search this blog

Saturday, November 7, 2020

Slavic-like Medieval Germans


The samples labeled DEU_Krakauer_Berg_MA in the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) plot below are from a recent paper by Parker et al. at Scientific Reports. Their remains were excavated from a Medieval cemetery in the now abandoned village of Krakauer Berg in eastern Germany.

Krakauer sounds sort of like Kraków, doesn't it? That's probably not a coincidence, especially considering how these people behave in my analysis. To see an interactive version of the plot, paste the coordinates from the text file here into the relevant field here.


See also...

Yamnaya-related ancestry proportions in present-day Poles

Warriors from at least two different populations fought in the Tollense Valley battle

Viking world open analysis and discussion thread

175 comments:

Davidski said...

What were the detailed Y-haplogroup classifications for these Krakauer Berg samples?

sds said...

David, does KRA001 and KRA003 show enough autosomal similarity to have been closely related?

Davidski said...

I don't think KRA001 and KRA003 are close relatives, based on what I've seen. But I haven't done any detailed genealogical analyses of these samples yet.

Archi said...

R1a1a1b1a1a1c CTS11962

Archi said...

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-CTS11962/

Archi said...

R1a1a1b1a1a1c1 L1029/S4554 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L1029/

Simon_W said...

Probably as German as Bronze Age people from Hungary are Hungarian.

Simon_W said...

BTW Polish Krakow is called Krakau in German, and the suffix -er in Krakauer Berg just signifies that this mountain (Berg) was the mountain of Krakau, so there's essentially the same name.

Ioannis Gavras said...

Nothing unexepected.Eastern Germany was inhabit by western Slavs.These lands come under Germanic domination and that's all.

zardos said...

For newly settled territories of the Eastern colonisation, the exact place, even village matters.
There were villages which kept their Slavic character for many generations, some to modern days, the next neighbouring one was mixed, and again another one founded and inhabited by Western Germans and Dutch settlers.
Its up to every single place and its history in detail. Oftentimes the name of the village gives a hint, but that alone is never a safe bet, because new settlers could keep an old place name and locals could change theirs.
In some places whole populations were replaced later in times of plagues and war.
Like this village could have been reestablished with Western settlers or with Sorbian or Czech ones.

I wonder which profile 005 has? Too low coverage?

Considering the role of this place, I doubt all inhabitants were the same.

Gabriel said...

@Bessarion

Except for the part where the population of East Germany became half Slavic, half German. It wasn’t just domination. These samples are more eastern on average than modern East Germans (some of which are more eastern, others more western).

Davidski said...

These samples are more eastern than most Poles. They're more similar to Belorussians and Western Russians.

Rob said...

? potentially instructive on proto-Slavic homeland

Gabriel said...

@Davidski

Is there any possibility that some of the western signal in Poles is from Ostsiedlung-era Germans, or is it all from East Germanic tribes?

ambron said...

Two Sorbs are grouped with north-eastern Poles, and one with the mid-north Poles. So, such as Mazovias and Kashubians. According to PhyloGeographer, the L1029 mutation took place in Mazovia, and according to Rębała the fatherly lines of the Sorbs split off from the Kashubians. Everything is correct.

Davidski said...

@Gabriel

Is there any possibility that some of the western signal in Poles is from Ostsiedlung-era Germans, or is it all from East Germanic tribes?

I think very little of that is from East Germanic tribes, but I guess we'll see soon. There are quite a few East Germanic and early Slavic samples on the way.

Matt said...

Does seems fairly Polish like and within the variation of present day Polish people albeit to the north of that cline. When I make a ghost that on the assumption that present day Polies are about 50% from this group, then the top 5 modern matches for group average are Slovenian, German_East, Croatian, Czech, Hungarian. It would be expected that there would be some subtle (or sudden) geneflow from both south and west over time...

My impression of them is they're a bit far "north" relative to the present day Poles, but not too far "east" overall... The ghosts that project difference seem south shifted, relative to Poles but not west shifted (slightly east if anything). But these samples may be "east" relative to their absolute location on Europe east-west!

Quick PAST custom PCA using some regional samples from present day and medieval (and inc 50% and 33% "ghost"): https://imgur.com/a/gw27zcq

ambron said...

One of the Tollense warriors are grouped with KRA003.

zardos said...

Concerning Poles its not just East Germanic and German as well as Viking, Czech and Vlach admixture, but also older local populations going back to Lusatian and the like, plus more modern European even.
If Czechs mixed a lot with old local elements, Germanic and others, its likely to have happened in Poland, on a lower level and with big regional differences, too. I expect initially huge differences between regions which levelled out over time in the Polish kingdom, once the tribal organisation was broken down.

Concerning modern, very recent admixture, just check for French and Spanish surnames in modern Poles. Not that big, but still significant.

Ioannis Gavras said...

@ Gabriel

I think the area of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is the most germanic admixed compared to the other eastern germanic regions.Saxony is prolly the most Slavic of all.Also i do not agree that all of eastern germans have germanic admixture.We have seen samples and gedmatch kits with many of them being even almost Polish or CZ like.Also it is not easy to say when exactly the slavs of eastern germany started to mixing with germanic people.I mean,okay during middle ages and HRE there were assilimations no1s doubt about it...but i think the Prussian domination is also an important factor for the germanic admixture that we seeing in eastern germany nowdays..and goes beyond eastern germany.I am pretty sure that the germanization of western slavs in the area of eastern germany have become slowly and it took many years and ages.Also i really doubt that it become with peaceful ways but thats an other story.

epoch said...

The Germans settling east often settled in their own villages next to existing Polabian Slavis villages. So you can often tell these settlements by name: Neu Kaliss versus Alt Kaliss, for example. And Wendisch Evern versus Deutsch Evern.

There are also more places named Krakow, such as Krakow am See.

epoch said...

@zardos

Even today Wendisch or Sorbisch is spoken in Lausitz.

sds said...

The samples do have a Baltic cline, so this seems to be supported by the data.

Samuel Andrews said...

It seems that......

Eastern Germans are half Slavic. Due to assimilating Slavic tribes.
Western Germans are half French. Due to being apart of Frankish kingdom.

Friesland (Northern Netherlands) and Saxony, are the only places which are definitely mostly Germanic.

Gabriel said...

@Samuel Andrews

Do you consider some of that “French” ancestry to be of local Celtic origin?

Samuel Andrews said...

I consider it to be French French.

But this is just my impression. There's no good evidence that it is French French or Celtic.

At thepricity they post Gedmatch results for German users.

Saxons are much more 'northern' than people in nearby provinces just south of them. My explanation is Saxony was not apart of Frankish kingdom and therefore doesn't have French admixture.

What i can't explain is why Germans in former Bavaria, Swabia also have lots of French-like ancestry.

Samuel Andrews said...

Also, an explanation for why North Dutch are significantly more 'northern' than South Dutch, is North Dutch are actually descendants of Frisians not Dutch.

Most of what is today the Netherlands was Frisian until the 1500s.

The French-like ancestry in South Dutch, can be explained by fact the Dutch are the real Dutch (Franks) who ruled a kingdom full of Gallic (French) people for centuries so admixed with French people a lot.

Ric Hern said...

@ Samuel Andrews

Just go have a look at the Dialects spoken in the North. The Names says it all. "Dutch Low Saxon" for example...

Gabriel said...

@Samuel Andrews

IMO the explanation is simple: most or all of the “French” ancestry in Southern Germany is of Celtic origin. The Celts didn’t go anywhere.

It would also easily explain the Celtic component in Belgium and the Southern Netherlands, because the Belgae didn’t go anywhere. Otherwise, what could have happened to the Belgae?

Gabriel said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fanty said...

Just for possible missinterpretations:

Last time I checked (couple years ago), the "East German" labeled people in these plots are NOT what we NOW call "East Germany". Most of them are from parts of Germany that now is Poland (Silesia, Pomerania, East Prussia etc)

Ioannis Gavras said...

@Samuel


There is not such as thing as French ancestry. 'France or French' took their names from a Germanic people with the name Franks. What it means western and South Germans have French admixture?Where are you from? USA?They plot South and they don't coming genetically like Frisians, North Dutch and Nort Germans(Saxons) is simply because they mixed with southern people more specific the Celts, or in general with more ANF admixed populations. France is a sole country with different dialects and different genetics as well. Northern French is not the same with southern French. As well people from Brittany are not the same with those from Aquitania. Northern and northeast France are more Germanic admixed and they have their own cushter with Belgians, South Dutch and SouthWestern Germans.

ambron said...

David, do you know what the other "Cracovians" looked like in terms of their full genome...

KRA004 - https://www.yfull.com/live/tree/I-Y4870/

KRA005 - https://www.yfull.com/live/tree/E-L540/

KRA008 - https://www.yfull.com/live/tree/I-Y16473*/

KRA009 - https://www.yfull.com/live/tree/R-BY195372/

KRA010 - https://www.yfull.com/live/tree/J-Z1043/

Davidski said...

@Fanty

The German_East samples in this PCA are from what is now eastern Germany, not from the former, pre-WWII eastern German lands.

https://vahaduo.github.io/g25views/#NorthEurope

J.S. said...

@ Bessarion
Here we go again..According to the only one French study ever published on the genetic structure of the Modern French population, it dates back to the Neolithic, Bronze Age transition and Fst=0,0002 between the two main clusters which contain more than 80% of the samples, but there is no French-like Ancestry.

So, you may assume total replacement from Iron Age to Modern Times.

Basically, what is called French Ancestry is Bronze Age/late Iron Age peopling as genetic continuity is assumed between these two period of time, whatever is called now the Autochthonous population and its territory.
Almost all the French regional dialects come from Gallo-Roman and they are spoken in more than 80 departments out of 93 in the hexagon.

Simon_W said...

@Samuel Andrews

Careful; you talked about modern Saxons, but what you said clearly referred to Germans from the area of the ancient Duchy of Saxony, which no longer exists, hence these Germans are usually not called Saxons, but Low Saxons, Westphalians, Holsten, Bremers and Hamburgers. A generic term could be western Low Germans. They are descended primarily from the Old Saxons. Modern Saxony on the other hand is the southernmost part of eastern Germany, and its people are called Saxons, even though they are not primarily descended from the Old Saxons, they are a mix of other tribes and Slavs.

