Page 274 of 307 FirstFirst ... 174224264272273274275276284 ... LastLast
Results 2,731 to 2,740 of 3063

Thread: A theory about the origin of E-V13

  1. #2731
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,494
    Sex

    To give a perspective: It will be just very relevant when and with which cultural formations both J-L283 and E-V13 appear in which region.

    Like did appear J-L283 in larger numbers in the MBA-LBA transition, with groups related to expansions from around Croatia? Same for E-V13, exact sites and context for the samples will matter a lot. Especially if there are for either multiple finds sites with diversity. Probably there aren't any or the samples are once more low coverage, who knows. But if there are multiple finds sites which allow us to reconstruct a pattern, that would really help. A reconstruction of the migration paths is what we need.

    Quote Originally Posted by excine View Post
    Hmm...not a single Thracian leans in the direction of the steppe groups on the PCA. All of these are close to the Aegean populations and have very high EEF/CHG.
    Greeks too, yet we know they received more Central-Eastern admixture as well in the MBA-LBA transition. The comparison has to be made with actual Thracian related cultures, not just people sampled from the region, and it has to be made by comparing the preceding with the Early-Middle Iron Age population. Like was there a shift. Doesn't matter if they still score Aegean, that's no problem if assuming that it was mostly male-mediated and limited autosomal inflow. There needs to be just enough to recognise it clearly. The Bulgarian Iron Age cluster looks very diverse, rather too diverse. And it seems they have just a handful of samples, so probably they covered just one region or group of the Thracian sphere.

    Illyrians aren't "Appenine Italian"-oriented. They are very different from Italic populations.
    There are cultural ties running from Apennine Italian -> Castellieri -> Posusje-Dinaric. Whether these translate to any sort of migrations on an individual or group level, any sort of signficant gene flow, I don't know. That's really a strictly cultural observation. They were West oriented, culturally, that much can be said.

    HRV_EBA the closest profile to Proto-Illyrians is R-Z2103.
    That's part of the problem. No J-L283 yet and not exactly the same profile. This might be irrelevant, but such a potential (not proven) shift in uniparentals and autosomal make up can be important. It might point to an influx or change after the EBA. Actually, this is quite likely, because J-L283 was totally dominant in the later groups and Bell Beaker/TC ancestry constantly rising.

    Do you realize that of all the pre-Roman E-V13 found, several had Illyrian profiles, but none even faintly resemble the EEF/CHG of Thrace? None of them were native to Thrace. I'm not saying that we won't find E-V13 in Thrace, but based on the E-V13 profiles we have, it's clear that it wasn't the Proto-Thracian haplogroup.
    Psenichevo is THE Thracian Early Iron Age cultural formation, derived in large from Channelled Ware people. And they got E-V13, it's a proven case. Thrace was big, it likely harboured different stocks of people, even after the Channelled Ware people came in - there came other people afterwards too, like Cimmerians, Scythians, Greeks.

    Anyway. We have E-V13 from Thracians already, not just any, but from the most important group for the debate, which is Psenichevo. Not some later mixed and regionalised group, but Psenichevo!

    The question now is just was that kind of a lucky strike, and with much larger sampling it will remain low, or not. But with a handful of samples, we won't know that, especially not if looking at a diverse and mixed landscape like Thrace. We rather need samples from Babadag, Basarabi and Mezocsat/Thraco-Cimmerians, Ferigile etc., from the Thracian groups which used inhumation. And the more from Thrace and Greece the better - more samples are always good.

    I really hope they have some Basarabi samples in the paper, fingers crossed. And not just one. Because one can always be a lucky strike or bad luck...

    You're saying that Proto-Thracians were like IA Hungary, but nobody in IA Bulgaria is even remotely close to this profile. It is virtually impossible for Proto-Thracians to have this from Hungary or Romania with this autosomal ancestry in the EIA
    That's like looking at Proto-Illyrians and Proto-Thracians and saying modern Albanians are impossible. Or looking at Early Germanics and saying that modern Bavarians, Austrians, Alsatians etc. are "impossible". No they are not, you just need the right amount of admixture, of other ancestral components to come to the same spot. Once again, a North <-> South cline of Proto-Illyrians and Proto-Thracians will meet, inevitably, at some point. Funnily, its on some PCAs Italian Abruzzo, as an example:



    The main difference is, that you need from Channelled Ware related profiles more South Eastern ancestry to reach the same point. Like 3/4 Southern ancestry. But that's perfectly plausible if assuming for example that the Channelled Ware people mixed in two steps:

    Gáva -> Belegis II-Gáva/Eastern Gáva-Babadag -> Psenichevo/Southern Thracians.

