Page 71 of 75 FirstFirst ... 21616970717273 ... LastLast
Results 701 to 710 of 749

Thread: N1c in the Balts

  1. #701
    Agriculture gives advantage in population size. Therefore inland L1022 would largely replace L550 in Estonia. However L1025 got assimilated into Balts and what is strange - got into working previously unused land (fertile but unworkable without proper iron tools in say Zemgale). Which let them spread.
    This is very discutable statement, when it comes to island nations, that are generating more population migration waves than inlanders(Goths originated on islands, even modern nations that are located on islands are most densely populated). Agriculture has always required very hard work and most of all - it binds inhabitants to one place. Sea dwellers on other side did not only fishing(and some limited farming), but also trading(and sea pirating) which made them more choices what to do. Any big water in the past was motorway, compared to bumpy land roads.

    As for Zemgale - it would be great if there was research done in regards to Kreewings(Latvian Votes), that were settled in empty lands of Zemgale and who also spread in sparsely populated(because of forests) regions of Selonia. Somehow I have a feeling that they were not L1025 or even L550. Anyway, I would discard any relations of L1025 to Liivi, as it is hard to link them to Lithuanians and source of L1025 comes from the east - and even today N share in Latvian y-dna reaches higher numbers in east(where Liivi were not observed) and it contradicted belief that Liivi might have been major contributors of L1025 to Latvians(and if that was so, then also Lithuanians?).

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to arpatir For This Useful Post:

     parastais (07-21-2021)

  3. #702
    Registered Users
    Posts
    260
    Sex
    Omitted
    Ethnicity
    1/2 Swedish 1/2 German
    Y-DNA (P)
    N1c
    mtDNA (M)
    U2

    Quote Originally Posted by arpatir View Post

    Most populous and earliest branch of L550 is L1025. There are roughly 5 million people of L1025 people - most of them(by numbers - not by share) are living in Lithuania, followed by... Ukraine, Poland, Belarussia and Russia, Latvia and then Estonia and Scandinavia. Roughly 50% of L1025 nowadays are speaking Slavic language.
    There are even more L1025 living in US than in Estonia, so to make it even clearer - Estonia is more like a fringe territory to both L1025 and other branches of L550. And that rules out completely any relation to Tarand graves to L550, which IMO are local phenomenon - most probably it has something to do with final remnants of Kunda culture, than to Uralic people whatsoever, because none of that is relatable to other Finnic people - and certainly not to Latvians or Lithuanians as major carriers of L1025.


    Y-dna N share of L1025 in Estonians is ~ 25%, in Latvians it is 70%, and in Lithuanians it reaches highest numbers of all people - more than 90% of y-dna N(only Ukrainian, Polish and Belarussian y-dna N has similarly high shares of L1025 in regards to other N-ydna). With almost 99% certainity Estonian L1025 source is from Latvians.

    Other clades of L550 are insignificantly less numerous than L1025 - most of them are speaking Swedish(and not Finnish) and their ancestors were vikings - also not related to Finnic people at all.



    So, looking on clades, VL29(N1a1a1a1a1a) seems to stand out as Uralics, that branched off earlier from other Uralic clades by mingling with Baltic speakers and assimilating into them by accepting their farming techniques. It has been very very very long time ago and they have been lost to rest of Uralic speaking people until modern genetics came along and gave this shocking realization, that some of non Uralic speakers have Uralic ancestry from paternal side.

    Even if VL29 is present among Finnish, it is sister clade Z1936(N1a1a1a1a2) that is main clade that is present in Finnish and Karelian y-dna N and that is responsible for spreading Finnic languages(also Estonian). So, we are looking at different branches of N-tat migrations and at least one of them was spreading without Uralic identity, that for some reason is so important to some modern people...


    Origins of L1025/L550
    There is relation of Latvians and Lithuanians through L1025. Both of them arrived from east - first known state with name Lithuania was established in Naugardukas(Navahrudok, Belarus) in Jatwingian(!) lands. So, the earliest records of Lithuanians are about them occupying lands of other Baltic tribes. Latgalian lands at the same time period was spreading east of modern Latvia up the river of Daugava. It might be possible that L1025 origins was on the upper Daugava river around Polatsk in Belarus. And my speculation is that L550 origins might have been in Smolensk area, where y-dna N was present at least 4000 or more years and where during various historical periods that area was populated by Baltic cultures, that originated from Dnieper river basin and the ones that spread to west did not had y-dna N. It appears among other Balts only with arrival of Latvian-Lithuanian tribes.
    Most of what I said was not speculation. The regulars of this thread are very knowledgeable and already know the aDNA/archeological research I was basing my conclusions on. In your case, a good starting place might be the previous 70 pages of this thread, you can then see how our understanding of N1c in the Baltic has evolved.

