A theory about the origin of E-V13

[Granary]

That's the crucial part, because we see no strong expansion from Bulgaria and on the contrary Bulgaria was flooded with different groups of people from the Carpathian Basin, the Central Balkans and the steppe, like Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni. Actually, these Noua people are likely related to Cimmerians or Scythians, but they played a role both in Transylvania (Wietenberg-Noua fusion) and at the Lower Danube (Coslogeni local fusion).

There is absolutely no indication for any stable growth or expansion from Bulgaria itself in that period. On the contrary, the country was largely depopulated. On the other hand, in the Upper Tisza area, like described in earlier posts, Suciu de Sus experienced a peak growth, which continued into Lapus I + II (Gáva). They even settled areas which were earlier uninhabited, and built large scale settlements in their centre. At the end of the period, when Channelled Ware began to expand, those settlements became deserted or greatly reduced.

We see nothing like that in Bulgaria, no such growth and stability or later expansion, but constant pushes from the West, North and North East, as well as the South (Mycenaean, Grey Ware Anatolian). All of which being eaten up at the end of the LBA, in the Transitional Period by Channelled Ware.

There is no viable independent candidate in the region earlier than the LBA imho.



The quotation is great, but you notice the problem: E-V13 was already really big and significant in the Bronze Age and became a major player in the Iron Age. It didn't start from scratch in the Bronze Age, that's not possible if just looking at the modern E-V13 phylogeny. The most parsimonious explanation is therefore that the region or people being not sampled and there are two reasons for this:
- Lack of samples from Western-Central-Northern Romania, Eastern Slovakia and Transcarpathia
- Cremation horizon dominating in these regions and nearby, in all the relevant cultures since the EBA.

It couldn't have been hidden somewhere in the South East, in a people which got robbed and decimated every generation by newly arriving warlike tribes from all directions. Talking about continuity in Bulgaria from the MBA, there is almost none at all and surely nothing which would explain the rise of a lineage to the numbers needed. Looking at the source of Channelled Ware in the Carpathian region, we see a completely different and ideal context.

Do we know exactly to which less basal E-V13 lineages those Croatian and Bulgarian samples belong to?

[Riverman]

Do we know exactly to which less basal E-V13 lineages those Croatian and Bulgarian samples belong to?

We have some results, but not for all because of the coverage. You can always start a quick check here: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...0275603746&z=7

As for the Bulgarian Knobbed/Channelled Ware and its connections:

Traditionally Troy VII b2 was absolutely dated between 1120 and 950 B.C. In an article on the
„Buckelware” associated with this phase and its cultural context, Dietrich Koppenhöfer (Koppenhöfer
1997, 314–315; 334–347) still relies on Bernhard Hänsel’s parameters for the absolute dates of the cultural groups of the Lower Danube region in regard to the chronology of Troy (Hänsel 1976, 229–236
with older references). Hänsel suggested a possible lifespan of pottery from the Dobrudzha/Dobrogea in
Romania and the Tundža-Marica region in Bulgaria beginning around 1100 and ending around 800 BC,
the date when the Basarabi style emerges. $ e absolute chronology of Troy/Troia VII still depends on
the Aegean pottery based chronology of the LH III C period and the start of the Protogeometric Period.
$ erefore, the recent higher (14C) dates for the Protogeometric period25, which are still under discussion,
might also e* ect the absolute chronology for the cultural groups of the Lower Danube and east Balkan
region. Some 14C-measurements of material from Troia VII b2-contexts associated with Knobbed Ware
have produced several dates; the most convincing are 938–906 cal. B.C. and 984–961 cal. B.C. (Koppenhöfer 1997, 314)26. $ is makes the „Buckelware” or Knobbed Ware contemporary with the channelled
horn-like knobs in central Transylvania or even Srem (Kalakača), which are independently dated.
I would like to stress again what I have tried to show in this article: in central Transylvania
the presence of channelled pottery with horn-like knobs is dated to a later Gáva horizon (Gáva II) and
can very likely be regarded as the result of a cultural contact in what so ever form with the areas of the
Knobbed Ware’s origin, such as the Lăpuş and Suciu Valleys in Northwest Transylvania. The similarity of
the Bulgarian vessels some of which are characterised by channelled knobs (i. e., Hänsel 1976, Pl. 25/15;
29/13; 69/5 and Fig. 6/3) with the Troy finds is so striking that the question of immigration was raised
almost immediately after the Knobbed ware horizon Troy VII b2 was discovered (Blegen et al. 1958;
Pintér 2005). The petrographic as well as geochemical analyses by Farkas Pintér of pottery from Troy VII
b2 and several Bulgarian and Turkish sites have revealed that the Knobbed Ware in Troy was produced
locally (Pintér 2005, 144–146; 177 = .). Pintér concludes that their production in Troy must be seen as a
„transfer of technical solutions”. In my opinion this transfer was done by people who originated in areas
such as modern Bulgaria or the coastal area south of the mouth of the Danube who were present in Troy
and produced their pottery in their own style on site with local clay.