    So already in Belegis II-Gáva and Eastern Gáva, we see a lot of local admixture. Already when coming in, they no longer had the HUN_LBA profile. If they ever had exactly that profile majority wise, because these are very Western samples, of which some have Encrusted Pottery admixture possibly, of which we don't know actual Gáva had the same. We have no samples from the core group yet.

    The already mixed Mezocsat, again not ideal, being already less extreme in Pannonia, so we can assume the Belegis II-Gáva surely was more Southern, and so will be Psenichevo, the later mixed Thracians, with additional Aegean, even more so.
    Last edited by Riverman; 06-30-2022 at 11:57 PM.

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

     vettor (07-01-2022)

  3. #2732
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,685
    Sex
    Location
    Australia
    Ethnicity
    Italian Alpine
    Nationality
    Australian and Italian
    Y-DNA (P)
    T1a2 - SK1480
    mtDNA (M)
    H95a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-S8172
    mtDNA (P)
    T2b17

    Australia Italy Veneto Friuli Italy Trentino Alto Adige Italy Ladinia Republic of Venice
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    I think they will be related to Thracians/Channelled Ware, but come from an earlier branching event, which is less Thracian than e.g. the historical Dacians and Getae. Note that e.g. Vatin and Brnjica surely being much closer related to Channelled Ware than the Illyrians were. Both had much closer ties to the generic Pannonian Tell cultures, something the Illyrians completely lack, because of their stronger orientation towards Bell Beakers-Italy/Alpine-Adriatic sphere. The biggest differences between Illyrians and Thracians are because of their orientations: Illyrians were West-oriented (Bell Beakers, Apennine Italian, Tumulus culture), whereas Thracians were East oriented (steppe groups like Noua, Cimmerians, Scythians and Epi-Corded Unetice, Kostany-Mierzanowice, Lusatians), but also Aegean-Lower Danube.

    Paeonians are yet another case which can be much better understood once we have ancient DNA samples from these people. Because in the Balkans the associations are pretty clear:
    E-V13 = Thracian
    J-L283 = Illyrian
    R-Z2103 and J2a = Greco-Armenian

    Not necessarily exclusively, but primarily. Just like Slavs have R-L51 and Germanics have R-Z280, yet as a general rule and tendency, we all know what is more likely associated with what.
    Paeonians have always been the middle people ethnically of both Macedonians and Dardanians ..........they share both ethnicities


    My Path = ( K-M9+, LT-P326+, T-M184+, L490+, M70+, PF5664+, L131+, L446+, CTS933+, CTS3767+, CTS8862+, Z19945+, BY143483+ )


    Grandfather via paternal grandmother = I1-CTS6397 yDna
    Great grandmother paternal side = T1a1e mtDna
    Son's mtDna = K1a4p

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to vettor For This Useful Post:

     Aspar (07-01-2022)

  5. #2733
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,494
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by vettor View Post
    Paeonians have always been the middle people ethnically of both Macedonians and Dardanians ..........they share both ethnicities
    Hopefully we will know more soon. Because linguistics being pretty much exhausted on the issue, because there is simply not enough usable written evidence from those languages. Having just a couple of words can always go horribly wrong. Its not like we have a Paeonian bible at hand. This is something for genetics. Probably they being dominated by one of the major 3, or they have a completely different patrilineage. That's one of this totally open cases.