    For example, N-L550 was indeed found in early-Tarand graves. I can assure you these Iron Age Tarands have nothing to do with the Mesolithic Kunda culture.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.04.026

    Two more things:

    1) The frequency of subclades in modern populations, mean next to nothing for ancient groups. Even in the same geographic area. ~2500ybp Estonia was indisputably home to a large portion of N-L550 males. On the other hand, Iron Age Kivutkalns samples (Latvia) yielded no N-L550 or N-L1025.

    2) DNA extraction has come a long way in a few short years. Many of the earliest aDNA results are dubious due to the possibility of contamination. You don't have to take my word for it, but the current consensus is that the N1c from Smolensk was contaminated (not actually N1c).
    Last edited by Coldmountains; 07-22-2021 at 09:44 PM. Reason: Editing out rude phrase in quote

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Zelto For This Useful Post:

     Huck Finn (07-21-2021),  Michał (07-21-2021),  parastais (07-21-2021),  Ryukendo (07-22-2021)

  5. #703
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,176
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    Quote Originally Posted by arpatir View Post
    This is very discutable statement, when it comes to island nations, that are generating more population migration waves than inlanders(Goths originated on islands, even modern nations that are located on islands are most densely populated). Agriculture has always required very hard work and most of all - it binds inhabitants to one place. Sea dwellers on other side did not only fishing(and some limited farming), but also trading(and sea pirating) which made them more choices what to do. Any big water in the past was motorway, compared to bumpy land roads.

    As for Zemgale - it would be great if there was research done in regards to Kreewings(Latvian Votes), that were settled in empty lands of Zemgale and who also spread in sparsely populated(because of forests) regions of Selonia. Somehow I have a feeling that they were not L1025 or even L550. Anyway, I would discard any relations of L1025 to Liivi, as it is hard to link them to Lithuanians and source of L1025 comes from the east - and even today N share in Latvian y-dna reaches higher numbers in east(where Liivi were not observed) and it contradicted belief that Liivi might have been major contributors of L1025 to Latvians(and if that was so, then also Lithuanians?).
    I am with you on Liivi as not the source of L1025. You are absolutely right, Liivi haplos were likely pretty much Estonian like.
    Krieviņi are also not source of L1025. Of course.
    ***
    Lithuania has indeed both the highest share of L1025, as well as most diversity of branches under L1025. Whilst Latvians seem largely under my clade N - Z16980 (also it seems Estonian L1025 is mostly under "Latvian" Z16980, and there is a distinct West Slavic cluster under it, with early AD MRCA). Lithuanians have diverse clades. So, (secondary?) expansion could have happened in Lithuania.
    ***
    On other hand Lithuanians have virtually none L550+ L1025-, definately not basal clades. Which points that L550 (not to mention its father VL29) was not born in Baltic speaking population. And having L550 largely present in Tarands agrees with this, it was found in Estonian tarands before L1025 TMRCA. It was spread by Baltic Finns (or some other Para-Finnic group) initially. Even L1025 itself got basal lines that are neither Baltic nor Slavic, but only Fenno-Scandian. Which kinda tells that also first L1025 is unlikely to be born in Baltic population, rather a Fenno-Scandian one.
    ***
    After that you got the point re islands, because I believe L1025 in Balts arrived from Baltic islands, perhaps Saaremaa, and I relate this event to early Barrows with Stone Rings (uzkalniņi ar akmens riņķiem) burials, that spread from West Lithuania accross modern Latvia and Lithuania early centuries AD (related to expansion of L1025 lines at around same time). L1025 was found in subvariant of that culture in Lithuania (North Lithuanian Barrows Culture - the presumed ancestors of Selonians, perhaps also Semigalians and Zhemaitians).

