PDA

View Full Version : Chekunova 2014: N1c and R1a samples of Proto-East-Balts (?)



Tomenable
08-20-2015, 12:27 AM
As for the original homeland of Proto-East-Balts (I will simply call them East Balts below):

According to Russian studies of linguistics, toponymy (including hydronymy) and archaeology, such as these:

- Трубачев О. Н., Топоров В. Н., Лингвистический анализ гидронимов Верхнего Поднепровья
- Седов В.В., Происхождение и ранная истрия Славян
- Седов В. В., Славяние верхнево Поднепровья и Подвинья
- Бернштейн С. Б., Очерк сравнительной граматики славянских языков
- Третьяков П. Н., Памятники зарубинецкой культуры

The Iron Age homeland of East Balts were forest cultures of North-West Russia characterised by hillforts and long barrows.

That network of hillfort-building cultures of the forest zone, included primarily the following four cultures:

- Stroked-pottery culture
- Dnieper-Dvina culture
- Yukhnov culture
- Upper Oka culture

Areas occupied by those Iron Age cultures, contained archaeological sites (both Iron Age and older) described in these papers:

Dolukhanov et al., "The East European Plain on the Eve of Agriculture":

http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~nas13/AS/2009BAR_Int_Ser1964_Dolukhanov_etal.pdf

Dolbunova et al., "Archaeology of lake settlement (North-West Russia)":

https://www.academia.edu/9452168/Archaeology_of_lake_settlement_IV-II_mill._BC_Mazurkevich_A._Polkovnikova_M._Dolbuno va_E._ed

In the latter paper we have results of aDNA research, in Table 3. on p. 294 we have 6 samples:

For these samples mtDNA and Y-DNA haplogroups were established (but only superficially, no details about subclades are given):

1) The oldest of these samples is from the turns of the 5th and 4th millennia BC (I bet that this R1a didn't belong to Indo-European branch M198/M417, but it was some more archaic subclade, similar to Karelian R1a dated 5500-5000 BC, or to modern R1a kit of Mr Szpakowski, an ethnic Pole from Belarus):

Sample A3 - site Serteya VIII - dated to ca. 4000 BC; Y-DNA: R1a1, mtDNA: H

2) Three medium-aged samples belong to Zhizhitskaya culture from the mid-3rd millennium BC. It was under strong cultural influence of Corded Ware and/or Globular Amphora cultures. According to Dolukhanov et al. (page 185), Corded or Globular population penetrated this culture, mixing with the locals:

Sample A8 - site Naumovo - dated to ca. 2500 BC; Y-DNA: R1a1, mtDNA: H2
Sample A9 - site Serteya II - dated to ca. 2500 BC; Y-DNA: N1c, mtDNA: H2

3) Two youngest samples (800-400 BC) are Iron Age, part of the network of hillfort-building cultures of the forest zone. R1a (A4) was inside the hillfort, where warrios and craftsmen lived (Dolukhanov et al., p. 187), while N1c (A5) was in "Devichi gory" burial (long barrow/kurgan?) near the lake:

Sample A4 - Anashkino hillfort - dated to ca. 800-400 BC; Y-DNA: R1a1, mtDNA: H
Sample A5 - "Devichi gory" burial - dated to ca. 800-400 BC, Y-DNA: N1c, mtDNA: H2

There is lack of high-resolution data on subclades, but R1a1 and N1c in proportion 1:1 are also today typical haplogroups of East Balts.

Map showing these sites (I couldn't locate "Devichi gory" burial ground, but it was somewhere near the Zhizhitskoye Lake):

http://postimg.org/image/hsmtvl7xd/

http://s8.postimg.org/fbb2obo11/map_of_locations.png

I think, that R1a from Zhizhitskaya culture and Anashkino hillfort was of Satem IE origin, while N1c was from Non-Indo-European (Old European or Finnic?) population. So East Balts were a mix of R1a and N1c already when living in forests of North-West Russia, before settling at the Sea.

Was ethnogenesis of East Baslts about mixing of Satem IEs (Globular Amphora or/and Corded Ware) with people of Zhizhitskaya culture?

Zhizhitskaya culture was a Late Neolithic culture of fishermen and farmers, building pile dwellings near lakes and rivers. It was at least partially descended from earlier indigenous North-East European cultures of the Comb Ceramic horizon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit–Comb_Ware_culture

Population of Iron Age cultures of that area (like those from Anashkino hillfort and "Devichi gory") buried their dead in long barrows (long kurgans).

Here is a map showing the area occupied by Zhizhitskaya culture - area number 7 in this map:

This area (No 7) was being penetrated (areas 2 and 16) by people of the Globular Amphora culture (area 1):

http://postimg.org/image/hsmtvl7xd/

http://i59.tinypic.com/6p3vyx.png

Legend to the map:

http://i62.tinypic.com/fjooig.png

Lake Zhizhitskoye - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Zhizhitskoye

parastais
08-20-2015, 05:58 AM
I am not sure about East Balts and Zhizhitsksya. Since there were many different Baltic folks in that area including Balts that became substrate to FU. But obviously somewhere in that cocktail (map with cultures) area my ancestors built their hillforts.

Edit:
It also becomes possible that age of N1c1 is very underrated. This indeed could be Baltic N1c, but then it should be as min L550 (current age estimate 2800 years, so 800 BC). And maybe L550+ in FU populations is re-Finnified L550 :)

Volat
08-20-2015, 06:28 AM
The L550+ , L1025+ within N1c1 is specific to the Balts and nearby Slavs. If it was Uralic one would expect to find it among Uralic speakers. I also remember seeing a sample of East Pussian Germans who had N1c1 around 30%. So ethnogenesis doesn't seem to differ between east and west Balts based on N1c1 marker. Also Lithuanians have a share amount of west Baltic substrate. Some even argued that Curonians could have been western Balts originally. There were also a migration from the west into the Baltic. My guessing is west Balts in east Prussia (no longer relevant as the population is replaced), Lithuania, Latvia and the surrounding areas form a genetic continuum who have IE European and paleo-European (pre-IE) ancestry. Obviously, Latvians have some FU ancestry. But Livs could have been linguistic shifters themselves .