  6. #2734
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,685
    Sex
    Location
    Australia
    Ethnicity
    Italian Alpine
    Nationality
    Australian and Italian
    Y-DNA (P)
    T1a2 - SK1480
    mtDNA (M)
    H95a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-S8172
    mtDNA (P)
    T2b17

    Australia Italy Veneto Friuli Italy Trentino Alto Adige Italy Ladinia Republic of Venice
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelmendasi View Post
    What I believe to be conjecture is that this substrate or admixture came from an older Thracian (or related) population. As for the Paeonians, their ethnolinguistic character is still a matter of debate and mystery. Traditional historiography does maintain that at least a number of the tribes from Paeonia were Thracian or Thracian-related, however, this connection has scarcely been linguistically investigated or verified. There are also those (the majority of linguists) who maintain a relation to Greek and Illyrian. I believe that they were a distinct population group that may have been related to the neighbouring peoples.

    From Radoslav Katičić's Ancient Languages of the Balkans:

    The evidence at our disposal being so extremely scarce and contradictory it is only natural that scholars interested in the subject have expressed a variety of opinions. It is quite clear that the Paeonians were never Hellenes in any cultural sense. Nevertheless, some scholars believe them to be of Greek stock and their language to be another Greek dialect. Other think that the Paeonians were not Greek. The prevailing opinion is that they were "Illyrian", i.e., form a part of the linguistic complex of the ancient north-western Balkans. Still other scholars believe them to be Thracian or Phrygian.

    We know so little about their language that any assertion as to their linguistic affiliations seems meaningless. The general impression is that they did not speak Greek, but had very old contacts with the Greek world. The possibility, however, that they took part in the great Greek migration and remained behind on the route, and consequently spoke a Greek dialect, or a lost Indo-European language closely related to Greek, cannot be wholly ruled out. They had no part in Hellenic culture nor in the Hellenic name and the Hellenes regarded them as northern barbarians. In Paeonia, too, the northern border zone of the Greek world remains in a historical twilight in which the ethnic and linguistic situation cannot be clearly discerned.
    Paeonians look more Thracian than anything else

    https://www.academia.edu/1057691/The...Paeonian_world


    https://www.academia.edu/1337289/The...on_and_Dropion


    My Path = ( K-M9+, LT-P326+, T-M184+, L490+, M70+, PF5664+, L131+, L446+, CTS933+, CTS3767+, CTS8862+, Z19945+, BY143483+ )


    Grandfather via paternal grandmother = I1-CTS6397 yDna
    Great grandmother paternal side = T1a1e mtDna
    Son's mtDna = K1a4p

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to vettor For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (07-01-2022)

  8. #2735
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,494
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by vettor View Post
    Yes, that would be my guess too, if I had to make a bet. More leaning towards Thracian than other options. But the evidence is meagre.

  9. #2736
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,436
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post


    Psenichevo is THE Thracian Early Iron Age cultural formation, derived in large from Channelled Ware people. And they got E-V13, it's a proven case. Thrace was big, it likely harboured different stocks of people, even after the Channelled Ware people came in - there came other people afterwards too, like Cimmerians, Scythians, Greeks.

    Anyway. We have E-V13 from Thracians already, not just any, but from the most important group for the debate, which is Psenichevo. Not some later mixed and regionalised group, but Psenichevo!
    Psenichevo is a group which ended by the 8th century BCE. The "rumored" date of the E-V13 samples is ~500 BCE. And from the looks of it all samples from IA Bulgaria will be just a bit less Aegean than Aegeans themselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    The comparison has to be made with actual Thracian related cultures, not just people sampled from the region, and it has to be made by comparing the preceding with the Early-Middle Iron Age population.
    You're claiming that the samples from Thrace aren't Thracian but somehow we should look for other Thracian samples because the actual ones don't fit your theories. Theories have to fit reality, not the opposite.


    This is reality:



    ...and Thracians are not going to look anything like IA Hungary in any manner, shape or form.

    To recap: Gava didn't spread E-V13 and IA Bulgaria doesn't look anything like IA Hungary, let alone Scythians and Cimmerians. E-V13 in Thrace, Illyria, ancient Greece or anywhere else within the Balkans came from the Balkans.

    This of course is something which we already know from Shephard's draft paper, but this thread was used to spam the absolutely unfounded and archaeologically impossible idea that somehow Thracians would be just like IA Hungary.