And mind you, the Old Saxons did become part of the Frankish kingdom, too, they were subdued by Charlemagne, who thereby got the nickname "slayer of the Saxons".

Simon_W said...

@Bessarion

The presence of Germans in eastern Germany, and up to 1945 even beyond, mostly goes back to the High Medieval Ostsiedlung, from the middle of the 12th century till the early 14th century. That was the main wave. Everything later were minor modifications. At the beginning of this stood violent conquest in some areas, especially in eastern Germany and the Baltic, but in others local Slavic rulers had invited the German settlers, like in Silesia. And I suppose the Slavs started to mix with the Germans most of all once they had adopted German speech. Where they were outnumbered and surrounded by Germans this happened early on. Conversely there were also Germans who adopted Slavic speech in areas where they were outnumbered.

Simon_W said...

@J.S.

If I understood him correctly, what Bessarion was saying is that the term "French" isn't useful in this context, because it's derived from the ethnonym of the Germanic Franks. So he wasn't arguing for discontinuity, but to the contrary, for continuity with the Iron Age population known as the Celts. However, Celts didn't only live in what is now France, but also to the east of it, possibly explaining part of the French-like admixture there.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Bessarion,

Lombards, Alemani are more northern than modern Germans. Which suggests the southern-shift in modern Southern Germans is not ancient.

andrew said...

Is it before or after the migration era?

Ioannis Gavras said...

@ J.S

Excuse me and with all the respect,this specific terminology is wrong.You cannot use the term 'French admixture or French ancestry' to describe the southern shift among South Dutch,Southwest Germans and to other CentralWest European folks who dosn't coming like 'North Dutch or North German' in terms of autosomal DNA.Someone who has zero idea about genetics and reading us right now,can easily understand-realize that German people mixed with French people during middle ages,or later with Napoleonic wars and stuff like that.It would be better to use terms like Gaul,Celtic,La Tene,Gallo-Roman and similar terms to describe this admixture.And ofc not the whole country of France is like this.France is not the most homogenous country in EU.There are some regional diffrences in terms of autosomal DNA.The northern parts are not exactly the same with the southern regions.As for French dialects keep in mind that the northern Gallo-Roman dialects(Langues d'oïl) are very much influenced by the Germanic people and more specific the Franks.The Franco-Provençal and Occitan are not exactly the same..and that is also why modern French sounds weird and even the Latin speakers having hard time to understand it.

J.S. said...

@ Bessarion
"Excuse me and with all the respect,this specific terminology is wrong.You cannot use the term 'French admixture or French ancestry' to describe the southern shift among South Dutch,Southwest Germans and to other CentralWest European folks who dosn't coming like 'North Dutch or North German' in terms of autosomal DNA.Someone who has zero idea about genetics and reading us right now,can easily understand-realize that German people mixed with French people during middle ages,or later with Napoleonic wars and stuff like that.It would be better to use terms like Gaul,Celtic,La Tene,Gallo-Roman and similar terms to describe this admixture."

I can agree with you on this point, but it sounds a bit different than there is no such thing like French ancestry or French genetics.

Ioannis Gavras said...

@Samuel

These samples might be non-recent mixed individuals.Or they might be people who belonged to the upper class or to elite(kings and stuff).Lombards btw started as an East Germanic tribe and somehow they switched to a High German dialect.They conquered Italy and settled there.They were a homogenous group without assilimating and mixing with others on their way,like we have seen with other east Germanic people.Modern Germans are obviously more southern because they conquered and assilimated the already Roman dominated lands and its people.What people used to inhabit those lands before Germans settled down?Celts,Gauls,Gallo-Romans?Ligurians,Rhaetis,Latins..it dosn't really matters.These people were obviously more ANF admixed and the Germanic DNA wasn't enough-decent to pass their genes to the whole population.Ofc the locals were by far more numerous compared to the arrival German tribes.That is obvious in genetics and history,that the elite warrior group conquers and dominates the natives but rarely they can pass their genes.I can give you million of examples.From Turks of Anatolia,Anglo-Saxons,Bulgars,Hungarians and the list goes on...

Ioannis Gavras said...

@ J.S

I am not saying that there are not French genetics,i am simple saying it would be better to use terminology associated with BA,IA,roman period or Middle ages.France btw it is not a homogenous country in terms of autosomal DNA.Northern France is obviously more Celto-Germanic while the southern parts are closer to Northeast Italy and to Catalonia,Aquitania,Basque lands.The samples we got from IA are low res.But i think they give an a good idea of how France was pretty much and its people.

Simon_W said...

@Bessarion

Afaik Lombards are Elbe Germanic, not east Germanic. They originated on the lower Elbe. But how certain this is, is another question.

Simon_W said...

@Samuel Andrews

Well Lombards mixed with ANF heavy North Italian locals. And as for the Alamanns; some in Niederstotzingen were North German-like (palpably the purest ones), some were West German-like (maybe those with some Celtic admixture) and some were North Italian-like (probably Gallo-Romans of local origin). Moreover it's well established that the central-northern part of Switzerland wasn't empty of people at the time of the Alamannic immigration. The Gallo-Romans had merely retreated to fortified settlements, the so called forts. After some time they adjusted themselves to the changed environment, switching languages. I suppose the same holds true for Upper Bavaria south of the Danube which remained part of the western Roman empire until its end.

Simon_W said...

@Bessarion

As for the langue d'oil, I'm really not that convinced that its phonological peculiarities come from Germanic influence. There are some Germanic loan words like hache, no doubt. But what's specifically Germanic about its phonology? Obviously the R is pronounced like in modern standard German or in Danish. But in fact most German dialects not very long ago had a different kind of R, formed with the tip of the tongue. Conversely Medieval old and Middle French still had that same rolling tongue tip R. So you could just as well say that the guttural R typical for modern standard German goes back to French influence. There was a time, in the 18th, early 19th century, when the German elite preferred to speak in French which was admired for its prestige. I think the langue d'oil developped with the subconscious purpose of becoming light and elegant. It has short, soft, light syllables not akin to any Germanic language, with their heavy syllables. The consonants are soft, not aspirated like in Germanic languages. In fact native German speakers have great difficulty in understanding oral French and in pronouncing it correctly.

Ioannis Gavras said...

@ Σιμον

The origins of Lombards are not well recorded.Many historians and scholars suggest Eastern Germanic origins,others saying Elbe Germanic.Some Greek historians suggest that Lombards were people who come directly from Scandinavia picking other people on their way.Many other sources mentioning that they started as East Germanics and later they switched to Elbe.The point is these people didn't had had a big impact to modern Germans IMO.. but more to modern Italians and to some way Swiss and maybe some Austrians.As for Alemani i will agree with your comment above.Also the northeast area of Alsace-Lorraine in modern France is associated with Alemani background.There are local dialets there who belong to Upper German spectrum.

Ioannis Gavras said...

@ Simon

Well,i am not a French speaker so i am not going to pretend the smartass here.But watching in youtube videos with people speaking these dialects..the d'oil dialects inclunding Walloon, it gives me the impression that these dialects have little to do with other Latin associated languages not only from South France but also from Spain and Italy.I might be wrong here, but the French language looks foreign compared to the Latin standard base.Anyway, linguistics is not the point here.I think Northern France is more influenced from the Franks while the other regions and parts have stayed pretty much the same as before the Frankish domination.Also many of these regions have become fully Frankish quite later,and many of these provinces were separate dukes-kingdoms etc.

Rob said...

Lombards are definitely not ‘East Germanic” in the sense that they differed considerably from Gepids, Heruli & Rugii in lower Austria and Hungary, whose power they supplanted. The latter were shorter, had obviously nomadic admixture, occasional deformed skulls, different pots, etc
The Lombards were taller, proto-typical Nordics, to use the old waycist terminology
They are Elbian but to trace them to the lower Elbe, as the myth goes, is a lot harder
Instead, I see their appearance as a pragmatic ethnogenesis. Refugees from the Thuringian kingdom which had been under attack by the franks. Certainly, their material culture (pottery, brooches) links them to Thuringia . So they moved down the Elbe ~ 500 CE toward the middle Danube

Rob said...

But the Lombards we got from Hungary and Italy so far have suspiciously high R1b-P312 . Doesn’t seem particularly Proto-Germanic. I’d have expected more U106, I1, I2a2..

ambron said...

David, I can see from the entries from Anthrogenica that there is probably a problem with the other KRA samples...

Davidski said...

The problem is with the genotyping, not the sequences.

ambron said...

Is there a chance they will end up on your PCA?

Davidski said...

They will eventually, and they'll probably cluster with/near East Slavs like the three that are already there.

Davidski said...

@Matt

It took me a while to figure out what you were talking about.

Of course, when were saying that these Krakauer Berg samples are more eastern and more East Slavic-like than Poles, we were talking in the context of intra-European variation, not ancient West Eurasian components.

Plot them in this PCA and see what you get.

https://vahaduo.github.io/g25views/#Europe2

You're talking about ancient West Eurasian components, but they're often not informative about recent, ethnic-specific European ancestry proportions.

Matt said...

Yes, I've run the other Vahaduo views. I think the Europe1 PCA is more informative on that.

ambron said...

This will be interesting in the context of their more Western haplogroups. How do you think...?

Davidski said...

They're both informative.

Europe 1 shows that at least one of these Krakauer Berg samples has Scandinavian-like ancestry, which isn't surprising.

But Europe 2 is better at differentiating East Slavs from West Slavs, and it shows that these samples are very East Slavic nonetheless, which is in line with their distance results.

Davidski said...

@ambron

They're basically East Slavs with some Scandinavian-like ancestry. One of these guys is very similar to the Viking from Bodzia.

This makes a lot of sense considering who they were and where they were dug up.

Matt seems to be using them as a proxy for pure Slavs, which doesn't make sense, considering that they're from Germany.

Matt said...