Shaikorth
08-20-2015, 07:54 AM
The N1c1 of Balts is quite strictly L550+, L1025+ and N-M2783+. The upstream L550 and L1025 clades appear in Finland and Scandinavia, perhaps Estonia as well, but not in Lithuania or Belarus and given the lack of diversity in the latter, probably never were Baltic.


The Baltic N1c1 cluster as well as other non-Baltic L550 clades and more Finnic CTS9976-clade have their common VL29+ ancestor dated to 3500 years ago. The location of this ancestral branch back then is unknown, but northern Russia seems most likely as Pinega is the only place where branches from between L1026 and VL29 have been found (Karmin et al. 2015).

Going by YFull's dating, the 800 BC N1c1 might be a Balt-specific ancestor clade, but the 2500 BC one is not and it's too old to be a VL29 ancestor as well - if it is ancestral to modern N1c1 it's more likely ancestral to all N1c1-L1026 clades from Khanties to Balts to Scandinavians.

http://www.yfull.com/tree/N-L1026/

parastais
08-20-2015, 09:45 AM
At some point m2783+ got injected into Balts.

If age estimates are really off, it could be Zhizhitskaya. Or before coming to Zhi. Since South - North direction makes more sense. Meaning I doubt Zhi folk was direct major ancestors of modern Latvians, even less so Lithuanians. But same N could spread to Zhi and to Let place (wherever that was).

If not, then it happened much later and Zhi folk were/became proto-Uralics.

Volat
08-20-2015, 11:15 AM
The age estimates for mutation change every 3-4 years. I doubt the accuracy of N1c1 mutation until deep clade testing is done on N1c1 to confirm it was up the tree of VL29+. By the time N1c1 folks reached eastern Baltic they absorbed much of the genes of people lived between Siberia-Ural-east Baltic.

parastais
08-20-2015, 11:49 AM
The age estimates for mutation change every 3-4 years. I doubt the accuracy of N1c1 mutation until deep clade testing is done on N1c1 to confirm it was up the tree of VL29+. By the time N1c1 folks reached eastern Baltic they absorbed much of the genes of people lived between Siberia-Ural-east Baltic.
This is interesting. If they arrived before IE, then all they could absorb would be EHG to the North and maybe so called teal to the South. Which would make them eventually... Yamna looking? :D

Gravetto-Danubian
08-20-2015, 12:40 PM
As for the original homeland of Proto-East-Balts (I will simply call them East Balts below):

According to Russian studies of linguistics, toponymy (including hydronymy) and archaeology, such as these:

- Трубачев О. Н., Топоров В. Н., Лингвистический анализ гидронимов Верхнего Поднепровья
- Седов В.В., Происхождение и ранная истрия Славян
- Седов В. В., Славяние верхнево Поднепровья и Подвинья
- Бернштейн С. Б., Очерк сравнительной граматики славянских языков
- Третьяков П. Н., Памятники зарубинецкой культуры

The Iron Age homeland of East Balts were forest cultures of North-West Russia characterised by hillforts and long barrows.

That network of hillfort-building cultures of the forest zone, included primarily the following four cultures:

- Stroked-pottery culture
- Dnieper-Dvina culture
- Yukhnov culture
- Upper Oka culture

Areas occupied by those Iron Age cultures, contained archaeological sites (both Iron Age and older) described in these papers:

Dolukhanov et al., "The East European Plain on the Eve of Agriculture":

http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~nas13/AS/2009BAR_Int_Ser1964_Dolukhanov_etal.pdf

Dolbunova et al., "Archaeology of lake settlement (North-West Russia)":

https://www.academia.edu/9452168/Archaeology_of_lake_settlement_IV-II_mill._BC_Mazurkevich_A._Polkovnikova_M._Dolbuno va_E._ed

In the latter paper we have results of aDNA research, in Table 3. on p. 294 we have 6 samples:

For these samples mtDNA and Y-DNA haplogroups were established (but only superficially, no details about subclades are given):

1) The oldest of these samples is from the turns of the 5th and 4th millennia BC (I bet that this R1a didn't belong to Indo-European branch M198/M417, but it was some more archaic subclade, similar to Karelian R1a dated 5500-5000 BC, or to modern R1a kit of Mr Szpakowski, an ethnic Pole from Belarus):

Sample A3 - site Serteya VIII - dated to ca. 4000 BC; Y-DNA: R1a1, mtDNA: H

2) Three medium-aged samples belong to Zhizhitskaya culture from the mid-3rd millennium BC. It was under strong cultural influence of Corded Ware and/or Globular Amphora cultures. According to Dolukhanov et al. (page 185), Corded or Globular population penetrated this culture, mixing with the locals:

Sample A8 - site Naumovo - dated to ca. 2500 BC; Y-DNA: R1a1, mtDNA: H2
Sample A9 - site Serteya II - dated to ca. 2500 BC; Y-DNA: N1c, mtDNA: H2

3) Two youngest samples (800-400 BC) are Iron Age, part of the network of hillfort-building cultures of the forest zone. R1a (A4) was inside the hillfort, where warrios and craftsmen lived (Dolukhanov et al., p. 187), while N1c (A5) was in "Devichi gory" burial (long barrow/kurgan?) near the lake:

Sample A4 - Anashkino hillfort - dated to ca. 800-400 BC; Y-DNA: R1a1, mtDNA: H
Sample A5 - "Devichi gory" burial - dated to ca. 800-400 BC, Y-DNA: N1c, mtDNA: H2

There is lack of high-resolution data on subclades, but R1a1 and N1c in proportion 1:1 are also today typical haplogroups of East Balts.

Map showing these sites (I couldn't locate "Devichi gory" burial ground, but it was somewhere near the Zhizhitskoye Lake):

http://postimg.org/image/hsmtvl7xd/

http://s8.postimg.org/fbb2obo11/map_of_locations.png

I think, that R1a from Zhizhitskaya culture and Anashkino hillfort was of Satem IE origin, while N1c was from Non-Indo-European (Old European or Finnic?) population. So East Balts were a mix of R1a and N1c already when living in forests of North-West Russia, before settling at the Sea.