    ***
    Perhaps L1025 spread further East as producers or traders of East Euro barbarian enemals, already with (West) Balts. Early centuries AD, it shows frequency of those finds:
    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/andv...301283_800.jpg

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to parastais For This Useful Post:

     Ryukendo (07-22-2021),  Zelto (07-22-2021)

  7. #704
    Registered Users
    Posts
    526
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    N-Z1936-CTS12908
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Finland
    Quote Originally Posted by parastais View Post
    It was spread by Baltic Finns (or some other Para-Finnic group) initially.
    It seems to me that at least also Meryanic speakers, if not also speakers of some Mordvinic looking language, were present in the areas next to the Baltic speaking groups. In other words, many groups descending from the founding West Uralic population. Basically any of these, including of course Baltic Finns, should work as the N-connection. Also, we may still be dealing with a sampling bias, emphasizing the northern Baltic area in terms of upstream mutation levels. More results from Pskov Oblast, both ancient and modern, would and should be most beneficent.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Huck Finn For This Useful Post:

     parastais (07-22-2021)

  9. #705
    Quote Originally Posted by parastais View Post
    I am with you on Liivi as not the source of L1025. You are absolutely right, Liivi haplos were likely pretty much Estonian like.
    Krieviņi are also not source of L1025. Of course.
    ***
    Lithuania has indeed both the highest share of L1025, as well as most diversity of branches under L1025. Whilst Latvians seem largely under my clade N - Z16980 (also it seems Estonian L1025 is mostly under "Latvian" Z16980, and there is a distinct West Slavic cluster under it, with early AD MRCA). Lithuanians have diverse clades. So, (secondary?) expansion could have happened in Lithuania.
    ***
    On other hand Lithuanians have virtually none L550+ L1025-, definately not basal clades. Which points that L550 (not to mention its father VL29) was not born in Baltic speaking population. And having L550 largely present in Tarands agrees with this, it was found in Estonian tarands before L1025 TMRCA. It was spread by Baltic Finns (or some other Para-Finnic group) initially. Even L1025 itself got basal lines that are neither Baltic nor Slavic, but only Fenno-Scandian. Which kinda tells that also first L1025 is unlikely to be born in Baltic population, rather a Fenno-Scandian one.
    ***
    After that you got the point re islands, because I believe L1025 in Balts arrived from Baltic islands, perhaps Saaremaa, and I relate this event to early Barrows with Stone Rings (uzkalniņi ar akmens riņķiem) burials, that spread from West Lithuania accross modern Latvia and Lithuania early centuries AD (related to expansion of L1025 lines at around same time). L1025 was found in subvariant of that culture in Lithuania (North Lithuanian Barrows Culture - the presumed ancestors of Selonians, perhaps also Semigalians and Zhemaitians).

    ***
    Perhaps L1025 spread further East as producers or traders of East Euro barbarian enemals, already with (West) Balts. Early centuries AD, it shows frequency of those finds:
    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/andv...301283_800.jpg
    >>>Whilst Latvians seem largely under my clade N - Z16980

    Well, I am in the process of finding my own clade, which I suspect will be different than that what majority of Latvians has, and if you can point to any sources, that are supporting this claim... I would be happy to change my views on this, but so far I have read that Latvian y-dna N is 60% of that what Lithuanian y-dna N is composed of, and almost all of the rest is similar to Estonians, which is not surprising because of known history.



    I have heard about this idea, that L550 originated in Scandinavia and then spread to Baltic people. That, however, is only one version, that leaves out many other issues:

    1. It does not explain current spread of L1025. It does not explain why L1025 % share in population of (modern)Baltic people is decreasing to the west - it should be otherwise if L1025 arrived from west, because "purposely" decrease of L1025 and simultaneous increase of more ancient R1a-M558 does not explain timing - unless serious people believe in time travel. I do not believe that time travel is possible but I have found some aspects of it entertaining, but not serious.
    2. It does not explain how L550 and L1025 appeared in west in relation to VL29. It does not explain why VL29 is so different from other clades.
    3. It does not explain how other clades of N1a appeared where they are now. It does not explain why other clades were not mingling with VL29.

    I could go on and on. Most of variations of OTHER L550 branches appeared in Sweden - majority if not almost all of these modern people that are carriers of L550 are speaking Swedish and because their history is linked with history of vikings, for the most of their history they were NOT Uralic speaking people and if any of them are speaking Finnic languages now, then that is secondary side effect of those viking settling among Uralic people and assimilating into them.

    So at this point we have L550, that is not Uralic and majority of them - L1025 is associated of Latvians and Lithuanians.

  10. #706
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,176
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    @arpatir, how do you explain presence of L550 in Tarand graves (deep first millennium BCE) and simultaneous lack of L550 in Brushed Pottery site in Kivutalns (during whole first millennium BCE up to early centuries BCE only R1a there)?

    Do you think L550 in Tarand burials were:
    a) Norse speakers
    b) Baltic speakers
    c) West Uralic (group including Finnic, Meryanic, Mordvin) speakers
    ?