Yep, if we were to place the average of these three samples, Poles, Lithuanians and Croats on a cline, with Croats and Lithuanians at ends, these samples def slightly shifted towards Lithuanians. Very close to present day Polish variation though.

ambron said...

Today, the autosomal East Slavic/Baltic genome extends to central Poland, but may have previously extended further west, like WEZ56. I wonder...

Davidski said...

We'll know soon, but I'm skeptical that it did.

ambron said...

So the only option left is that they came from somewhere in central Poland.

Davidski said...

I'm not seeing that as an option to be honest.

Based on genetics, the closest that their eastern ancestors could have come from is somewhere in northern Poland.

But considering that they were the descendants of Slavs, not West Balts, then eastern Poland or east of Poland look like better options.

ambron said...

The problem is that there is a Baltic toponymy there. Slavic toponymy begins in central Poland.

Davidski said...

Maybe, but if there weren't any Slavs there, then that's a problem for the Slavic toponymy.

We'll find out soon who was there.

ambron said...

I hope! I am only concerned that we cannot genetically distinguish Balts from Slavs.

Rob said...

the CTS1211 - slavs are from upper Dnieper region & Dvina region. They left there ~ 200 AD and moved down the Dnieper
The I2a1 guys are Dacianoids from the east carpathian region
The M458 is more of a mystery

Arza said...

@ Rob
the CTS1211 - slavs are from upper Dnieper region & Dvina region. They left there ~ 200 AD

CTS1211 has been already found in the Iron Age Hungary (DA197, 506-505 calBCE).

Distance to: Scythian_HUN:DA197
0.03088295 Slovenian
0.03146443 Croatian
0.03146927 Austrian
0.03281915 Hungarian
0.03707968 Bosnian
0.03772270 German_East
0.03780998 Czech
0.03819415 German
0.04016662 Slovakian
0.04123845 Montenegrin

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-YP340/

The I2a1 guys are Dacianoids from the east carpathian region

More or less yeah.

The M458 is more of a mystery

It appears in Hallstatt(-period) near Switzerland and in La Tene in Bohemia, so its source wasn't far away.

Maybe it can be seen here:
"TURNING POINTS AND CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE BOHEMIAN BASIN DURING THE BRONZE AGE", EAA2020
https://youtu.be/i_FiWWw_r-I?t=390

Rob said...

@ Arza

''CTS1211 has been already found in the Iron Age Hungary (DA197, 506-505 calBCE).''

Yes ''forest-steppe Scythians'' arriving into Hungary. However, there is no direct line connecting them with later Slavs


''It appears in Hallstatt(-period) near Switzerland and in La Tene in Bohemia, so its source wasn't far away.''

I recall. Perhaps they were the Celtic stratum in Przeworsk culture.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Rob,

The Lombard R1b p312, is from non-Lombards in the cemetery. About half of samples are Lombard. Y DNA is I2a2a, R1a-Z284, R1b U106.

Rob said...

Makes sense , Sam

ambron said...

Rob, DA197 is a culturally assimilated local native:

DA197 R1a-Z280>CTS1211>YP343>YP340 (xYP371,P278.2)
Target: Scythian_HUN:DA197
Distance: 1.3804% / 0.01380425
38.8 HUN_Baden_LCA
33.2 Baltic_EST_BA
25.6 Corded_Ware_DEU
2.0 POL_Globular_Amphora
0.4 SWE_Motala_HG

ambron said...

David, as we know, your PCA was designed to target recent admixtures. The main East Slavic cluster is located exactly in the middle, between the Poles and the Balts. Some KRA samples also lie here. So, they must be mixture of Poles and Balts. There is probably no other way to explain it. And this is consistent with historical knowledge - the Lechites conquered the lands of the Balts in the north and east in the Middle Ages. And where could the Poles mix with the Balts before the Middle Ages?

Davidski said...

They look more like a mixture between East Slavs and Scandinavians to me.

ambron said...

But the Eastern Slavs are a mixture of Poles and Balts...

Davidski said...

Well, modern East Slavs have complex ancestry like almost everyone else, but I doubt that all East Slavs have significant Baltic ancestry.

Rather, I'd say they're largely derived from a Slavic/Baltic genetic continuum, with various recent admixtures.

ambron said...

David, I mean specifically those Eastern Slavs who located themselves in PCA between the Poles and the Balts - Belarusians, Northern Ukrainians and Western Russians. Same as North-Eastern Poles. They all reside in the areas of the former Baltic toponymy.

Ioannis Gavras said...

David do you think Slavs started as Balts in terms of autosomal DNA(Balto-Slavic group) but during their split and expansion they come in contact with Bell Beaker pockets western than them and with other sources eastern to them?Also what is the possibility Pomeranian culture to be associated with Slavs?Maybe it was an other culture where Slavs originated?What your guesses?Ι think the genetics of Slavic people have been the most difficult and complex compared to other populations of EU.

Davidski said...

There's still a big hole in the ancient DNA record precisely where most of us more or less expect the ancestors of the Slavs to have formed and lived. That is, in the border area between Poland, Belarus and Ukraine.

Until we get some samples from this region covering the Late Neolithic to Iron Age period, we'll be going round in circles arguing about the same stuff.

EastPole said...

@Davidski

“Well, modern East Slavs have complex ancestry like almost everyone else, but I doubt that all East Slavs have significant Baltic ancestry.

Rather, I'd say they're largely derived from a Slavic/Baltic genetic continuum, with various recent admixtures.”


I used to think that this Slavic/Baltic genetics and culture came from Trzciniec culture, but now I am more and more convinced it was much earlier, Mierzanowice or CWC. There are so many Slavic influences on Vedic and Greek culture, language and religion, that the source had to exist earlier than Trzciniec.

R1a migrations to Central Asia and Balkans probably was the source of it. But it could only happen before Trzciniec, most likely:
CWC(Poland)–>Sintashta–>Andronovo–>India
CWC(Poland)–>Mierzanowice–>Nitra–>Balkans–>Greece.

For example:
Swan was a sacred bird for Slavs and Balts. Even now one cannot harm a swan. Slavs were sun worshipers. Sun was dead during winter but resurrected in the spring, when sun god arrived with the swans. But metaphorically the sun was also the symbol of happiness, wisdom and poetic inspiration. That myth that sun god Apollo arrives with the swans was passed to Greece from Hyperboreans.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/fb/4a/3ffb4a24331a4a9fd1ed36a3693324c7.gif

Interesting article:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313112852_The_swan_chariot_of_a_solar_deity_Greek_narratives_and_prehistoric_iconography

Notice Dupljaja 1500BC

The sun can be male, female or neutral, so in India a female goddess is associated with swan:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/29/Saraswati_Sarasvati_Swan_Sculpture.jpg/419px-Saraswati_Sarasvati_Swan_Sculpture.jpg
Notice that she as Apollo in Greece is linked with music, art and sciences.
“The most famous feature on Saraswati is a musical instrument called a veena, represents all creative arts and sciences, and her holding it symbolizes expressing knowledge that creates harmony. Saraswati is also associated with anurāga, the love for and rhythm of music, which represents all emotions and feelings expressed in speech or music.
A hamsa or swan is often shown near her feet. In Hindu mythology, the hamsa is a sacred bird, which is offered a mixture of milk and water, is said to be able to drink the milk alone. It thus symbolizes the ability to discriminate between good and evil, essence from the outward show, and the eternal from the evanescent. Due to her association with the swan, Saraswati is also referred to as Hamsavāhini, which means “she who has a hamsa as her vehicle”.”

Sanskrit ‘Hamsa’ comes from Slavic ‘gęś(genś)’”goose”. Hamsa also symbolizes sun in Rigveda.
I could write more about Rigveda and many similarities, but I know that you don’t want it to be discussed here.

So to find Hyperboreans we have to look where swans arrive in the spring for breeding (yellow color):

https://i.postimg.cc/bwqZP9wG/Swan-Apollo.jpg

http://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/mute-swan-cygnus-olor

Red arrows show how the religious idea that sun god of poetry and wisdom is linked with the swans migrated IMO. I think it follows genetics, and I am sure that after Nitra we will find R1a in the Balkans.

Archi said...

@EastPole

"Sanskrit ‘Hamsa’ comes from Slavic"
"There are so many Slavic influences on Vedic and Greek culture, language and religion"

LOL.

EastPole said...

@Archi

„LOL”

I think it is a spam, not an argument.

If you have better ideas how to explain similarities in Slavic, Vedic and Greek cultures, languages and religions, like sun god arriving with the swans, which do not come from Slavic lands but come from Greece or India, go ahead, we will compare your theory with mine.

Archi said...

@EastPole

It is known to everyone. Slavic and Sanskrit and Greek had a common ancestor of the Proto-Indo-European language (and culture). There were no borrowings from Slavic. Nobody in the world has any other ideas. You are spamming here with Vedic native faith.


EastPole said...

@Archi

“It is known to everyone. Slavic and Sanskrit and Greek had a common ancestor of the Proto-Indo-European language (and culture).”


So prove now that PIE believed in the sun god arriving with the swans. Because for example ancient Greeks didn’t have that idea. It was introduced later when Apollo cult was introduced from Hyperboreans. Give some evidence.

I am sure you are not interested in explaining or understanding anything only in spamming.

Rob said...

@ Sam


Rob, DA197 is a culturally assimilated local native”

Maybe but unlikely for R1a-Z280 derived lineages to be “native” to Hungary , from what we know in the BA

@ ioannis

“Pockets of BB” are unlikely to have much to do with Slavic expansions

Archi said...

@EastPole

"So prove now that PIE believed in the sun god arriving with the swans. Because for example ancient Greeks didn’t have that idea. It was introduced later when Apollo cult was introduced from Hyperboreans. Give some evidence."

Do not write your inventions about some Hyperboreans. What you wrote is purely your invention. In Greek myth, the chariot of Apollo, drawn by swans, arrives from the Ripean Mountains - the Urals. This is exactly Sintashta - Babino.

"I am sure you are not interested in explaining or understanding anything only in spamming."