Was ethnogenesis of East Baslts about mixing of Satem IEs (Globular Amphora or/and Corded Ware) with people of Zhizhitskaya culture?

Zhizhitskaya culture was a Late Neolithic culture of fishermen and farmers, building pile dwellings near lakes and rivers. It was at least partially descended from earlier indigenous North-East European cultures of the Comb Ceramic horizon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit–Comb_Ware_culture

Population of Iron Age cultures of that area (like those from Anashkino hillfort and "Devichi gory") buried their dead in long barrows (long kurgans).

Here is a map showing the area occupied by Zhizhitskaya culture - area number 7 in this map:

This area (No 7) was being penetrated (areas 2 and 16) by people of the Globular Amphora culture (area 1):

http://postimg.org/image/hsmtvl7xd/

http://i59.tinypic.com/6p3vyx.png

Legend to the map:

http://i62.tinypic.com/fjooig.png

Lake Zhizhitskoye - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Zhizhitskoye

The Milograd culture has the same outlook as the above mentioned. It too, according to such definition, should be considered "Baltic", or at least, proto- Balto-Slavic.

Also, Shchukin tentatively dated the arrival of Baltic language actually to this Iron Age cultures, rather than preceding Bronze Age cultures. .

parastais
08-20-2015, 01:13 PM
Btw, I cant find a good comprehensive info/ article on (proto) Baltic loanwords into Finnic or Uralic. Any suggestions?

Tomenable
08-20-2015, 02:49 PM
. I also remember seeing a sample of East Pussian Germans who had N1c1 around 30%.

East Prussia - below I list 82 samples of Y-DNA of most distant ancestors from Family Tree DNA :

R1a - 36 (ca. 44%)
N - 20 (ca. 24%)
R1b - 12 (ca. 15%)
I - 10 (ca. 12%)
J, E, G, T - 1 each

These samples are mainly from German and Polish projects (here I rather didn't miss anyone, because I checked carefully):

https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/polish/dna-results
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/germany/

And also from East Prussia, West Prussia and Pomerania projects (here I could miss someone, I didn't have so much time):

https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/ostpreussen-east-prussia/dna-results
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/posenzandz-westz-prussiaz-provincesz-germany/dna-results
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/pommern/dna-results

I included samples from original Prussia (east of Pomerelia, north of Mazovia; Kulmerland & Suwalki Governorate not included):

Haplogroup R1a - 36:

kit 145992 Martin Kiehl born 1760 Stobbendorf R-M458, R-M512
kit 165792 Johann Michael Sommerfeld b. 1750 Tujsk R-Z280, R-L365
kit N2864 Michael Flatau b. 1800 Stary Dzierzgoń (Alt Christburg) R-M417, R-M512
kit 275076 Georg Gottlieb Gutt b. 1729 Brodnica R-Z280, R-CTS3402
kit 137403 Felyx Pruhs b. 1826 Bratjan R-M198, R-M417
kit 329192 Friedrich Mattern b. Miłakowo, d. 1717 Stockholm R-Z280, R-CTS456
kit 161829 Johann Pieczkowski b. 1824 Różnowo (Rosenau) R-Z280, R-M512
kit N1840 Mikel Bujnicki, 1844-1921, Rogajny (Rogonnen), R-M458, L260
kit E9666 Jakob Pawellek b. 1853 Szczytno (Ortelsburg) R-Z280, R-L365
kit 175710 George Glass 1810-1890 Babięty R-M417, R-Z280
kit 221446 Ludwig Ermis b. 1822 Gruenwalde (near Ortelsburg) R-Z280, R-CTS456
kit 31553 Samuel Liedtke b. 1853 Kalwagi (Kaltwangen) R-M458, R-L260
kit 71994 Franz Pallaschke b. 1883 Buddern (Budry) R-Z280, R-CTS1211
kit 162556 Otto Ernst Kloth 1702-1778, Deutsch Wilten (Ermakovo) R-Z280, R-Z92
kit 153224 Leopold Lau 1867-1931 Compehnen R-Z283
kit 200664 Simon Netke b. 1686 Koenigsberg R-Z280, R-M512
kit 85285 Fred Lichtenstein b. 1870 Koenigsberg R-Z280, R-L366
kit E4464 Carl Labinsky b. 1840 Trempen (Novostroyevo) R-Z280, R-M417
kit 275090 Martin Kurschus b. Klaipeda (Memel) R1a-M512
kit E10941 Jablonski b. Koenigsberg R1a-M198
kit N46232 Christian Nikel b. Zabrowo 1780 R1a-CTS10893
kit B14462 Karl August Rosenbaum b. 1830 Mamonovo R-M512, R-L1029
kit 316853 August Czeranna b. 1864 Gross Schoendamerau R-Z283
kit 2546 Johann Piasetzki b. 1860 Sensburg (Mrągowo), R-Z280, R-CTS3402
kit E6115 Klaus b. 1935 Königsberg R-M512
kit 200664 Simon Netke 1686 -1735 Königsberg , R-Z283
kit E2656 Michael Gruenhagen, b. 1750, Bartoszyce (Bartenstein), R-M198, R-M512
kit 330940 Friedrich Malesha ca. 1800-1866, Sołdany, R-L1280, R-Z280
kit N2278 Krystyan Lamka, 1769, Łapinóż, East Prussia, R-CTS456
kit N5198 Peter Wróblewski, b. 1830, Marienwerder (Kwidzyń), R-L1029
kit N18451 Frank J. Zalewski, 1858-1941, Goczałki, R-Z283
kit 131361 Jan Jablonowski, Prioma, R-Z283
kit 157553 Tomasz Szypulski, 1738-1826, Szypułki-Zaskórki, R-M417, R-Z283
kit E4688 Stanislaw Holynski b. 1780, Kuty (Kutten), R-Z280, R-Z92
kit 145455 Scheffrahn b. Kętrzyn (Rastenburg) R-M417
kit N43077 Panemune, East Prussia (Sovetsk, Russia), R-Z280, R-Z92