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to parastais For This Useful Post:

     Ryukendo (07-22-2021)

  12. #707
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,176
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    Quote Originally Posted by arpatir View Post
    >>>Whilst Latvians seem largely under my clade N - Z16980

    Well, I am in the process of finding my own clade, which I suspect will be different than that what majority of Latvians has, and if you can point to any sources, that are supporting this claim... I would be happy to change my views on this, but so far I have read that Latvian y-dna N is 60% of that what Lithuanian y-dna N is composed of, and almost all of the rest is similar to Estonians, which is not surprising because of known history.



    I have heard about this idea, that L550 originated in Scandinavia and then spread to Baltic people. That, however, is only one version, that leaves out many other issues:

    1. It does not explain current spread of L1025. It does not explain why L1025 % share in population of (modern)Baltic people is decreasing to the west - it should be otherwise if L1025 arrived from west, because "purposely" decrease of L1025 and simultaneous increase of more ancient R1a-M558 does not explain timing - unless serious people believe in time travel. I do not believe that time travel is possible but I have found some aspects of it entertaining, but not serious.
    2. It does not explain how L550 and L1025 appeared in west in relation to VL29. It does not explain why VL29 is so different from other clades.
    3. It does not explain how other clades of N1a appeared where they are now. It does not explain why other clades were not mingling with VL29.

    I could go on and on. Most of variations of OTHER L550 branches appeared in Sweden - majority if not almost all of these modern people that are carriers of L550 are speaking Swedish and because their history is linked with history of vikings, for the most of their history they were NOT Uralic speaking people and if any of them are speaking Finnic languages now, then that is secondary side effect of those viking settling among Uralic people and assimilating into them.

    So at this point we have L550, that is not Uralic and majority of them - L1025 is associated of Latvians and Lithuanians.
    1. Good point. One argument comes from anthropology. Current highest rates of L1025 is in NE Lithuania (former Selonians), guys whom anthropologist Raisa Denisova said were East Baltic tribe that kept Burials with Stone Rings phenotype best. Rest were replaced with later Flat Graves classic EB type. Including in South Curonia.
    2. Why? L550 migration with Tarand Graves explains why L550 and its son clade L1025 is more spread West than VL29, apparently other VL29 stayed behind
    3. Different clans migrating with different patterns or times. It is normal.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to parastais For This Useful Post:

     Ryukendo (07-22-2021)

  14. #708
    Registered Users
    Posts
    526
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    N-Z1936-CTS12908
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Finland
    I think it is BTW interesting that we have in YFull on Pre N-L550 level three N-VL29 > N-Y56680 (TMRCA 2900 years) samples: one from Turkey, one from Moskovskaya Oblast and one from Samaraskaya Oblast. Especially the one from Turkey is intriguing and could fex point to some Uralic - Oghur Turkic interaction. Even if there are just two samples based in Russia, gravitation point between Moscow and Samara could point to the Mordvinic speaking area. If I recall it right, some forum members even connected the Turkic looking genetic features of both Erzyans and Mokshans to their ancient, Hunnic looking horse harnesses.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Huck Finn For This Useful Post:

     parastais (07-22-2021),  Ryukendo (07-22-2021)

  16. #709
    Quote Originally Posted by parastais View Post
    @arpatir, how do you explain presence of L550 in Tarand graves (deep first millennium BCE) and simultaneous lack of L550 in Brushed Pottery site in Kivutalns (during whole first millennium BCE up to early centuries BCE only R1a there)?

    Do you think L550 in Tarand burials were:
    a) Norse speakers
    b) Baltic speakers
    c) West Uralic (group including Finnic, Meryanic, Mordvin) speakers
    ?

    a) certainly not -they became Norse speakers when they settled in Sweden from where other L550 clades spread
    b) probably yes - that would also explain barrow mound burials in Lithuania
    Other clades of L550 are not really numerous - this can be explained that their ancestors wandered a lot among other people, before finding place where to multiply
    c) there is not much ground to claim that
    Besides, Finnic and VL29 represent sister clades, while Komi centric and other related Uralic speakers(Mari, Merya, Moksha, Erzya, Udmurts etc) are from completely different branch. Yes, VL29 can be found as far as Mari people, but VL29 spread at the same time perfectly overlaps IE speaking cultures, that were present in regions that are now associated with Uralic speakers. Fatyanovo-Balanovo culture, from which South Asian IE originated existed at the same spot(where there were no y-dna N found), where now are found Uralic people - probably arriving later and replacing IE speaking cultures - also reassimilating some IE speaking Uralic people, that got there 1000 years before Meryan people got there. That is a huge time span - thousands and thousands of years and plenty of things could have happened over that time span.