What you write is exclusively spam. You absolutely do not write anything except spam and do not understand. I know that for sure. All your messages do not relate to genetics at all, even indirectly, one propaganda of pseudoscience.


Ioannis Gavras said...

@ Rob

Pomeranian culture was very close with Oksywie/Wielbark witch seems they were associated with east Germanics prolly.Also pretty much close with Jastorf and House Urns culture's and ofc south of them La Tene people.What people inhabit eastern of them i am not sure and i cannot say 100%,but probably Baltics and other Steppe related folks or even Scytho-Sarmatians tribes.My point is,after their expansion they started receiving influences depends their direction.I am starting to believe that we are going to see 2 subbranches of Slavic people.Those being towards northeast and those being less 'Baltic' like admixed taking some other influences western of them.Btw some posters in AG claiming HUN_AVAR_SLOZAD AV2 is more close to reality of Proto-Slavs etc.

EastPole said...

@Archi
“It is known to everyone. Slavic and Sanskrit and Greek had a common ancestor of the Proto-Indo-European language (and culture).”

“In Greek myth, the chariot of Apollo, drawn by swans, arrives from the Ripean Mountains - the Urals. This is exactly Sintashta - Babino.”

So you have failed to prove that common elements in Slavic, Vedic and Greek like sun arriving with the swans in the spring came from PIE.
Prove it now that it came from Sintashta-Babino.

You have no idea who PIE were, who Hyperboreans were, what their religions were like etc. You don’t present any evidence or reasoning. You are just spamming.

@Davidski

I think this model explains some common elements in languages and cultures of Slavic, Vedic, Greek and Celtic/Italic:

CWC(Poland)–>Sintashta–>Andronovo–>India
CWC(Poland)–>Mierzanowice–>Nitra–>Balkans–>Greece.
CWC(Poland)–>Mierzanowice/Nitra–>Unetice–>Tumulus–>Urnfield culture

Hyperboreans lived north of Carpathian mountains and north of the steppe, they worshiped sun and believed that sun god arrives in the spring with the swans:

https://i.postimg.cc/667kL2LP/Swan-Apollo2.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/bYxfWzPZ/screenshot-81.png

ambron said...

Rob, there are already several dozen Z280+ from the Hungarian borderland from the Bronze Age.

Carlos Aramayo said...

@Davidski,

I want to let you know that recently Asko Parpola published a paper regarding Sanauli's proto-chariots, dated around 1800 BCE (found in Uttar Pradesh, India), which he thinks are still oxen carts (not driven by horses as Indian archaeologists suggest). Parpola's point of view now is that a first wave of Indo-Iranians reached Sanauli, with oxen carts, around 1900 BCE, not Indo-Aryans which, as per his view, came later in time.

He changed also his point of view that Indo-Iranians split into Indo-Aryans and Iranians in the 3rd millennium BCE, now he suggests it happened closer to 2000 BCE.

Take a look at:

https://tinyurl.com/y5unduqp

(See full pdf included in that page).

Davidski said...

@Carlos

Thanks, it's an interesting paper. But it's very speculative without a proper study of these chariots and burials.

It's based on a few images and reports rather than on any sort of primary examination of the finds.

Archi said...

@EastPole

You don’t know how to read, everything you write is pure lie. All you write is spam and deception. You do not know anything and do not present absolutely any evidence for your inventions. My words are fully confirmed by scientists, yours never. I gave you proof of my words, you did not.

Kuzmina 1994 Where did the Indo-Aryans come from:
"Researchers of the Mycenaean civilization suggest that the Mycenaean dynasts came to Greece from the North and are looking there for the origin of a number of features of the material culture of Mycenae. The nature of chariot myths indicates their central European origin. Especially important is the mythologeme of swans-horses, drawing the chariot of the solar god across the sky [Ivanov, 1969, p. 54], the possibility of a Mediterranean origin is excluded and which could
only in Northern Eurasia, where the arrival of swans symbolizes the onset of spring. In Greek myth, Apollo's chariot, drawn by swans, arrives from the Ripean Mountains - the Urals.
In Hellas, in the pre-Mycenaean era, there were no developed traditions of horse breeding, which did not stimulate the invention of horse chariots. On the contrary, horse breeding in the Eurasian steppes has been known since the 4th millennium BC, in the 3rd millennium BC. In the area from the Dnieper to the Urals, horse breeding cultures emerged, the cult of the horse took shape [Kuzmina, 1977] and the rite of horse sacrifice at burial, which appeared in Greece only together with the Mycenaean dynasties: the burials of two horses were discovered in the dromos tholos in Marathon [Vanderpool, 1959, ... 277-283]. On the contrary, in the steppes, the ancient horse breeding tradition led to the development of training. The intense search for the most effective ways of harnessing is evidenced by the extreme diversity and instability of the cheekpieces in the steppe on the sites of the Potapovka and Petrovsko-Sintashta types. All this leads to the conclusion that the formation of cheekpieces of type I took place in the Eurasian steppes, where both the largest number of cheekpieces and the most archaic specimens of the Abashevo and KMK cultures without decoration are known. At the turn of the Middle Helladic and Late Helladic periods, chariots with pairs of horses with disc-drive cheekpieces from the steppes came to Greece. "

You do not know anything about languages, you do not know anything about the Slavic languages ​​and Sankrit.

Archi said...

@Carlos Aramayo

All that Parpola writes must be multiplied by zero. I don't remember a case when he was right about anything and constantly didn't change his opinion.

old europe said...



the birds simbology comes from the Cucuteni Tripolye cultural complex and it is evidently a neolithic thing. It was obviously incorporated into the Sredni Stog communities and later on passed to every IE daughter culture.

https://www.academia.edu/keypass/SWxxQ3B4eS9FWit0NERSMU10NDM0ZEI0Y0lPWG00UVlUdjFwSFM0MC9uVT0tLWZpN1FYL1QwZUtqc1RHSUp5ZTJFNlE9PQ==--9ca0aa6b8e648c5b74829ecf6bd3f5329854ee0b/t/duouf-PdiBuU2-gFB2Y/resource/work/38377698/The_Birds_in_the_Imaginarium_of_Cucuteni_Trypillia_World_New_Plastic_Representations?email_work_card=title

Archi said...

@old europe

The symbolism of birds has nothing to do with Tripolye, it is a common symbolism of Northern Eurasia, the peoples of Siberia have it. Even the Volosovo culture is full of figurines of duck birds. So it was rather borrowed to Tripolye.

EastPole said...

@Archi

Hecataeus of Miletus placed Hyperoborea north of Thrace and Riphean Mountains, he also believed that the Riphean Mountains were adjacent to the Black Sea.

Ural is impossible:

https://i.postimg.cc/65QM8Gcy/Swan-Apollo3.jpg

There are no swan breeding places north of Ural mountains, so your “sources” cannot be right. Don’t accept everything you read. Use your brain sometimes.

Riphean Mountains is an old name of Sudetes:

https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B3ry_Ryfejskie

Archi said...

@old europe

You have funny fantasies. There are no such hypotheses that the Riphean Mountains are the Sudetes, they are not in the scientific world. Do not bring Wikipedia into which every dreamer writes and no one checks, you wrote this fantasy there. The Riphean mountains are the Ural, this is the only consensus in science, Indo-Arya has the Ural and is called Mount Ripa.

And no need to carry nonsense, no one wrote about from the north of the Ural Mountains, it was written from the Ural Mountains. Absolutely everything that you write is not true. verything you wrote about the Hecataeus of Miletus is not true.

Hippocrates - Scythia lies under the constellation of the Bear, at the foot of the Ripean Mountains, from where the north wind blows.

Aristotle also pointed out that the Ripaean mountains lie behind extreme Scythia, under the Bear itself, and that most of the rivers flow from there, the largest after Istria, but he considered stories of their unprecedented size fabulous.

Dionysius Perieget: the rivers Aldesk and Panticap (river near the Don) flowed from the Ripean mountains.

Ancient Roman historian Justin: Scythia stretches eastward and is bounded on one side by the Pontus, on the other by the Riphean mountains, and behind by Asia and the Phasis river.

Nobody even fantasized about the Sudetes and you wrote your own fantasy on Wikipedia.

Rob said...

@ Ambron

'Rob, there are already several dozen Z280+ from the Hungarian borderland from the Bronze Age''

In the Unetice culture, Nitra, etc. Nut are they ancestral to medieval Slavic ? Im not sure, but less not sure than I Used to be :)

@ Ioannis

''Pomeranian culture was very close with Oksywie/Wielbark witch seems they were associated with east Germanics prolly.Also pretty much close with Jastorf and House Urns culture''

Okay but calling them BB pockets isn't correct

''Btw some posters in AG claiming HUN_AVAR_SLOZAD AV2 is more close to reality of Proto-Slavs etc.'''

Yes obviously people with Balto-Slavic drift were moving into the Carpathian during the Avar period, we don;t need the lapp-dogs at AG to tell us that


Ioannis Gavras said...

@ EastPole

Brother do not taking so serious the Greek Mythology.Even some issues among Greek historians like Homer etc were extreme and overrated.Archi is right in what he mentions above.All these IE folks lived very close to each other and they share similar culture,tradition,dialects,customs and many other things.I think we have discuss it before that the Greek Legacy is very IE based in every sector.

Rob said...

@ Archie
So are chariots and Myceneans from Central Europe, or the Urals, or both ?

Archi said...

CWC -> Babino -> Greece.

Real Chariots from Sintashta, it is next to Babino.

Ioannis Gavras said...

I will start to believe Archi from now on.. that Greeks arrived from a R1a source.I used to believe Catacomb but i will give a try to Archi.

Archi said...

@Ioannis Gavras

The Catacombians were the substrate for the Babinians. I don't know how much they influenced Babinians genetically, but anthropologically Babinians did not differ at all from Fatyanovians, and had nothing to do with Catacombians.

Well, culturally, many archaeologists have already written about the connections of the Babino culture with the Central European (epi)CWC and Mycenaeans.

Arza said...

@ Rob

The fact that they're R-Z280* doesn't change anything. Not without a reason big labs don't even care about detailed Y-DNA assignments. What does really count is autosomal composition. With Y-DNA it's always hit-and-miss, and even if it's a "hit", they are dead-ends anyway as almost all (if not all) Y-DNA lineages found in the aDNA.

And as ambron wrote... these Iron Age folks (this time with a "proper" Y-DNA) are local.

However, there is no direct line connecting them with later Slavs

Peach, please.

Target__________ Distance Baltic_EST_BA Scythian_HUN
Slovenian_______ 0.01604482 25.6 74.4
Croatian________ 0.01571164 26.4 73.6
Slovakian_______ 0.01708248 35.6 64.4
Polish__________ 0.01389673 44.2 55.8
Ukrainian_______ 0.01501355 51.0 49.0
Russian_Orel____ 0.01994686 52.8 47.2
Russian_Voronez_ 0.01619229 55.4 44.6
Belarusian______ 0.01254988 59.6 40.4
Lithuanian_PA___ 0.01277681 60.4 39.6
Lithuanian_VA___ 0.01160981 61.8 38.2
Russian_Smolensk 0.01677005 62.4 37.6
Lithuanian_VZ___ 0.01469755 67.4 32.6
Lithuanian_PZ___ 0.01513477 68.6 31.4
Lithuanian_SZ___ 0.01036740 69.6 30.4
Lithuanian_RA___ 0.01240813 70.0 30.0
Latvian_________ 0.01285156 73.2 26.8
Average_________ 0.01456590 55.3 44.7


Perhaps they were the Celtic stratum in Przeworsk culture.

Target: DEU_Singen_EIA:MX265
Distance: 2.3205% / 0.02320544
40.4 DEU_Krakauer_Berg_MA:KRA011
34.8 ITA_Proto-Villanovan:RMPR1
24.8 DEU_Lech_MBA:OTTM_151ind2_d

Ah, so Krakeuers are Celts from Przeworsk. Got it.

A said...

Amber is associated with Apollo and the Hyperboreans:


“In Greece, amber objects first make their appearance in the seventeenth or sixteenth centuries BCE at the very beginning of the Mycenaean period. (…) Based on the results of scientific analyses, Heinrich Schliemann already had to assume that the amber objects in the shaft graves consist of Baltic amber. Only much later did it become evident that the amber objects had not reached Greece from the Baltic, but, mostly as finished products, from the area of the Wessex culture of southern England. The crucial evidence for this is provided by rectangular amber spacer plates with a particular complex-bored pattern that only appear in funerary contexts in three regions of Europe, namely the Wessex culture, the Tumulus Burial culture in Central Europe and the Early Mycenaean culture in the Peloponnese. The transmission of amber objects from the Wessex culture to Greece during the LH I phase predates the earliest appearance of components of amber necklaces, including spacer plates, in graves of the Tumulus Burial culture (…)

There is an amazing similarity between the shaft grave period and the Wessex culture not only in the amber items as such and their close association with gold, but also in the social contexts of the appearance of amber jewellery… while in the Early Bronze Age in the British Isles amber is by no means confined to elite tombs, special forms like crescentic amber necklaces with spacer plates and trapezoid end-pieces remain restricted to the richest Wessex burials. This exactly corresponds to the find situation of amber jewellery with spacer plates in the Early Mycenaean Peloponnese, thus emphasizing that in both regions such special amber objects were confined to the very small group of the most richly furnished burials.”

(Maran 2013) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270900023_Bright_as_the_sun_The_appropriation_of_amber_objects_in_Mycenaean_Greece

Rob said...

All this shows is that by 1600 BC; the Mycenaean culture was fully developed and had wide -ranging networks, from the Atlantic to Egypt
But the proto-Greeks were in northern Greece by ~ 2500 BC; as a post-Yamnaya - Balkan mix. By 1600, the elites needn’t necessarily have been R1b-Z2103; they might have been G2a .

ambron said...

Arza, that's why it seems to me that David is looking for Proto-Slavs in the wrong place and genotype. I would point to the area farther south and the genotype more similar (in terms of autosomes and uniparentals) to DA197 and MX265.

Davidski said...

So these KRA samples weren't actually Slavs but Balts with some local Germanic admix?

Hmmm...

ambron said...

Most likely, but previously culturally assimilated by the Slavs.

Davidski said...

So eastern Germany was actually full of Slavic-speaking Balts at the time?

Isn't that way too convenient?

Rob said...

Check this out
https://brill.com/view/title/56858

EastPole said...

@Davidski

“So eastern Germany was actually full of Slavic-speaking Balts at the time?”

People are talking nonsense here without even understanding words they use. What does the word Slav mean? There is no Baltic, Germanic or Celtic substratum in Polish language. All this cultural assimilation is nonsense.

Rob said...

@ Arza

''Peach, please.

Target__________ Distance Baltic_EST_BA Scythian_HUN
Slovenian_______ 0.01604482 25.6 74.4
Croatian________ 0.01571164 26.4 73.6''

Ok my cupcake.. But what do these online distance outputs actually tell us ? That this Scythian has the same mix of WHG/EEF/Yamnaya as modern Croat & Slovenes. It not even formal IBD
No, we need multi-dimensional evidence approach, incl. a very realistic understanding of the population demography of who was living where & when.

ambron said...

The East Slavic genotype in the west probably comes from the Wends (the name of the Slavs used by the Germans) and/or Galindians (one of the names of the West Baltic and Sorbian tribes), who were the earliest to succumb to the linguistic assimilation implied by the Sklavins living in the area between the Vistula and the Danube.

Copper Axe said...

@Archi

"All that Parpola writes must be multiplied by zero. I don't remember a case when he was right about anything and constantly didn't change his opinion."

No kidding. In that article he argues that the sanauli wagon is from an early Sintashta migration predating the invention of the fully fledged chariot, yet this wagon is a full century younger than the oldest chariots found.

Also claims that Srubnaya was Iranian and Andronovo was Indo-Aryan, not really based on anything.

Johnny3Batony said...

So what's the hip theory about Slavic origin now? CWC were Proto-Slavic speakers? If so, why are they genetically closest to modern Scandinavians, not to Poles or Russians.

Archi said...

@Davidski
"So eastern Germany was actually full of Slavic-speaking Balts at the time?
Isn't that way too convenient?"


No, it's over, these are ordinary Slavs who are in those places according to historical documents. There are a lot of documents that describe the impudent, from the point of view of the Germans, the behavior of the Slavs who behave there at home, which angered the Germans.

Davidski said...

@Johnny3Batony

How did you work out that Scandinavians were significantly closer to all Corded Ware populations?

Post your analysis and I'll take it apart.

Davidski said...

Oh, you don't have an analysis? Well, that's a shame.

But in any case, obviously Scandinavians are not significantly closer to Corded Ware than Poles and Western Russians are, if we exclude recent drift.

In fact, there is one Corded Ware sample that is closer to Poles and Russians even in terms of recent drift, which suggests that this is precisely the sort of population that Balto-Slavs derive from and it may have been Proto-Slavic speaking.

Haha.

Archi said...

@Copper Axe said...
"Parpola"

All his statements are completely unsubstantiated. This wagon could even come from Sumer, there were already a lot of such there at that time. By that time, the kings there at least knew about horses, but they did not have chariots.

Who Srubnaya was is not clear, but to attribute the entire Andronovo culture to Indo-Aryans alone is ridiculous. Andronovo culture is not monolithic at all, there are a bunch of options, Sintashta, Petrovka, Alakul, Fedorovo, Srubno-Alakul, Alekseevo, and a bunch of derived cultures from it. It is from Alekseevo type such as the Fergana Valley and Semerechye that the Indo-Aryans most likely originated. But apart from the ancestors of the Indo-Aryans and Iranians, the ancestors of the Nuristanians and Dards lived in it.

Copper Axe said...

@Davidski

"Haha."

I don't know why it always gets me, but whenever you end a comment with "haha" I crack up.

@Archi

Not to mention toy replicas of two wheeled carts have been found in the IVC. But I guess the interesting news is that DNA is taken from this burial, it will be interesting to see what the results will be.

A said...

@ Rob

"the proto-Greeks were in northern Greece by ~ 2500 BC; as a post-Yamnaya - Balkan mix"

Which culture/s do you associate with their migration into Greece?

ambron said...

David, what specific sample do you have in mind? I0432...?

Samuel Andrews said...

The first videos on my youtube channel will be on Roman DNA study, Viking DNA study, Welzin warriors, then one on Asian Steppe in last 4,000 years.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoL-O5egSxkfvkCGGE0vN1Q?view_as=subscriber

Then, I'll do a about 20-video series on population history of Europe. Which will be very good.

zardos said...

The whole debate reminds me on why I always had troubles with many of the Slavic origin theories. Most of them seem to have lacked what I may call the "real world check". Like small groups surviving in swamps, or between a row of dominant conquerors, which all took the respective regions, but they just survived independently, keeping their own ways and not disintegrating.

Early Slavs surely had a demographic run, they multiplied in a short period of time and expanded rapidly, but even for that to happen you need a solid base, a population centre and independent elite. It can't happen from a small spot on the map in the midst of some swmaps.

The most parsimonious theory was always that they lived in a zone in which their core group and elite could exist fairly independent and untouched by the then dominating groups in Eastern Central Europe and the steppe, so not in the midst of Celts, Thracians, Iranians or Germanics, but rather further away.
So the close relationship of their main component to early Corded Ware might be no coincidence, like how about them being the Corded groups which moved and stayed in the forest steppe region? Obviously in close proximity to the Balts, even in a union, but while the Balts would have been bordering Uralics, they would have bordered Thracians, Celts, Germanics, Iranians and unknown people from these spheres, probably even related Proto-Slavs which were in closer contact or under the rule of these other people.

This scenario would put any origin of the main Slavic groups much further North East than some of the theories floating around. The recent results from fairly unmixed Slavic people might just reflect this origin?

Like Poland was inhabited by Lusatian-related people, which might have been different, those were influenced by Celts, Thracians and then came Germanics. Where should the Slavs have hidden? Especially with this genetic profile, but even more important, as a people, as an independent culture? Only in the very North East and more likely further East.

The "Baltic problem" might be solved like that: What about a general shift taking place, like in the rest of the migration period - if it was a general movement to the West of Rome <- Germanics <- Slavs <- Balts <- Uralics. So the neighbouring people to the East just moved West, once the migration started. Everyone was happy getting a better place than they had before.
The trend reverted some generations later with a push to the East, once the Western population growth and cultural advancement made it a viable option again. This time the same thing happened in the opposite direction French -> Germans -> Poles -> Russians -> Uralics-Siberians.

Obviously I see no big issue with a Baltic substrate in the North East, because after the Slavic expansion, there was a Slavic substrate in regions which were surely NOT SLAVIC before (like Eastern Germany), simply because it was a large scale replacement with little written records by the Slavs, in largely, not completely though, emptied regions. Same thing, same result. Even in some formerly provincial Roman regions there was actually little surviving toponymy from pre-Slavic inhabitants - and we have the written records that those existed with absolute certainty.

Serious question: How would linguists being able to distinguish old from new substrate and adstrate effects with any certainty, if the sequence was Slavic -> Baltic -> Slavic?

Davidski said...

@ambron

Obviously, I'm talking about Spiginas2.

Michał said...

@Davidski
"In fact, there is one Corded Ware sample that is closer to Poles and Russians even in terms of recent drift, which suggests that this is precisely the sort of population that Balto-Slavs derive from and it may have been Proto-Slavic speaking."

I guess you meant Proto-Balto-Slavic (or even Pre-Proto-Balto-Slavic) rather than Proto-Slavic-speaking population.

Davidski said...

Well, at some point there had to have been a Corded Ware-derived population like this that was Proto-Slavic.

Ioannis Gavras said...

David and other Poles who reading, can you help me with a specific surname.

Do you guys have any idea if the surname Mineyko is of Polish roots or it might be Jewish-Hebrew?

I am trying to understand the roots of this man's here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygmunt_Mineyko

In general Polish_Jews had and still have surnames similar to Poles?

EastPole said...

@Davidski
“Well, at some point there had to have been a Corded Ware-derived population like this that was Proto-Slavic.”


I don’t think Spiginas2 was Proto-Slavic. It is made of HG and CWC/Dereivka. In my opinion populations like Corded_Ware_POL:N49 or UKR_Dereivka_I_En2:I4110 were better candidates for Proto-Slavic. Spiginas2 could be Proto-Baltic.

Target: Corded_Ware_Baltic:Spiginas2
Distance: 3.9695% / 0.03969541
51.2 Corded_Ware_POL:N49
15.8 UKR_Dereivka_I_En2:I4110
14.8 UKR_Meso:I5885
11.2 Baltic_LTU_Narva:Donkalnis7
4.4 RUS_Karelia_HG:I0211
1.4 HUN_ALPc_Tiszadob_MN:I2375
0.8 HUN_Sopot_LN:I4184
0.4 TUR_Ikiztepe_LC:IKI037


https://i.postimg.cc/RVsPnQhy/Spiginas2.jpg


After removing Corded_Ware_POL:N49:
Target: Corded_Ware_Baltic:Spiginas2
Distance: 4.2141% / 0.04214074
39.2 UKR_Meso:I5885
14.6 Corded_Ware_DEU:I1534
10.6 HUN_Sopot_LN:I4184
9.6 Baltic_LTU_Narva:Donkalnis7
9.0 Corded_Ware_DEU:I1538
6.6 Corded_Ware_DEU:I1539
4.4 UKR_Dereivka_I_En2:I4110
2.4 DNK_BA:RISE276
2.0 POL_Unetice_EBA:RISE109
1.0 TUR_Ikiztepe_LC:IKI012
0.4 RUS_Poltavka:I6294
0.2 SRB_Iron_Gates_HG:I5238

EastPole said...

@Ioannis Gavras

Mineyko, Domeyko, are Polish or Slavic surnames, nothing Jewish here.
Zygmunt_Mineyko was Polish.

Michał said...

@Davidski
"Well, at some point there had to have been a Corded Ware-derived population like this that was Proto-Slavic."

Sure, but we need to differentiate here between the Corded Ware and Corded Ware-derived populations.

Davidski said...

@EastPole

In my opinion populations like Corded_Ware_POL:N49 or UKR_Dereivka_I_En2:I4110 were better candidates for Proto-Slavic.

Don't think so.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-my_nm5nGWOQ/X63PcBfe14I/AAAAAAAAJac/7Tt29BT9mcss5AYOFM8TbjgQhs-2uh1bwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1200/Vahaduo%2BGlobal%2B25%2BNorth%2BEurope%2BPCA.png

Overall, Spiginas2 is the earliest sample that clearly shows a very strong shift to the Balto-Slavic pole of variation. And there's no reason to believe that Slavs are derived from an ancient population that lacked this very specific affinity.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nii1bPj8CeM/X63QjtF8z7I/AAAAAAAAJak/lly8YmoO3d8oImckRlHYXl3BtgLv-_YXQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1200/Vahaduo%2BGlobal%2B25%2BNorth%2BEurope%2BPCA.png

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nLwql9ilizg/X63QstQAiWI/AAAAAAAAJao/-CdkW3TAjcQ75U4t2LOKgBh6yq5pRafgACLcBGAsYHQ/s1200/Vahaduo%2BGlobal%2B25%2BEurope%2B2%2BPCA.png

Michał said...

@Ioannis Gavras

Mineyko doesn't sound like a Jewish surname to me. Most likely, it is a Slavic name with some East Slavic (Belarusian?) flavor. The alternative spelling in Polish would be Minejko. It seems that there was a wealthy Polish-speaking noblemen family in Lithuania (Mineyko of the Gozdawa coat of arms), so I would guess they were descendants of some Polonized noblemen (boyars) of Belarusian/Lithuanian ancestry. Do you know their Y-DNA haplogroup/subclade? Also, take a look at these sites:

https://geneszukacz.genealodzy.pl/index.php?search_lastname=Mineyko&from_date=&to_date=&exac=1&rpp1=&bdm=&url1=&w=&lang=pol&op=se
https://geneszukacz.genealodzy.pl/index.php?search_lastname=Minejko&from_date=&to_date=&exac=1&rpp1=&bdm=&url1=&w=&lang=pol&op=se
http://nlp.actaforte.pl:8080/Nomina/Ndistr?nazwisko=Mineyko
http://nlp.actaforte.pl:8080/Nomina/Ndistr?nazwisko=Minejko

Ioannis Gavras said...

@ EastPole

Thank you mate,it seems the idiotic neonazi conspiracy theories from some far-right Greeks about Mineyko being Jewish have not bases at all. They connect it very often because of Papandreou familly for being Socialists etc.Anyways thanks a lot!!!

EastPole said...

@Davidski

“Don't think so”

Why?

In your first PCA PC1 explains about 60% of variation and PC2 less than 10% of variation. So PC1 is important here, other dimensions are less important.

In PC1 both Corded_Ware_POL:N49 and UKR_Dereivka_I_En2:I4110 are very Slavic. They look more Slavic than Baltic or Celto-Germanic:


https://i.postimg.cc/KvpDqGnH/PC1-CWC.jpg

Spiginas2 is out of Slavic range in PC1, looks more Baltic/Uralic.

Davidski said...

@EastPole

Spiginas2 is on the way to becoming Balto-Slavic. There's nothing Uralic about him. Take a closer look at Europe 2.

Some Uralic populations have a lot of Balto-Slavic admix which can also confuse things.

Overall, there's nothing specifically Slavic about N49 or I4110. The Slavic affinity you're seeing in them is coincidental.

Ioannis Gavras said...

Thank you Michali for your analysis.I never believed Mineyko was a Jew but the Greek far-rightwing used to claim such bullshit.Anyway,this man had clearly a very Slavic 'profile-looking' he would never pass as a Jew IMO.And besides looks,how possible it would be someone during the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth to be Jewish and having such a high ranking position and having also noble origins???Very hard i guess...

EastPole said...

@Davidski

“Spiginas2 is on the way to becoming Balto-Slavic. There's nothing Uralic about him. Take a closer look at Europe 2.”

I am looking at Europe 2 and still see that in PC1 Corded_Ware_POL:N49 and UKR_Dereivka_I_En2:I4110 are closer to Slavic range than Spiginas2. In PC2 all are close:


https://i.postimg.cc/c19FjBWh/PC1-CWC-Europa2.jpg

Romulus said...

Isn't Trzciniec culture Balto-Slavic? Timeline suggests Baltic split from Slavic ~1500 B.C.

Davidski said...

@EastPole

Spiginas2 is closely related to Baltic BA, and Baltic BA defines the Balto-Slavic pole of variation.

Also, there's strong corroboration from uniparental markers that the Spiginas2/Baltic BA pole of variation is Balto-Slavic related.

I don't know what N49 and I4110 represent. Their uniparental markers don't appear to be Balto-Slavic and overall they look sort of broadly Northern/Eastern European related.

Rob said...

@ 'A'

''Which culture/s do you associate with their migration into Greece?''

It's best to approach it as a set of processes
Nothern & Central Greece underwent a depopulation just like East Balkans during the ~ 4000 BC floods/ earthquakes & subsequent pandemics, and what remained restructured to favour settling the coasts rather than the old Neolithic valleys.
Broadly the same time, as we know- people from Anatolia were moving in (e.g. captured by late N Pelopoenssus*) but this really picked up by 2500 BC - the colony period, when merchants settled along the entire eastern mainland. So Greece became integrated with the Eastern Med. world
These netwokrs were disrupted ~ 2200 BC, as part of the widespread 4,2 kiloyear calamaties, and we see evidence of destructions & turmoil in Greece (e.g. destruction of Hosue of Tiles, then covered by a mound).
I would guess that by 2500 BC there is steppe ancestry in northern Greece. After that, more moved down into Greece, e.g. in the Late Ezero phase there is a population drop in Thrace**, so obviously these people went somewhere.
BY 1600 BC everything had settled down, and elites on the eastern side of the mainland won power and finally reece became re-integrated into the wider Med and pan-European networks. The profit the elites acquired from this enabled them to built their shaft graves
Was there more migrations ~ 1600 ? Yes, but these were R1b-Z2013 rich proto-Illyrians moving from Hungary toward Albania & Dalmatia in the wake of the 'collapse of the Neo-Tells'

* Krepost is a contaminated sample, out of line with other Balkan N. data, and Harvard should remove it
** After 2000 BC, the population decline in Thrace is partially filled by counter-current movements from Anatolia. These guys might have brought the Anatolian-related ancestry seen later in Bulgaria, becasue it's otherwise missing in the earlier B.A.