Haplogroup N - 20:

kit 217892 Johann Groening b. 1800 Krzewiny (Horsterbusch) N-L731
kit E13080 Joannes Reihs b. 1800 Bisztynek (Bischofstein), N-L550, N-L1025
kit E9638 August Darge b. 1870 Bartoszyce, N-L550, L1025+, N-M231+, N-M178
kit 202401 Jan Łozowski b. 1850 Lötzen (Giżycko) N-L550, N-L551, L1025
kit 179556 Michael Bannuscher b. 1729 Schoenfeld N-L550, N-M232
kit 193848 Jons Maczullatis b. 1745 Skaisgirren (Skajzgiry), N-L550
kit N61024 Jurgis Lunczyns b. 1715 Mosteiten, K-M9, N-L550, L1025+
kit 142919 Wilhelm Edward Spangehl b. 1819 Ragnit N-L550, L1025+
kit N42695 Julius Baltrusch b. 1874 Campinschken near Tilsit N-L550, N-M178
kit E13080 Joannes Reihs b. 1800 Bisztynek (Bischofstein) N-L1025
kit 284236 Wannagat b. 1880, Jogeln/Göritten/Stallupönen, N-M178
kit 147092 Johann Bever b. 1800, Ryabinovoye, N-M178
kit 343953 Pranciškus Lukoševičius, b. Wisztyniec, N-M232
kit B42972 Johann Kuschnereit b. 1800 Eszerischken, N-L1025
kit N58382 Dargil, b. ca. 1344, Gut Dargels near Braunsberg, N-L1025
kit 183188 Andrzej Cholewa, 1815, Belczac, N-M231, N-L1025
kit N23762 Andrzej Romanski, b. 1758, Łapka in Warmia, N-M232, N-L1025
kit 173926 Baltazar Chylinski/Hilinski, 1866-1925, Rakowo (near Tiegenhof), N-L1025
kit E2482 Martin Ossowski, b. 1729, Malbork (Marienburg), N-M232, L1025
kit E8045 Dawid Barteit, Kolonie Bismarck bei Heydekrug, N-L551, L1025

Haplogroup R1b - 12:

kit 253571 Heinrich Bartel 1766-1828 Grudziądz (Graudenz) R-M269, R-U106
kit N112758 Ignatius Reis b. 1858 Wabcz R-M269
kit E15373 Johann Voelkner b. 1748 Rodnowo (Reddenau) R-M269
kit E10648 Jacob Preuschoff b. 1575 Klejnówko (Klenau) R1b-L48
kit N69965 Otto Emil Kraft, b. 1893 Tilsit R-P312
kit 81967 Johann M. Wentzel, 1845-1923, Marienburg, R-DF13
kit 59511 Johann Schwarm, b. 1814 Kwidzyń (Marienwerder), R-M269
kit 17375 Bäsner, b. 1840, Heilsberg/Braunsberg, R-S5970
kit E4574 b. 1844 in Kallinowen, Kreis Lyck, R-M269
kit N14933 Walenty Straszewski, b. 1731, Waldowo Szlacheckie, R-L23, R-Z2103
kit 266572 Karol Zalewski, b. 1812 , Rozogi, R-U106, R-Z8
kit N43078 Koenigsberg (Kaliningrad), R-23 (Z2103 or CTS7822 or CTS9219 needed)

Haplogroup I - 10:

kit E7698 Michael Rimek b. 1723 Szczytno (Ortelsburg), I-P37, M423+
kit 125721 Gustav Schedlinski b. Jeziorowskie (Seedorf) I-M253
kit E2677 Carl L. Nath b. 1820 Osterode I-M423
kit 181479 Ludwig Muller b. 1858 Mamonovo I-Z260
kit 169101 Otto Bewer b. 1899 Groß Skaisgirren I-M253
kit 330214 Heinrich Kardell, 1841-1878, Graudenz, I-M253
kit B1542 Gottfried Golembiewski, 1790-1860, Prabuty I-P37
kit N4664 Adalbert Rutkowski, b. 1730, Gruta, I-M423
kit 164185 August Napierski 1879-1962, Sensburg (Mrągowo), I-M253, I-P109
kit 64526 Jurgis Serapins, b. 1857, Piktupenai (Picktupöhnen), I-M253

Haplogroup J - 1:

kit 173911 Wolf Zimak alias Simon Freybuschewitz b. Dąbrówno (Gilgenburg) d. 1884, J-PF5456

Haplogroup E - 1:

kit E4759 Johan Krüger 1680 Wehlau, E-V13

Haplogroup G - 1:

kit 260477 Walkau, Königsberg, G-M201

Haplogroup T - 1:

kit 96408 Michael Hohenfeld b. Tolkmicko, T-M70

parastais
08-20-2015, 03:06 PM
The Milograd culture has the same outlook as the above mentioned. It too, according to such definition, should be considered "Baltic", or at least, proto- Balto-Slavic.

Also, Shchukin tentatively dated the arrival of Baltic language actually to this Iron Age cultures, rather than preceding Bronze Age cultures. .
What languages Schukin believes were spoken before Baltic in that area? Also which area exactly we are speaking about? :)

Gravetto-Danubian
08-20-2015, 03:14 PM
What languages Schukin believes were spoken before Baltic in that area? Also which area exactly we are speaking about? :)

He does not state. But he cautiously suggests that Baltic spread during Iron Age. I think it was in his book "Rome and the Barbarians in East Central Europe".. although he might have been referencing Sedov

Tomenable
08-20-2015, 03:20 PM
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5203-Chekunova-2014-N1c-and-R1a-samples-of-Proto-East-Balts-%28-%29&p=103666&viewfull=1#post103666

^ Those 82 samples of course include not just Germans, but also Poles and Lithuanians who settled in East Prussia.

In the 1800s Lithuanians & Poles, especially Protestants, were strongly influenced by German nationalism, and many became Germanized.

This is roughly how the ethno-linguistic and religious situation looked like in areas in question during the early 1800s:

Majority populations by county:

http://s29.postimg.org/ip1yx936v/Prussia_ethnic_1800_B.png

In the early 1800s Lithuanians from East Prussia constituted about 15-16% of all Lithuanians.