    I think, we should distinguish migration of L550 and migration of Z1936(that ocured later and brought Uralic languages).

    Modern Estonians are not in majority L550. L550 were probably not populous when they arrived in Finnish gulf. Quite possible, that L550 initially arrived mixed and together with some groups of R1a. I can't even understand why this is not seen as possibility. For some reason only very few(possibly family sized group of relatives) of them continued further and arrived in Sweden, where L550 experienced branching and spread in large numbers among Swedish speaking people and then those new clades started to spread with vikings back to the east now in Finnic speaking populated areas.

    For the reasons why Estonians are speaking language that is even more similar to Finnish, than Latvian language is to Lithuanian, it could be explained by arrival of clades that quite simply were not L550.

    Tarand graves might have been something, that was initiated by L550, but quite frankly I do not see how they differ from rest of the Baltic region burial customs. They contain remains of cremated people(Baltic and IE custom in this region) and some that were not cremated. I have read that they possibly(my memory is not reliable on this) also had urns, that contained cremated remains - just like Prussians. If Estonia(well, to be frank, Tarand graves are also found in Russia, Finland and Sweden and Latvia) was Baltic speaking country, Tarand graves might have been nothing out of ordinary compared to other Baltic burial customs.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to arpatir For This Useful Post:

     parastais (07-22-2021)

  18. #710
    Quote Originally Posted by Huck Finn View Post
    I think it is BTW interesting that we have in YFull on Pre N-L550 level three N-VL29 > N-Y56680 (TMRCA 2900 years) samples: one from Turkey, one from Moskovskaya Oblast and one from Samaraskaya Oblast. Especially the one from Turkey is intriguing and could fex point to some Uralic - Oghur Turkic interaction. Even if there are just two samples based in Russia, gravitation point between Moscow and Samara could point to the Mordvinic speaking area. If I recall it right, some forum members even connected the Turkic looking genetic features of both Erzyans and Mokshans to their ancient, Hunnic looking horse harnesses.
    Or it could be explained by raids of Turkic speaking people on Southern Russian borders that they did for centuries and they took into slavery at least a million people there and selling those inhabitants of Southern Russia in Turkish market as slaves. There is some modern perception, that slavery ends procreation of males, but even in modern days where slavery (unofficially) exists in Muslim world, their masters were arranging wives for their slaves and also lets not forget that slaves in Muslim world could become proper members of Muslim society by simply accepting Islam and some of the status in Islamic society is depending on marriage ties, that is more important than we can think of.

    Turkic people are riddled with myths more than Uralic or Slavic people are. They are very heavily mixed people of different origins and the only thing that unites them is language. The only truly Turkic people are Kazakh people - not to mention, that according to Mongols Turks were considered as their tribe and Turkic indeed is linguistically closer to Mongolic languages.

    Most of the Turks in modern Turkey have ancestors that either were speaking Greek, Armenian, Kartveli or Aramaic. Same thing that happened with Slavic population in Hungary. Nothing much to see there.
    Same thing happened to Chuvash people, who were speaking Uralic language similar to Mari and this is more similar to previous name of Mari, where they for most part of their existence they were known to others under different name than today - Cheremis(or Çirmeş in Tatar).

    Even more presence of VL29 in modern Turkey could also be because of Variangian guards in Imperium Romanum(or as we are calling them wrongly today - Byzantine Empire) - they had Variangians, Rus(Scandinavian vikings) and Koulpingoi(Finnic speakers), who also were used as mercenaries elsewhere - probably by Hungarians and also Arabs, because they were also known to Arabs as al-Kilabiyya. Despite what CK2 as game has painted image of army building, that applies only to age of nations, while in ancient times armies of most rulers were made by mercenaries, because proper army generals will always seek a way to depose ruler and take his place. Many of those mercenaries settled eventually in other lands - in some military role. Nothing is more permanent than things that are thought to be done only temporarily...
    Last edited by arpatir; 07-22-2021 at 08:44 AM. Reason: Cheremis

Page 71 of 75 FirstFirst ... 21616970717273 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. N1c in Balts came with Finnic admixture?
    By Tomenable in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 01-17-2019, 02:34 PM
  2. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 08-21-2015, 12:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •