would be hard to get data from these sites though, all of them used cremation.

Honestly, exclusively G?va/Upper Tisza would be strange, considering how interconnected these groups along the Tisza were. Especially if it was widespread in local groups like Suciu de Sus.
The question is really more about the bulk of it, ghe main LBA founder lineages.
I wouldn't wonder about singular Transdanubian Encrusted Pottery as well.
But at that time, there needs to be a group with really high level E-V13, not just a small minority frequency. In the MBA-LBA, its no longer a handful of males. It must be at least a major tribe dominated by E-V13.

 

[Hawk]

The Daco-Thracian origin of Berisha-Sopi gets more credible: https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-FGC33614/

The Berisha tribe had one legend by Albanian elders (something along the line) that they were Odrysian in origin from the ancient city of Cabyle.

 

[Excine]

The Daco-Thracian origin of Berisha-Sopi gets more credible: https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-FGC33614/

The Berisha tribe had one legend by Albanian elders (something along the line) that they were Odrysian in origin from the ancient city of Cabyle.

Go to the live version:


https://www.yfull.com/live/tree/E-FGC33614/


You'll notice that the Romanian and the Bulgarian aren't E-FGC33614* any longer, but they form a new subclade which makes them non E-FGC33614*, hence a parallel branch to the Albanian one. The new Romanian sample does the opposite of what you originally thought when you wrote your comment.

 

[Hawk]

Go to the live version:


https://www.yfull.com/live/tree/E-FGC33614/


You'll notice that the Romanian and the Bulgarian aren't E-FGC33614* any longer, but they form a new subclade which makes them non E-FGC33614*, hence a parallel branch to the Albanian one. The new Romanian sample does the opposite of what you originally thought when you wrote your comment.

It doesn't really matter, this lineage is shared through Channeled-Ware/Gava anyway, there is another Romanian from much South than this one from Prahova who didn't upload in yfull, another Bulgarian from Plovdiv, Greeks from Macedonia and Greek from Crete, and the rest of FGC33621 are either from Switzerland/Germany or Western Europe.

 

[Excine]

It doesn't really matter, this lineage is shared through Channeled-Ware/Gava anyway, there is another Romanian from much South than this one from Prahova who didn't upload in yfull, another Bulgarian from Plovdiv, Greeks from Macedonia and Greek from Crete, and the rest of FGC33621 are either from Switzerland/Germany or Western Europe.

It does matter. You literally mentioned the new sample because you thought that it is E-FGC33614* but now neither the Bulgarian, nor the Romanian are E-FGC33614*. So your argument doesn't stand. How other samples are related to each other is a matter of speculation "they're Gava anyway" with 0 samples is a moot point.

 

[Hawk]

It does matter. You literally mentioned the new sample because you thought that it is E-FGC33614* but now neither the Bulgarian, nor the Romanian are E-FGC33614*. So your argument doesn't stand. How other samples are related to each other is a matter of speculation "they're Gava anyway" with 0 samples is a moot point.

I am not going to continue with your type of debate "a needle in a haystack". It's quite clear to majority of people with the exception of "one particular group".

 

[Hawk]

The SZM-259 from Szeged-Makkoserdő shares the same E-FGC33614 subclade and mtDNA U1a1a with Derite.

 

[Hawk]

The myth origin of Berisha (the Sopis were very likely just a very early split-offs of Berisha who lost track of their origin since very early split and sometimes considered themselves as either Thaq or close to Bytyqi both of whom are wrong, they either come from Shopel or Fierz villages expanding on Kukes/Topojan and then Kosovo and primarily Nish).

Berishësit mund të jenë nji fis thrak ardhë prei Deti së Zi (Murrdéti): por ndër fise thrake qi banuenë buzë Déti së Zi njehënë Odryzët prei Kabyles djerë ndëByzantium e Astaejtë, ndoshta Berishësit janë nji tepricë e këtyn'e fisevet
HYLLI I DRITES Vjeta XV 1939, 8-10 fq 409-411

translation:

The Berishas may be a Thracian tribe that came from the Black Sea (Murrdéti): but among the Thracian tribes that inhabited the Black Sea were the Odrysians from the Kabyles who lived up in
Byzantium and the Astaeans, perhaps the Berishas are a surplus of these tribes

 

[Hawk]

This is interesting, because the author is clearly hinting that the Lapus group has clear dominant Ottomany Culture influence. And it makes a connection between Vattina, Dubovac Zuto Brda, Girla Mara and inter-related Eastern Urnfielder complex. E-V13 stands there as was hinted by the leaks of Psenicevo-Babadag site Early Iron Age, per Draga Garasanin Psenicevo had clear link with Paracin and Mediana groups in Central Balkans.

https://books.google.de/books?id=vX...F6BAgeEAM#v=onepage&q=cruceni culture&f=false