Polish historian & geographer Stanislav Plater, in his "Geography of the Eastern Part of Europe...", published in 1825, wrote:

1. About Roman Catholic Lithuanians in the Russian Empire:

"(...) Lithuanians are remnants of an ancient nation (...) already in times of Mindaugas and Gediminas the true Lithuania (...) attached to much larger dominions in which foreign language was spoken, was in fact a Rusyn-inhabited state. Lithuanians as we observe them today, number fewer than 1,300,000 heads; of them majority belong to the Russian Empire. (...) Lithuanians inhabit almost entire Vilno Governorate and the northern part of Grodno Governorate. In three counties of former Samogitia, that is in Raseiniai, Telsiai and Siauliai, they preserved more of their original nationality than elsewhere; it is also there where they are in the best condition, have the best houses, the best agricultural tools and property; there they enjoy the lucky ease of selling their products, in close proximity to Königsberg and Riga. The Lithuanian language, that is the Samogitian language, is not one of Slavic languages, but rather it is very similar to brotherly Livonian or Latvian (...) Only very few of Catholic Lithuanians can read, thus no other works are being published in this language apart from several prayer books printed in Vilno: Latin letters are used in these books. Lithuanians are of Roman Catholic faith since their conversion by Władysław Jogaila at the end of the 14th century. But here and there also traces of old Pagan ceremonies have remained in customs of rural people, which can be justified only by gross illiteracy, and which not so long ago have been used in favour of poetry by picturesque imagination of Adam Mickiewicz. In parishes where rural population consists of Lithuanians, gospels and sermons are being delivered either in Polish language or in Samogitian language. (...)"

2. About Protestant (Evangelical) Lithuanians in East Prussia:

"(...) Lithuanians inhabit over 1/4 of the territory of East Prussia, the eastern part of it. What distinguishes Protestant Lithuanian peasants in East Prussia from their Catholic brothers in the Russian Empire, is that they are of evangelical faith, that they are more industrious, that they have better houses and agricultural tools, and that they are more educated. (...) Nearly all of them can read: the Bible and prayer books in Lithuanian language can be found in every house: they are being printed by print shops located in Königsberg, with use of Gothic letters. (...)"

Plater in his 1825 book estimated the total number of Lithuanians as fewer than 1,300,000 - including:

1. Lithuanians in the Russian Empire:

Vilno Governorate - 780,000 Lithuanians (out of 1,200,000 inhabitants)
Grodno Governorate - 100,000 Lithuanians (out of 800,000 inhabitants)
Augustow Voivodeship - 200,000 Lithuanians (out of 450,000 inhabitants)

2. Lithuanians in the Kingdom of Prussia:

East Prussia - 200,000 Lithuanians (out of 1,080,000 inhabitants)

TOTAL - 1,280,000

parastais
08-20-2015, 04:29 PM
He does not state. But he cautiously suggests that Baltic spread during Iron Age. I think it was in his book "Rome and the Barbarians in East Central Europe".. although he might have been referencing Sedov
Google gives me no results for that book :(
Baltic could have (secondary?) spread in Iron Age. Do you remember from where to where he thought the spread was?

Volat
08-20-2015, 06:48 PM
The guys counted the frequencies from the East Prussians Germans and descendant of the Prussians (namely Prussian Yotvingians) projects : http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28371-How-Old-Prussian-were-the-East-Prussian-Germans

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/PrussianYatviagian/default.aspx?section=yresults
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Ostpreussen_East_Prussia?iframe=yresults

Volat
08-20-2015, 06:57 PM
This is interesting. If they arrived before IE, then all they could absorb would be EHG to the North and maybe so called teal to the South. Which would make them eventually... Yamna looking? :D

It was not uncommon for people to mix as they migrated from one place to another. Anthropologists described physical appearance of people of the Baltic of what we commonly describe Europid. Although some crania had mongoloid elements found in Estonia and further north-east pre-dating corded-ware expansion if I am not mistaken.

parastais
08-20-2015, 07:03 PM
It was not uncommon for people to mix as they migrated from one place to another. Anthropologists described physical appearance of people of the Baltic of what we commonly describe Europid. Although some crania had mongoloid elements found in Estonia and further north-east pre-dating corded-ware expansion if I am not mistaken.
I am not arguing the concept. I am just saying they would end up Yamna like in the end, that is if they fully replaced their genes with ones picked up on the way.

Volat
08-20-2015, 07:03 PM
Sedov wrote much on the Balts using archaeological evidence. I was left with impression he was baltifying all archaeological cultures of iron age found north-eastern Europe , because he developed a concept of Slavic original home-land in Poland which left little space for the Slavs further east in early Iron age. Even Krivichis (Pskov, Smolensk, Belarus) and Radzimiches (south-eastern Belarus) were Balto-Slavic communities according to him.

Volat
08-20-2015, 07:04 PM
I am not arguing the concept. I am just saying they would end up Yamna like in the end, that is if they fully replaced their genes with ones picked up on the way.

They would. :)

Volat
08-20-2015, 07:18 PM
Archaeologist V. Sedov stated in interview on ethnogenesis of Belarusians that on the basis of archaeological data it can be argued that the Balts settled the territories from south-eastern Baltic to upper Don river, the basin of Oka river and basin of Dniepr river (from Smolensk to Kyiv) in late bronze age and throughout Iron age http://tverzha.ru/archives/2294

- На основании археологических данных можно утверждать, что с конца бронзового и на протяжении железного века на территории от юго-восточного побережья Балтийского моря до верховьев Дона, включая весь бассейн Оки, и от Поднепровья до Киевщины жили балты.

Tomenable
08-20-2015, 07:24 PM
the guys counted the frequencies from the East Prussians Germans and descendant of the Prussians (namely Prussian Yotvingians) projects

I counted from one of these projects as well (plus four other projects). But I didn't include data from "descendants of Prussians" project.

How did they determine if someone is a "descendant of Prussians and Yotvingians" or not? What was their methodology ???

My 82 samples posted before include basically all people who were born in East Prussia before WW2 from five projects that I listed.

Gravetto-Danubian
08-20-2015, 07:32 PM
Google gives me no results for that book :(
Baltic could have (secondary?) spread in Iron Age. Do you remember from where to where he thought the spread was?