Another aspect mentioned in the article about Basarabi influences along the Danube points to vessel types moving from Nova Zagora to Bavaria in the Hallstatt era! This resulted in completely new influences and motifs in the Hallstatt sphere, which were first used in Psenichevo-Basarabi contexts.
So the networks once established by Channelled Ware, Thraco-Cimmerian horizon and the Kantharoi-Hallstatt connection were kept alive with trading and migration (low level) throughout the Early Iron Age. Surely resulting in gene flow, even more so in the South Eastern centres among themselves.

Also worth to stress in this context:

A well known vessel with a conical neck and white incrusted ornamentation (Fig. 6; Catalogue
Berlin 1981, * g. 66) from Nova Zagora in Bulgaria clearly shows a special connotation of horned knobs
since the neck of the vessel is decorated with an exceptional scene of human figures in an adoration pose
with raised arms. This scene is a further argument for interpreting the horn-like knobs as religiously
denoted symbols.

https://www.academia.edu/3195938/Cha...ogical_aspects

This transition from abstract channels/fluting and knobs (like earlier in Tisza-Danube groups and especially Lapus-Gáva) to more concrete human figures is a crucial transition from the Eastern Urnfield to the Early Hallstatt context and it happened in Psenichevo and Basarabi, spread from there West and North.

Now the point is, nevertheless: This was a transition, a development, an evolution, probably from local substrate influences, but based on the established forms of the Channelled Ware horizon. Its pretty much a smooth transition.

There is no way that Channelled Ware had left no genetic mark on the region. Even the Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni and Cimmerian influences, surely much smaller, left their mark, we get the R-Z93 carrier, which, I have to stress this and can't stress it enough: He was as Souhern as the other Thracians, probably only a very minor steppe hint, but basically the same as the E-V13 carriers!
Would anybody search for the origins of R-Z93 in Bulgaria only (I'm not excluding the possiblity, I just deem it less likely) because of that?

Same for E-V13, which surely started not as different from the later Bulgarian samples, even if coming from let's say the area of Suciu de Sus/Lapus.

[Avraam Kyriakidis]

Yeah. Central Greece is 30% Thracian, with 0 Thracian words.

I think it's quite clear that Thracians absorbed Aegean/Anatolian E-V13 people, rather than Thracians spread E-V13 to all of Europe and Anatolia.

Saying E-V13 spread is down to Thracians is a reach to say the least.



Like I said, E-V13 correlates with the "East Med" autosomal component that spread all over Europe.

In Greece EV13 is def mostly Vlach(Thraco-Roman).Like in other parts of the balkans.

[takerunder]

In Greece EV13 is def mostly Vlach(Thraco-Roman).Like in other parts of the balkans.

There are 2 million Greek men today who are E-V13, and Vlachs were not majority E-V13. I think you need to learn some history. Even today Aromanians number at like 200k.

[takerunder]

Using G25, here is the more south-eastern shifted G25 Albanian Medieval samples using (1) Illyrian (2) East Med E-V13 from Anatolia



Look at the low distance. I know this is only medieval, but note E-V13 is on average 27% in Albanians, the same as this sample. (Obviously modern Alb are not 27% East Med).

[Avraam Kyriakidis]

There are 2 million Greek men today who are E-V13, and Vlachs were not majority E-V13. I think you need to learn some history. Even today Aromanians number at like 200k.

Yeah yeah…It is Dorian or Celtic forgiving me

Explain how this ydna found in Greece when the BA Mycenae and Minoan’s completely lack it.It is mostly coming from hellenized paleobalkaners(aka Vlachs) and medieval Slavs and Albanians.

[Avraam Kyriakidis]

Where in the case of Albanians it is also coming from Daco-Thracian related(Vlach) groups that did not switched to Roman-Latin.

[takerunder]

Where in the case of Albanians it is also coming from Daco-Thracian related(Vlach) groups that did not switched to Roman-Latin.

Yes, Vlachs who are like 15% E-V13 spread to 20% Greeks and 27% Albanians. Like I said, learn some history.

[takerunder]

Using G25, here is the more south-eastern shifted G25 Albanian Medieval samples using (1) Illyrian (2) East Med E-V13 from Anatolia



Look at the low distance. I know this is only medieval, but note E-V13 is on average 27% in Albanians, the same as this sample. (Obviously modern Alb are not 27% East Med).

Also, modelling Iron Age E-V13 Thracians as Bronze Age Bulgarian + Byzantine Anatolian E-V13.

[takerunder]

Explain how this ydna found in Greece when the BA Mycenae and Minoan’s completely lack it.It is mostly coming from hellenized paleobalkaners(aka Vlachs) and medieval Slavs and Albanians.

Iron Age Italians completely lack it. Where did 15% of Italian men today belonging to E-V13 come from? Vlachs? Seriously, what are you even going on about?