Samuel Andrews said...

Btw

Looking at the Viking samples. The Balt samples from Gotland cluster at northern end of modern Balt variation. And Two samples cluster with Baltic Bronze age, north of all modern Balts.

So there were still people like Baltic Bronze age in Middle Ages.

Balts=Mix between baltic Bronze age and a Slavic-like population?

ambron said...

David, but corded populations emerged from the Carpathian area:

https://i.postimg.cc/Ng9xMNLX/fatyanovo.png

In my opinion, the matter is simple: the Iranians went east, the Balts went to the north, and the Slavs stayed in the Carpathians. So, as I said before, you have to look for a Proto-Slavic homeland somewhere in this area.

EastPole said...

@Davidski
„Spiginas2 is closely related to Baltic BA, and Baltic BA defines the Balto-Slavic pole of variation.

Also, there's strong corroboration from uniparental markers that the Spiginas2/Baltic BA pole of variation is Balto-Slavic related.

I don't know what N49 and I4110 represent. Their uniparental markers don't appear to be Balto-Slavic and overall they look sort of broadly Northern/Eastern European related.”

I am not convinced. PC1 which explains 60% of variation for North Europe divides Europe into 3 areas: western Celto-Germanic, central Slavic and Eastern Baltic/Uralic:

https://i.postimg.cc/kXXC09bP/PC1-CWC-Europa-North.jpg

Majority of CWC samples fall within Central, Slavic range. It is out of Western, Celto-Germanic range. Originaly CWC was dominated by Indo-Slavic R1a-M417. After the separation of proto-Indo-Iranian R1a-Z93 population of CWC which remained in Europe can be considered proto-Balto-Slavic. And the similarity of Vedic Sanskrit to Slavic languages is the best argument for it. All the I2a markers which were assimilated from farmers and HGs by proto-Balto-Slavic CWC can be considered Proto-Balto-Slavic too. It is in agreement with what linguists write: Proto-Slavic is dated 3000 BC by Trubachyov and others. This is the time when Proto-Slavic started to form. Linguistics and genetics agree .
I will quote Oleg Trubachyov again:
“Currently, there is an objective tendency to deepen the dating of ancient Indo-European dialects. This also applies to Slavonic as one of the Indo-European dialects. However, the question now is not that the history of Slavonic may be measured by the scale of the II to III millenniums B.C. but that we can hardly date the ‘emergence’ or ‘separation’ of proto-Slavonic or proto-Slavonic dialects from Indo-European dialects because of the proper uninterrupted Indo-European origin of Slavonic.
The latter belief is in line with the Meillet’s indication that Slavic is an Indo-European language of archaic type, vocabulary and grammar of which has not experienced shocks in contrast to, for example, the Greek (vocabulary) “
Trubačёv, O. N. 2003. Ėtnogenez i kul’tura drevnejščix slavjan: Lingvističeskie issledovanija.
Moskva: “Nauka”.

Davidski said...

@EastPole & ambron

All Balto-Slavic populations with little to none foreign admix cluster more or less within the Balto-Slavic variation pole marked on this plot.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YoDo6kXnL0w/X65dqI6U1DI/AAAAAAAAJa4/Q3_LsFDg2zcggZgW1qX9GbZWa7IjYw_TwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1170/G25_Balto-Slavic_pole.png

There are very good reasons for this, and whether you like it or not, all ancient Balto-Slavic populations and those directly ancestral to them will end up in this space too.

So cut the crap, and get with this reality as soon as possible, or discussing anything related to this issue with you will be extremely dull and a total waste of time.

Archi said...

@A

The Yamnaya culture never entered Greece. There are no links between the Hellenic cultures and the Yamnaya culture. Linguistically, we know for sure that before the beginning of the Mycenaean civilization ~ 1600BC in Greece, no one spoke Greek. No one ever assumed that the Yamnaya culture were Greeks. There is not the slightest evidence that the Yamnaya culture is associated with the Greeks, there is not the slightest connection between Mycenae and the Yamnaya culture. No one even provided indirect evidence that the IE Greeks were in Greece before 1600BC.
The settlement of Greece by the Greeks was not a process, it was a one-off event.

@EastPole

"Proto-Slavic is dated 3000 BC by Trubachyov and others. This is the time when Proto-Slavic started to form. Linguistics and genetics agree."

No, they don't agree.

https://i.ibb.co/3NQh1wX/IE-with-TMRCA.png

quote Oleg Trubachyov is not dated 3000 BC : "the II to III millenniums B.C."
Trubachov does not date the separation of the Slavic language.

"Originaly CWC was dominated by Indo-Slavic R1a-M417."

Originally CWC was most Indo-European R1a-M417.

Rob said...

Archie
that,s true, nobody said Yamnaya culture spoke Greek

'No one even provided indirect evidence that the IE Greeks were in Greece before 1600BC.'

That's not an arguement for pre-literate societies.

Archi said...

@Rob

"That's not an arguement for pre-literate societies."

Greece was a literate society. There has been writing since about ~2000BC, Linear A, it's not in Greek.

Rob said...

Linear A is from Crete. It spread to mainland Greece after 1700 BC

Archi said...


It does not matter, it is important that it is not written in Greek. There are no traces of even Greek borrowings into it. The Achaeans are gentlemen-conquerors, they would not have tolerated that someone wrote in a language other than theirs. In general, as with the Hittites, who, as they came so immediately, all began to write in Hittite.

EastPole said...

@Davidski

“So cut the crap”

OK. I give up. Will not discuss it.

You can believe whatever you want. To me it is crap and a waste of time. It simply doesn’t explain anything. You will be searching for PIE homeland for the next 200 years and will not find it. Because it never existed in the form you imagine it did after reading all that nonsense produced by western scholarship which has Prussian and Nazi background. They ignore most important IE languages and traditions which were the closest to PIE. And as a result they have no clue about PIE religion and culture.

@ambron
“but corded populations emerged from the Carpathian area:

https://i.postimg.cc/Ng9xMNLX/fatyanovo.png

In my opinion, the matter is simple: the Iranians went east, the Balts went to the north, and the Slavs stayed in the Carpathians. So, as I said before, you have to look for a Proto-Slavic homeland somewhere in this area.”

Yes and we never left that area, we are still here. We preserved not only language, genes but also culture, religion, tradition.
It can be reconstructed with the help of linguistics, ethnolinguistics, ethnology.
Prof. Bartmiński writes about it.

https://i.postimg.cc/RVtp47sB/screenshot-105.png

And the reason why we can understand PIE culture better than they is because it was our native culture. Once you understand it a lot of things become clear. Even elements of Rigveda can be explained with the help of our folk traditions. But as they are not interested and prefer worship of horses and wolves coming from Yamnaya (see D.W. Anthony) I will not write about it here.

Rob said...

So how do the literary preferences of these gentleman back your claim that Aecheans come from KMK in 1600 BC when even Minoan wasn’t written before 1600 in the mainland ?

George said...

Off Topic:

Genomic Insights into the Demographic History of Southern Chinese
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.08.373225v1

From the Abstract:
"To comprehensively cover the genetic diversity in East and Southeast Asia, we generated genome-wide SNP data from 211 present-day Southern Chinese and co-analyzed them with more than 1,200 ancient and modern genomes."

"Multiple phylogenetic analyses support that the earliest living branching among East Asian-related populations is First Americans (∼27,700 BP), followed by the pre-LGM differentiation between Northern and Southern East Asians (∼23,400 BP) and the pre-Neolithic split between Coastal and Inland Southern East Asians (∼16,400 BP). In North China, distinct coastal and inland routes of south-to-north gene flow had established by the Holocene, and further migration and admixture formed the genetic profile of Sinitic speakers by ∼4,000 BP. Four subsequent massive migrations finalized the complete genetic structure of present-day Southern Chinese."

George said...

Off Topic:

The Genomic History of the Middle East
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.18.342816v2.full.pdf

From the Abstract:
"We generated and analysed 137 high-coverage physically-phased genome sequences from eight Middle Eastern populations using linked-read sequencing. We found no genetic traces of early expansions out-of-Africa in present-day populations, but find Arabians have elevated Basal Eurasian ancestry that dilutes their Neanderthal ancestry. A divergence in population size within the region starts before the Neolithic, when Levantines expanded while Arabians maintained small populations that could have derived ancestry from local epipaleolithic hunter-gatherers. "

and from page 3:

"We find that most present-day Middle Easterners can be modelled as deriving their ancestry from four ancient populations (Table S1): Levant_N, Neolithic Iranians (Iran_N), Eastern Hunter Gatherers (EHG), and a ~4,500 year old East African (Mota). We observe a contrast between the Levant and Arabia: Levantines have excess EHG ancestry (Figure S4), which we showed previously had arrived in the Levant after the Bronze Age along with people carrying ancient south-east European and Anatolian ancestry (Haber et al., 2017, Haber et al. 2020). Our results here show this ancestry remained mostly confined to the Levant region. Another contrast between the Levant and Arabia is the excess of African ancestry in Arabian populations."

epoch said...

@Davidski

Is there a possibility to add the high res of the two Gravettian twins in Global 25? Are they already available?

Rob said...

@ Archi

Linear A wasn't particularly common in the mainland. It features only in a couple of sites. It was just a transient presence, so the absence of Mycenean Greek loans in it means little, esp if - as most people know- early Greek was residing in the north, around Macedonia, Thessally, etc.
Anyhow, you've been told by that KMK doesn't seem like a great fit for Myceneans, so perhaps you should just let it go...

Davidski said...