Sorry here https://www.amazon.com/ap/signin?openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.c om%2Fgp%2Faw%2Fd%2F086054690X&openid.identity=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fau th%2F2.0%2Fidentifier_select&openid.assoc_handle=usflex&openid.mode=checkid_setup&openid.claimed_id=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2F auth%2F2.0%2Fidentifier_select&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2 .0&

No he doesn't explicitly state . He talks about the role of language convergence . He was suprusingly ahead of his time

Gravetto-Danubian
08-20-2015, 07:34 PM
Sedov wrote much on the Balts using archaeological evidence. I was left with impression he was baltifying all archaeological cultures of iron age found north-eastern Europe , because he developed a concept of Slavic original home-land in Poland which left little space for the Slavs further east in early Iron age. Even Krivichis (Pskov, Smolensk, Belarus) and Radzimiches (south-eastern Belarus) were Balto-Slavic communities according to him.

Yes like all scholars in the 20th century, undercurrents always influenced interpretation.
The important things is to minimize that as much as possible these days ...

Tomenable
08-20-2015, 07:34 PM
The Milograd culture has the same outlook as the above mentioned. It too, according to such definition, should be considered "Baltic", or at least, proto- Balto-Slavic.

Milograd culture was related to those cultures, but was quite different. Milograd people were better farmers than those living north of them, And also Milograd culture was internally differentiated. Northern Milograd were building hillforts, but Southern Milograd consisted only of open settlements without fortifications. It is also considered, that the Scythians had a cultural influence on Milograd culture, at least on its southern part. In the 2nd century BC immigration from the west from area of Wejherowo-Krotoszyn culture to Milograd culture took place, as the result of which Milograd culture started to transform into Zarubintsy culture. In some places traditional Milograd coexisted with Zarubintsy until the 1st century BC.

According to Tryetyakov areas occupied by Zarubintsy culture are characterised by archaic Slavic hydronymy.

According to Toporov, Slavic language emerged in western parts of Baltic (or Proto-Balto-Slavic) territories.

parastais
08-20-2015, 07:35 PM
Archaeologist V. Sedov stated in interview on ethnogenesis of Belarusians that on the basis of archaeological data it can be argued that the Balts settled the territories from south-eastern Baltic to upper Don river, the basin of Oka river and basin of Dniepr river (from Smolensk to Kyiv) in late bronze age and throughout Iron age http://tverzha.ru/archives/2294

- На основании археологических данных можно утверждать, что с конца бронзового и на протяжении железного века на территории от юго-восточного побережья Балтийского моря до верховьев Дона, включая весь бассейн Оки, и от Поднепровья до Киевщины жили балты.
I recently realized how little I know about which ones of these actually contributed genes to modern Balts. And are the modern Balts genetically "average" of those Balts of old.

parastais
08-20-2015, 07:38 PM
Sorry here https://www.amazon.com/ap/signin?openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.c om%2Fgp%2Faw%2Fd%2F086054690X&openid.identity=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fau th%2F2.0%2Fidentifier_select&openid.assoc_handle=usflex&openid.mode=checkid_setup&openid.claimed_id=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2F auth%2F2.0%2Fidentifier_select&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2 .0&

No he doesn't explicitly state . He talks about the role of language convergence . He was suprusingly ahead of his time

Ok, 350 USD, that is a bit out of budget for me :) But thanks anyway :)

Volat
08-20-2015, 07:44 PM
Yes like all scholars in the 20th century, undercurrents always influenced interpretation.
The important things is to minimize that as much as possible these days ...

Sedov was among few renowned archaeologists that has a lot of respect in academia to this day. Only time will show if he was right about his concepts and proposals. He always maintained that his proposals are based on the current data until new findings become available. He continued publishing till early 2000s.

Gimbutas was also criticised for her Kurgan theory over the years , which is very much relevant to this day after many ancient samples were tested . Older studies does not always mean obsolete.

Tomenable
08-20-2015, 07:52 PM
Volat you didn't answer my question concerning that "descendants of Prussians and Yotvingians" project. But on last page of the link that you have posted, you can find my estimates of natural growth and immigration in East Prussia, and ethnic origins of its population:

1220 is pre-conquest population, and I assumed that it was 100% of ethnic Prussian origin (in reality probably +/- 95%):

http://s17.postimg.org/5z2blsm33/East_Prussians_B.png

Note that this estimate is actually optimistic when it comes to the share of aboriginal Prussians, as I was choosing figures most favourable for them. In reality the percent of Old Prussian ancestry among the population of East Prussia as of 1816 could be lower than this.

Devastating for aboriginal Prussians was not just initial conquest, but also all those wars and epidemics which took place later.

Each demographic decline after a war or an epidemic, was followed by immigration to East Prussia from outside.

One of my optimistic pro-Prussian assumptions, was that they had the same natural growth rate as people of immigrant origin.

Volat
08-20-2015, 08:04 PM
How did they determine if someone is a "descendant of Prussians and Yotvingians" or not? What was their methodology ???
Volat you didn't answer my question concerning that "descendants of Prussians and Yotvingians" project.


I don't know how the folks determined if someone is a descendant of Prussians and Yotvingians. The question has to be addressed to the administrator of the group "Prussians and Yotvingians" on FTDNA.

parastais
08-20-2015, 08:16 PM
I think we can settle the Prussian question once we have Prussian ancient DNA. Until then it is all speculation anyway.

This is interesting. There is a specific subclade in Baltic clades that is assigned to West Balts by molgen:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/geodun/YDNA/SNP-N-TREE-FIN.jpg

Shaikorth
08-20-2015, 08:35 PM
It's named that because some people belonging to it do trace their paternal line to Prussian region. But some of the other clade names can be misleading, the "North Balts" (Y4706) clade for example doesn't actually have any Balts or even Estonians to my knowledge but only Swedes and Finns .

Tomenable
08-20-2015, 09:23 PM
I think we can settle the Prussian question once we have Prussian ancient DNA. Until then it is all speculation anyway.

It's not a speculation to say, that Old Prussians were not entirely exterminated by Teutonic Knights, but largely survived the crusade.

After all, we even have written texts in Baltic Prussian language, most of them from the 16th and the 17th centuries.