    It's obvious that they wouldn't be like IA Hungary because they didn't reach Bulgaria in the LBA/EIA. Not only that, but the one and only BGR_IA sample we have may actually be positioned slightly to the north of this cluster because they are much more Aegean-like than her.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Bruzmi For This Useful Post:

     J Man (07-01-2022)

  11. #2737
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,892
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruzmi View Post
    I agree with all points. This is where Shephard cites the upcoming Southern Arc study:

    Henry M. Shephard (2021), Проблемы поиска истоков и возможные предпосылки появления индоевропейцев: Палеогенетически прагреки второго тысячелетия до нашей эры родственны фракийцам / Paleogenetically, the ancient Greeks of the second millennium BC are related to the Thracians
    Are there any clues as to Thracian Y-DNA haplogroups then?

  12. #2738
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,584
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Y-DNA (P)
    J1-BY32817
    mtDNA (M)
    T1a1l
    Y-DNA (M)
    E-CTS1273 (BY6357?)

    Albania Kosovo
    Quote Originally Posted by vettor View Post
    There is no clear or convincing evidence to suggest that the Paeonians were Thracians or from the same ancestral ethno-linguistic group. The available linguistic data (which is extremely meagre) does not support a Thracian character, in fact there is some (albeit uncertain) evidence to suggest that the Paeonians spoke a centum Indo-European language as opposed to a satem one like Thracian and more closely related languages. The fact that they were also distinguished from the Thracians in historical sources further strengthens the argument that the Paeonians were a separate people, rather than western Thracian off-shoots.
    Ydna: J1>P58>YSC234>ZS241>BY32817 (Y179831)

    Maternal Ydna: E-V13>CTS1273 (BY6357?)

    Mtdna: T1a1l

  13. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Kelmendasi For This Useful Post:

     Bruzmi (07-01-2022),  J Man (07-01-2022),  olive picker (07-01-2022),  Pribislav (07-01-2022),  Riverman (07-01-2022)

  14. #2739
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,038
    Sex
    Location
    Bay Area
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V13
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c
    mtDNA (P)
    I1a1

    Germany Italy Sweden Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruzmi View Post

    T

    This of course is something which we already know from Shephard's draft paper, but this thread was used to spam the absolutely unfounded and archaeologically impossible idea that somehow Thracians would be just like IA Hungary.
    God forbid someone share their theory in a thread about theories...

    Look, you all know way more about any of this than I do, but as an observer, you tend to crop dust this thread with cherry picked quotes and when the person responds, you have already moved on to the next disagreement. At this point I have lost track of your theory and why you disagree with Riverman 100% of the time. I value your input as this is a thread about theories, but instead of shitting all over someone else's theory, maybe reiterate yours and why you think its correct? Just a thought. I dont intend to be confrontational.
    E-V13 -> E-PH1246 -> E-BY14160*
    distance%=4.6465"
    Barcin_N,47.2
    Yamnaya_Samara,41.4
    WHG,10.6
    Ethiopia_4500BP,0.8

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to digital_noise For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (07-01-2022)

  16. #2740
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,436
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by digital_noise View Post
    God forbid someone share their theory in a thread about theories...
    Anyone can share their theories, but there is a point where we have to align theories with the archaeogenetic reality without trying to explain it away. If we don't change our theories based on what we find in new data, then we don't correct or refine them.

    In a nutshell, my working hypothesis is that we should look for BA E-V13 within the Balkans in the regions between Slavonia (eastern Croatia) and west-central Serbia (Belotic-Bela Crkva)
    otherwise we should look for it in the Morava river valley, thus in a more central Balkan position than Belotic-Bela Crkva.

Page 274 of 307 FirstFirst ... 174224264272273274275276284 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Arabic Q-m25 cluster origin theory
    By Afshar in forum Q
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-17-2020, 07:45 PM
  2. Mycenaean South Caucausian Origin theory
    By Johane Derite in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-24-2019, 04:03 PM
  3. Out of Africa: a theory in crisis
    By firemonkey in forum Human Evolution
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-29-2018, 11:46 AM
  4. Ancestral origin and Haplogroup origin
    By Smilelover in forum FTDNA
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-17-2016, 10:26 AM

Posting Permissions

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