@Johnny3Batony

Poles can be modeled as ~50% Corded Ware, basically same as Scandinavians.

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2020/08/yamnaya-related-ancestry-proportions-in.html

It makes no difference if Polish Corded Ware is closer to Scandinavians based on Global25 or some GEDmatch results.

That's because recent drift skews the results and there was variation within Corded Ware anyway.

At this stage of the game, you really have to have your head stuck deep up your ass not to understand that Balto-Slavs derive from Corded Ware.

You don't understand what you're doing. Learn the basics then we can talk.

Parastais said...

@Samuel Andrews
“ Btw

Looking at the Viking samples. The Balt samples from Gotland cluster at northern end of modern Balt variation. And Two samples cluster with Baltic Bronze age, north of all modern Balts.

So there were still people like Baltic Bronze age in Middle Ages.

Balts=Mix between baltic Bronze age and a Slavic-like population?”
Yeap, Latvians can be modelled like 50% Baltic BA + 30% Hun_Avar_Szolad, Lithuanians can be modelled 50% Hun Szolad + 30% Baltic BA.
Hun_Avar_Szolad could be pretty much genetically proxy for something pre Slavic.
These genes entered Baltic gene pool before 1200 AD probably since Estonian_MA unlike Estonian_IA already had close to modern frequencies.

Archi said...

Rob, you did not write anything at all from what you were asked, you did not write a word about the archaeological cultures from which the Greeks came in your opinion, neither about the language, nor about culture, nor about genetics. You just said that they came to 2500BC in Greece and were purely slaves and cattle among the local population, voiceless and powerless. And then, from nowhere, they suddenly began to write in Greek, they got horses and chariots, weapons, burials, they began to rule, and genetics in which a steppe component appeared, which the Minians did not have.
Your dates for Linear A are very rough.

In other words, you do not have a single fact at all except for an incomprehensibly fictitious date taken from the ceiling. The KMK is the only culture that exactly suits the Proto-Mycenaeans, it is strongly proven by archaeologists and anthropologists.
Mycenae is very much like Arkaim.

Davidski said...

@EastPole

I'm not searching for the PIE homeland. I already know that it was in the Sredny Stog culture.

Slavs derive from Sredny Stog via the eastern Corded Ware culture.

There's no mystery anymore, unless you're not happy with these facts for one reason or another, but that's not my problem.

Ioannis Gavras said...

@ Archi

Archi do you think KMK would have been similar to Corded or more southern in terms of autosomal DNA?Also what other IE groups do you connect with KMK?

Archi said...

@Ioannis Gavras

According to anthropological and mitochondrial data, the early KMK did not differ much from the Central European Epi-CWC and Fatyanovo. Autosomally, it should be like them, but in the process of moving West from the Lower Don to the Danube, it had to include the Catacomb substratum.

It is believed that four linguistically related peoples came out of the KMK: Greeks, Macedonians, Phrygians, Armenians. Apparently it was in this order that they were located inside the KMK from the Danube to the Don (Tanais).

Rob said...

@ Archie

“ d, you did not write a word about the archaeological cultures from which the Greeks came in your opinion, neither about the language, nor about culture, nor about genetics. You just said that they came to 2500BC in Greece and were purely slaves and cattle among the local population, voiceless and powerless.”

Well if you think that’s what I said; then you need to get a head CT scan & check your thiamine levels, because you’re confabulating
But tbh I don’t pretend to have it all figured out, because of the still low number of data and the big variation of scholarly opinion. That’s how normal, rational people operate- they understand limitations

You on the other hand are categorically convinced of your scenario because (I) Kuzmina said so based on a couple of isolated similarities, (iI) you personally like the sound of KMK because you think it’ll be R1a . The fact that KmK are far too eastern and physically irrelevant for the steppe admixture in Mycenaeans is obviously too complex for your caricature models. So best of luck

Rob said...

Yamnaya culture can be found all the way in Thrace and Montenegro
The same can’t be said for catacomb; even less for KMK which doesn’t make it past Moldavia
But maybe they flew to Mycenae in Archi’s Uralic swans lol

Archi said...


As you would expect from Rob, apart from the naked statements of his fantasy, there are no more arguments other than ignorance and deception. Kuzmin has nothing to do with it, a lot of archaeologists wrote about the similarity between KMK and Mycenae, and independently of each other, I cited their texts in other topics.

Ignorance about the distribution of KMC is also evident. Learn.

https://i.ibb.co/56VYGfT/Babino-map.png
https://i.ibb.co/3BhPdMf/Epi-CWC-into-Babino.png
https://i.ibb.co/FqBWL2t/Discshaped-cheekpieces-of-the-Mycenaean-type-map.png

We can see any lack of any arguments from Rob.



Rob said...

@ Archi

Yes, of course O masterful one


''https://i.ibb.co/56VYGfT/Babino-map.png''

That's not a particularly detailed map, just a mass-colouring. No individual site numbers.


''https://i.ibb.co/3BhPdMf/Epi-CWC-into-Babino.png''

Oh look at that - Babino culture centred way out past the Dnieper (#15)


''https://i.ibb.co/FqBWL2t/Discshaped-cheekpieces-of-the-Mycenaean-type-map.png''

Yes in Mycenae the cheek piece was imported or imitated models foudn to the northeast. No issues.

Archi said...

@Rob

"That's not a particularly detailed map, just a mass-colouring. No individual site numbers."

This is a map of the distribution and variants of Babino culture. Site names won't give you anything.

"Oh look at that - Babino culture centred way out past the Dnieper"

Don't talk nonsense - it says to you there: DDBC, learn to read, Dnieper-Don variant of the Babino culture. For this I gave you a map of the distribution of variants of Babino culture. DDBC is the original version of Babino culture, the place where it originated and from where it spreads in all directions.

In that place, in addition to links with the Epi-CWC, there are many finds of the Middle Dnieper CWC culture, this shows that the newcomers came from Central Europe through their closest relatives on the Middle Dnieper CWC to the lower Don. Sintashta apparently went the same way, but beyond the Urals.

"Yes in Mycenae the cheek piece was imported or imitated models foudn to the northeast."

Nobody imported anything, these are the Achaeans-Danai, migrant invaders from the Danube. There was nowhere to import them, there were no neighbors at that time.

Rob said...

@ Archi

''This is a map of the distribution and variants of Babino culture. Site names won't give you anything.''

I asked where are the sites distributed ? Obviously you don;t know.
Here is a detailed image of sites of KMK https://imgur.com/l10pabR

Moreover, the flow of influences went from Carpatho-Danube (& forest-epi -Corded) regions to KMK, and specifically to the Dnieper-Don variant, whilst the western-most sites of KMK were few, and culturally-politically peripheral.

''There was nowhere to import them, there were no neighbors at that time.''

Okay, the Myceneans had no neighbours. Good one champ

Archi said...

@Rob

"I asked where are the sites distributed ? Obviously you don;t know."

You don't know that, I know everything. Your card is lightweight, here's the complete one.

http://s018.radikal.ru/i514/1603/f4/d459f693f12b.png

Just what does it give you?

"Moreover, the flow of influences went from Carpatho-Danube (& forest-epi -Corded) regions to KMK, and specifically to the Dnieper-Don variant, whilst the western-most sites of KMK were few, and culturally-politically peripheral."

Your map is not correct, so you are wrong as always. The flow came from the Dnieper-Don region, this has been proven unequivocally, there the Babino culture arose, there its oldest part. The Carpathian-Danube part of Babino culture place did not influence anything at all, it is generally the latest, closer to the end of this culture.

This was immediately announced by the researchers, which is amazing that the Carpathian-Danube region does not have any influence on the Babino culture at all, they've been looking for it for decades, and only the influence of the CWC and Epi-CWC was found.

"Okay,"

I was mistaken in the turnover, I meant that "the neighbors did not have them at that time".


Rob said...

@ Archie

The problem is you can't comprehend English very well, so you just get yourself confused and worked-up

'The Carpathian-Danube part of Babino culture place did not influence anything at all, it is generally the latest, closer to the end of this culture.''

That is not what I said. Your misunderstanding


'', which is amazing that the Carpathian-Danube region does not have any influence on the Babino culture at all, ''

No that's not it.
Lytvynenko writes Also It is worthy of note that, the central European sub-complex in question was absolutely unrepresented in DPBC, which is territorially farther west, i.e.,
closer to the above Epi-Corded-Ware cultures of the Podolia and Volhynia and,
therefore, to the presumed Carpathian-Danube source of its origin.


But Which exactly and where exactly in the Carpathian-Danube Region those primary epi-centres were located, remains a matter of further investigation

The 2nd source of ''Central European influences'' were epi-corded forest cultures.

But these influences, for some reasons, mostly seem to skip the western sub-groups of Babino, and went directly to the Dnieper-Don centre.

''I was mistaken in the turnover,'

okay.


''You don't know that, I know everything''


your grandiosity if pretty annoying. We can compile a list of all the things the omnisicient Archie was wrong about a do a dedicated post on it, but that would be a waste of time

- ''R1b arrived to Europe in Mesolithic; o by Mesolithic I mean Ice Age, because thats what Mesolithic means''.
- ''R1a is from Mesolithic Siberia''
- TRB is predominantly G2a
- Mycenean Babinans'
etc, etc

Archi said...

@Rob

"No that's not it.

your grandiosity if pretty annoying. We can compile a list of all the things the omnisicient Archie was wrong about a do a dedicated post on it, but that would be a waste of time

- ''R1b arrived to Europe in Mesolithic; o by Mesolithic I mean Ice Age, because thats what Mesolithic means''.
- ''R1a is from Mesolithic Siberia''
- TRB is predominantly G2a
- Mycenean Babinans'
etc, etc"

Everything that you wrote is a complete lie, a lie in fact and a lie about me. Your goal, as always, is only to deceive everyone and distort everything that has been said.


weure said...

Three North Dutch DEU MA BAVARIA (Elb Germanic) vs DEU MA KRAKAU:

https://www.mupload.nl/img/xm9g0o10bb89e.10.56.png

Mom still a chunk Krakau 1/8 vs 7/8.