Prussian language survived until the early 1700s, for the longest time in Sambia (see: Gerullis G., Zur Beurteilung des altpreussischen Enchiridions. Streitberg Festgabe. Leipzig 1924, p. 100 and Trautmann R., Die altpreussischen Sprachdenkmäler. Göttingen 1910, p. VIII).

Sambia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sambia_Peninsula

In 1404 there took place a census of Prussian farmsteads in lands of the Order (but apart from lands of the Order there were also lands owned by bishops and lands owned by private owners in the Teutonic Order's Realm - so the census was not complete).

Based on that census ethnic Prussians can be estimated as ca. 55-60% of the population of original Prussia in 1404. The rest were mostly Germans plus some Poles and others. Of course the Teutonic Order's Realm was already larger than ethnic Prussia at that time - since 1308-1309 it included Pomerelia (which was later labelled West Prussia, but that was ethnically Slavic land - Balts didn't live there).

Pomerelia was conquered from Poland by the Teutonic Order in years 1308-1309. Teutonic Knights commited atrocities during that conquest, for example they massacred the population of the Polish town of Gdansk (which later became known as Danzig).

Pope Clement V wrote about that in 1310-1317, condemning Teutonic Order's atrocities against - Christian, after all - Poland:

Latin original: "Novissime vero ad nostrum pervenit auditum, quod dicti praeceptores et fratres hospitalis eiusdem dilecti filii nobilis viri Wladislai Cracovie et Sandomirie ducis terram hostiliter subintrantes in civitate Gdansco ultra decem milia hominum gladio peremerunt infantibus vagientibus in cunis mortis exitum inferentes, quibus etiam hostis fidei pepercisset."

(in English: "It has recently come to our attention that the said preceptors and brothers of the same hospital [Order], stealing into the land of our dear son, the nobleman Duke Vladislav of Cracow and Sandomir, in a hostile manner, killed more than 10,000 people in the town of Gdansk by the sword, inflicting death upon infants crying in their cradles, whom even the enemies of the faith would have spared.")

And the second excerpt by Pope Clement V is from Lites I (3), 69 (Papal bull):

Latin original: "Gravem dilecti nobilis viri Wladislai ducis Polonie querelam accepimus, continentem, quod magister et fratres domus s. Marie Theutonicorum non attendentes, quod quondam Conradus dux Polonie avus eiusdem ducis eosdem magistrum et fratres, quos veros credebat katholice fidei defensores, ad partes illas pro defensione ipsius fidei primitus advocavit et nonnula inmobilia et mobilia bona liberaliter concessit eisdem, alias eos dictus Conradus et successors sui benigne ac favorabiliter prosequendo; sed ipsi dicto duci se reddentes ingratos et ad bona ipsius rapacitatis manus extendentes, illicite ducem ipsum terra sua Pomoranie Wladislauiensis dyocesis, que de regno Polonie fore dinoscitur temeritate propria spoliantes, illam cum hominibus, vasallis, castris, villis, possessionibus et bonis existentibus in eadem contra iusticiam occuparunt et detinuerunt iam per octo annos et amplius sicut adhuc detinent violenter, fructus ac redditus et proventus provenientes ex illa percipientes indebite et iniuste, illam sibi reddere contradicunt in ipsius ducis grave dispendium et regni predicti diminucionem enormem et scandalum manifestum."

(in English: "We accepted the serious complaint of our dear son, the nobleman Duke Vladislav of Poland, the master and brothers of the Teutonic Order not being present, maintaining that the late Duke Conrad of Poland, grandfather of the same duke, first called the master and brothers, whom he believed true defenders of the Catholic faith, and he freely conceded to them some movable and immovable goods, and the said Conrad and his successors with benign favour followed these up with others. But, showing no gratitude to the said duke and extending the hands of rapacity towards his goods, they [the Teutonic Knights] boldly and illicitily robbed that duke of his own land of Pomerania, of the diocese of Włocławek, which it is known should belong to the kingdom of Poland, along with the men, vassals, castles, villages, possessions, and goods in it, now occupying and detaining it against justice for eight years and more still violently detaining its fruits and revenues and produce wtihout right and unjustly, they refuse to return it to him at great cost to the duke himself and immense damage to the aforesaid kingdom and in manifest scandal.")

Coming back to Teutonic Order's figures on Prussian population in year 1404 (which served as a basis for my estimates from previous post):

In 1404 ethnic structure of Prussia (original one - so areas which were later known as East Prussia) was such, that cities were mostly German-inhabited, while the countryside was mostly Prussian - but in westernmost parts of the country (just to the east of the Vistula River) ratio of Prussians to Germans in villages was like 3 to 5, in northern part of Ermland bishopric Prussians were roughly 50% of villagers, in southern part of Ermland bishopric (the area which was later Polonized) they were 75%, in Natangia 90% and in Sambia 100%.

So the % of Prussians in the countryside was a west-east continuum - from some 35-40% in western regions, to 100% in Sambia.

Unsurprisingly, Sambia was the area where Prussian language survived for the longest time (until early 1700s).

All in all, if we also add Prussians living in towns and cities, they were some 50%-60% of the population of [East] Prussia in 1404.

And that was mostly the result of losses during the 1200s and high immigration of foreigners, rather than the Black Death.

Prussians also had the lowest status of all ethnic groups in Prussia - lower than German and Polish settlers. About 2/3 of Prussians were unfree serfs, the remaining half were mostly peasants - there existed also quite numerous Prussian nobility (even though Prussian nobles suffered especially high losses during the crusade of the 1200s), but they were the ones most likely to adopt German culture and identity, so that Prussian masses were deprived of native high culture and reduced to living under German domination.

All Prussian clans who broke the Treaty of Sirgune of 1249, were reduced to serfdom after the conquest (1283). That applied also to nobles, punished for opposing the Knights. While traitors who collaborated with the Order against other Prussians, were rewarded.

The assimilation of the lowest social stratum of Old Prussians into foreign cultures took place only after the Teutonic Order collapsed, and the Lutheran Duchy of Prussia (ruled by Hohenzollern dukes as vassals of Polish kings) emerged in its place. The Teutonic Knights even had such a saying: "Let the Prussians remain Prussians" ("Lasset Preussen Preussen bleyben", a statement from the Synod at Elbing in 1427), but don't get deluded, the Knights weren't into multi-culti - that saying was about preserving their low legal and social status, not culture or language.

