Why do native Iron Age Balkanites plot over modern Italians?

The issue with the Tumulus people adopting cremation must be seen in the context of their expansion into the Carpathian. First they pushed and largely annihilated the Encrusted Pottery people, which remains fled to the Balkans, then they pushed onwards to F?zesabony-Otomani.

They created a kind of colony with the Carpathian Tumulus culture (important site/old name Egyek) and Egyek centre influenced the remains of the Pannonian groups which were gathered in Piliny (pre-Kyjatice). Therefore Piliny is a syncretistic culture with contacts to both the Western Tumulus culture and the Eastern Otomani-Suciu de Sus people, which practised cremation. Piliny-Kyjatice is therefore the direct link between the Middle Danubian Tumulus culture and the cremating East Carpathian people (early East Otomani, Suciu de Sus and Wietenberg).

There was a fluent border from: Middle Danubian Tumulus culture -> Carpathian Tumulus culture -> Piliny -> Berkesz-Demecser -> Suciu de Sus/Lapus. Berkesz-Demecser and Lapus being the primary Pre-G?va groups.

I guess it was from this mixed Tumulus-Carpathian context that the new religious ideas being spread in the Tumulus culture sphere and this created the Urnfield phenomenon as such. There were also Greek-Mycenaean aspects involved, which too might have been transmitted by the intermediate groups to the South and East, because Suciu de Sus being noted as having close Mycenaean contacts also, for such a relatively Northern group.
 
I came across R.Rocca's response on Riverman, saying that he is completely wrong about Naue II swords and that the origin is Terramare Culture, and he backs his assumption and complain with a youtube video lol.

Naue II clearly has more diversity in Carpathian-Pannonian basin, the Naue I prototype of Naue II origin is somewhere in Germany, and it comes as no surprise that we can assume that the Hugelgraberkultur/Tumulus warriors when they crossed the Alps toward Carpathian Mountains somewhere in 1600-1500 B.C brought the Naue I swords with them, and much probably Naue II were invented somewhere in Carpathians as an improvement over the older Naue I. That's logical.

Now, Naue II might have been introduced in Northern Italy via Urnfield influence, Proto-Villanovan culture has some peculiar similarities with Balkan-Carpathian Vatin, Gava and some other Pannonian Urnfield Cultures. So, there you have the connection. No direct migration should be involved from Gava, Vatin, just shared ideas, cultural flow. The people who might have migrated and influence Proto-Villanovans might have been western neighbors of Vatin/Gava. Middle-Danubian Urnfielders likely!?

Check the figure below, the density, it just make more sense what i am saying. What other connecting dots would there be between Carpathian-Pannonian basin and Jutland/North except for Tumulus/Hugelgraberkultur as initial originator of Naue I, then Naue II early development?! Fully formed Naue II might have been already spread and formed not only by Tumulus but also Eastern Urnfielders like Gava and related Balkan-Carpathian tribes.

Density-of-Naue-II-swords-The-isolines-represent-the-average-number-of-swords-within-a.png


Density of Naue II swords. The isolines represent the average number of swords within a radius of 250km. The highest density (c. 180) occurs in Jutland. The dots represent one or more Naue II finds.


https://www.researchgate.net/figure...rage-number-of-swords-within-a_fig2_292397599

 
We know that Urnfield artisans migrated and created workshops. E.g. G?va smiths did move to Lusatian and Middle Danubian areas, or down the Balkans. But while these migrations are proven, bullet-proven is only the migration of a master and probable of some of his workers, not necessarily something on a larger scale.
The development of this sword type is a complicated matter in some ways, but what is known for sure is that it spread in the Balkans North of Greece primarily via G?va-related workshops. That's really beyond doubt. Greece itself received direct input from Italy and the West Balkans from the Middle Danubians of course.

I made a map for the main groups of interest and the related sword finds:

Naue-II-swords-2.jpg


Based on the distribution map from the same paper:
https://www.academia.edu/21306979/T...swords_a_Case_Study_on_Long_distance_Mobility
 
We know that Urnfield artisans migrated and created workshops. E.g. G�va smiths did move to Lusatian and Middle Danubian areas, or down the Balkans. But while these migrations are proven, bullet-proven is only the migration of a master and probable of some of his workers, not necessarily something on a larger scale.
The development of this sword type is a complicated matter in some ways, but what is known for sure is that it spread in the Balkans North of Greece primarily via G�va-related workshops. That's really beyond doubt. Greece itself received direct input from Italy and the West Balkans from the Middle Danubians of course.