Systematic discrimination of Prussians and "Prusianness" by the Knights led to assimilation of the higher strata of the Prussian society. Prussian language became gradually limited just to serfs (2/3 of all Prussians). Ironically - the end of that discrimination (which took place after Prussia transformed into a secular Lutheran Duchy) - led to assimilation of those serfs as well. Immigration of at first Germans (13th - 14th c.) and then Poles and Lithuanians (15th - 16th c.) also contributed to the melting of Prussians into other ethnicities.

For example Prussians living in southern half of the region of Warmia (Ermland) adopted mostly Polish ethnicity (language and culture), rather than German. They also remained Catholic after the Reformation, because Warmia was incorporated to Poland in 1466 and was also administered by bishops. By contrast Ducal Prussia became a secular and Lutheran country, where all subjects were compelled to convert to the Augsburg Confession between 25.08.1530 and the end of the 16th century (in the 1560s or the 1570s, IIRC).

The sharp division between Catholic Warmia and Protestant Masuria was due to fact, that Warmia was ruled by Catholic bishops and became incorporated directly to Poland following Polish-Lithuanian victories over Teutonic Order, while Masuria remained part of Ducal Prussia, where conversions to state religion (which was the Augsburg Confession since 25.08.1530) later became compulsory.

Another factor which contributed to assimilation of Prussians was migration of peasants from villages to towns. Towns in East Prussia were established by the Teutonic Order and were initially mostly inhabited by Germans. But over time (after year 1400) the influx of German settlers became small, while more of Prussians and other ethnic groups began to migrate to towns in East Prussia. That was not a sudden occurence but a gradual process, so Prussians who came to towns were adopting German language rather than imposing their Baltic language on the locals.

==============================

Ethnic Prussians were up to 60% in Prussia in 1404, which is not bad, considering that they had been conquered and colonized. Today Swedes with pre-1950 roots are 75% of the population in Sweden (25% are immigrants and their descendants who have come since year 1950) even though nobody has conquered and colonized them - except for their own immigration-crazy government... :)

parastais
08-20-2015, 09:44 PM
It's not a speculation to say, that Old Prussians were not entirely exterminated by Teutonic Knights, but largely survived the crusade.

Speculation is to tell that Old Prussians were x% R1a, y% N1c and z% R1b without having ancient data. They probably did survive the crusade, but who knows what were their genes and how much of those survived till those people who tested in relevant dna projects stating their ancestors from East Prussia.

Tomenable
08-20-2015, 10:20 PM
Speculation is to tell that Old Prussians were x% R1a, y% N1c and z% R1b without having ancient data.

I fully agree! So we need to wait for ancient DNA. BTW - also I1 and I2 could be there in some % of ethnic Prussians.


They probably did survive the crusade, but who knows what were their genes and how much of those survived till those people who tested in relevant dna projects stating their ancestors from East Prussia.

We have a lot of evidence of Prussian language being used long after the conquest, including texts in Prussian.

The language got finally extinct at the beginning of the 1700s, its last speakers probably died in Sambia Peninsula.

And here is the count of Prussian farmsteads (families) in lands administered directly by the Teutonic Order in year 1404:

Komturei - number of Prussian serf families / number of Prussian free families:

Marienburg - 444 / 57
Christburg - 1336 / 290
Elbing - 706 / 200
Balgen - 1935 / 908
Brandenburg (Pokarben) - 1148 / 450
Osterode - 97 / 9
Koenigsberg - 1610 / 1661
Ragnit - 108 / 121

In total - 7384 (serf) / 3696 (free) = ca. 11,100

But this doesn't include Prussian families in lands owned by bishops and in private estates, these are estimated as:

In areas administered by bishops estimated ca. 5,500 Prussian farmsteads
In areas owned by private owners estimated ca. 5,500 Prussian farmsteads

So another 11,000. In total over 22,000 farmsteads inhabited by Old Prussian rural population.

Prussians of Sambia Peninsula numbered ca. 4,400 families in 1404 (they are already included in those 22,000 above, AFAIK).

In Kulmer Recht villages (they were established primarily for immigrants) there were ca. 20,000 families (ca. 1000 villages x 20). It is said that in these villages the majority were immigrants (largely Germans) and Prussians were only up to 25%, which is ca. 5,000 families.

Average size of a farmstead / familiy is estimated to be 5 people.

Those estimates above refer only to rural populations, to settled peasants & petty nobles with their own farmsteads.

It is estimated that there were also ca. 10,000 Prussian so-called "loose people" (advenae), hirelings (hired laborers) & social margins.

Moreover in 56 towns and cities existing in Prussia as of 1404 as well as in their suburbs, there lived ca. 50,000 people (including 9,000 in Koenigsberg and 9,000 in Elbing). It is estimated that Prussians were at least 10% of this urban & sub-urban population, so at least 5,000. But in reality that was rather closer to 6,500. It seems for example, that in Koenigsberg Prussians were 28% of the population (high % in the suburbs, low % in the Old Town) and in Elbing - around 6%. So in Koenigsberg and Elbing combined, Prussians were 17% - or 3,000 out of 18,000.

The remaining ca. 50 towns had 32,000 people, including at least 10% Prussians. I assumed 3,500 Prussians.

All in all, in 1404 Prussians were probably 50% up to 60% (average 55%), of population of their original territory as of 1220.

But later their proportion declined after each subsequent war / epidemic, followed by new immigration waves.

So my estimate is that by year 1816 no more than 1/3 of ancestry of population of East Prussia was Old Prussian.

I chose 1816 because that's approximately when population of the "original Prussia" hit one million people.

George
08-21-2015, 01:39 AM
What is the source of the very interesting map [Fig.27] in the thread starter?

Gravetto-Danubian
08-21-2015, 12:41 PM
Ok, 350 USD, that is a bit out of budget for me :) But thanks anyway :)

wow that's ridiculously overpriced. Check a library , and even if they don't have it they can do inter-library loans. Definitely worth a read