I made a map for the main groups of interest and the related sword finds:

Naue-II-swords-2.jpg


Based on the distribution map from the same paper:
https://www.academia.edu/21306979/T...swords_a_Case_Study_on_Long_distance_Mobility


correct me if i am in error....but i do not recall etruscan being proto-villonovan.......they where just Villonovan.............with this proto-villonovan went from north central italy to north east italy and half way down the adriatic coastal line in italy
 
I just marked the Naue II finds of this map. The total distribution of the cultures could differ. Belegis II-G?va gor example did expand with daughter groups down, derp into the Balkans.
 
Just when you thought you had begun to understand Balkans archaeology, they start coming up with new cultures and sticking them together with new compound names. (joke btw)
 
I just marked the Naue II finds of this map. The total distribution of the cultures could differ. Belegis II-G�va gor example did expand with daughter groups down, derp into the Balkans.


Naue II sword finds have been from North -Italy

https://www.bronze-age-craft.com/Naue_II.htm

As early as 1450 BCE in northern Italy came an early type of a sword now known as the Naue II.
 
Modern Italians plot there because it is a coincidence. IA/BA Italy and Balkans have nothing in common except that they came into contact. North/Central Italians have shifted more East since the Bronze Age / Iron Age and among IA/BA Italy there are quite some outliers. Italians do not have any more continuity with Iron Age / Bronze Age Italy than let's say a population like Albanians or Greeks with Iron Age / Bronze Age Balkans. Let's not even talk about Iberia who have shifted east too except for Basques. Sardinians and Basques are the least shifted it seems.

Also Proto-Italics represent a totally different population that came from Bell Beakers / Corded Ware while the Balkans including Greeks, Illyrians, Thracians were Yamnaya folks that came directly from the Steppes + Balkan Neolithic and this is what the Southern Arc paper argues for too and even some linguists, they have different R1b markers compared to Italics and J2b2 is not an Italic marker. It's presence there is the result of Illyrians crossing the Adriatic. Italic tribes came also into contact with Illyrian tribes in the Northern Balkans.


you are speaking ..........far more extra rubbish than is usual for you.

all people/tribes in the adriatic sea on both sides of the land , have been mixing together since the bronze age ............
 
The ignoramus was a sock of a previously banned user.

Balkanites can be modeled with similar "Southern" Ancestry to Southern Italian/Greeks which is early Aegean Bronze Age or Minoan. The "Northern" ancestry was modeled as Slovenian_IA which is similar to modern Northern Italians. When combined it created a cline of people that overlap with Tuscans and Sicilians/South Italians. Later on in history, Slavic and Avar migrations pulled them "North" and "East".

Some of it is coincidence, but some of it are probably from the same sources, namely the "Southern" ancestry, at least in the case of Southern Italians. Btw, Minoans for example are indeed on a south-west axis from the south of Italy. At least every respectable PCA shows that; unlike (G)arbage 25.
 
Last edited:
The ignoramus was a sock of a previously banned user.

Balkanites can be modeled with similar "Southern" Ancestry to Southern Italian/Greeks which is early Aegean Bronze Age or Minoan. The "Northern" ancestry was modeled as Slovenian_IA which is similar to modern Northern Italians. When combined it created a cline of people that overlap with Tuscans and Sicilians/South Italians. Later on in history, Slavic and Avar migrations pulled them "North" and "East".

Some of it is coincidence, but some of it are probably from the same sources, namely the "Southern" ancestry, at least in the case of Southern Italians. Btw, Minoans for example are indeed on a south-east axis from the south of Italy. At least every respectable PCA shows that; unlike (G)arbage 25.

Perhaps I was too kind in only banning him for two months. Given his constant attempts to evade ban perhaps he should just be banned permanently.
 
Naue II sword finds have been from North -Italy
https://www.bronze-age-craft.com/Naue_II.htm
As early as 1450 BCE in northern Italy came an early type of a sword now known as the Naue II.

I read on multiple accounts that the earliest Naue II-like models are from Northern Italy and the Carpathian Basin. They appear nearly simultaneously and its hard to determine who got it first. As you can read in the link provided, the exact dates are sometimes disputed.

In any case, the big distribution of the swords started with the three main groups:
- Proto-Villanovan
- Middle Danubian Urnfield
- Eastern Urnfield, especially G?va

That's when it really kicked off with a refined mass production of the sword type.

And its remarkable that all these groups were not just part of Urnfield, but also had a similar pottery (burnished, channelled ware), weaponry, warrior ethic etc. So while they might have been different ethnicities, patrilineages and autosomal profiles, speaking different languages, they being very clearly interconnected within the Urnfield sphere and more to each other than to other UF groups, with some exceptions (like G?va was particularly close to Kyjatice and Lusatians).
 

This thread has been viewed 39387 times.

Back
Top