Page 53 of 116 FirstFirst ... 343515253545563103 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 1160

Thread: A theory about the origin of E-V13

  1. #521
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,683
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by rafc View Post
    The old Genographic data I could consult a few years ago suggested this split should exist, and I was amazed it never showed up in the many Big Y's we have. In the Genographic project there is also a Frenchman from Normandy, someone with German roots, an Italian from the Abruzzi and someone from Liechtenstein in the group that is L618+, CTS10912- (I noted it down as CTS1975-, but comes down to the same).
    That's of course pure speculation, but that sounds as if they could be close to the Michelsberger E1b1b finds?

  2. #522
    Registered Users
    Posts
    49
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruzmi View Post
    The few E-V13 samples found in Thrace in the IA can't be called Thracian. Thracians were the northern neighbours of ancient Greeks. They were in the region since the Bronze Age. Any theory which proposes that Thracians were E-V13 heavy has to explain how the Thracian population was basically wiped out and replaced by E-V13 migrations but somehow the language remained the same. All E-V13 internet theories have the same problem, not just the "Thracian" one. E-V13 in all of them is just a label with no real cultural attributes except for some archaeological markers.
    My thoughts is that there was (S of Danube and N of Greece) a proto-thracian population, the so-called palasgians. I also believe they were non-IE and threatened by the IE steppe peoples from east and west in the starting of the third millenium BC they moved S and N. To the north of Danube, avoiding the plains, settling mostly in mountains areas, passing throw what's now Transylvania (where they encounter a migratory non IE turkic people called agatarsi, excellent goldsmiths, where they learned the metalurgical skills), finally arriving to N carpathians, and there was the finality of their IEuropenization and now called (daco)thracians, founding the Gava-Holygradi culture. From there they started to migrate in opposite direction, now to the S. Peoples stayed in mountaneous areas N of Danube were called Dacians and others to the S of Danube were called Thracians.
    But I have some questions here:
    1. What happened with the palasgians migrating initially to South ? Did they cross into Greece and Anatolia and founded the 'phrygians' ?
    2. What migratory pressure from who they were forced to leave Gava ?

  3. #523
    Registered Users
    Posts
    382
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Huban View Post
    They were not. Bronze Age inhabitants of the Eastern Balkans were not Thracians, were not Thracian speakers. They were a combination of Yamnaya elements, Iranic elements with possibly some Luwian elements.
    Nope.

    Greeks and Thracians. Geography and culture (2010):

    The story of how Greeks and Thracians developed irregular encounters into long-term relationships is much larger and more inclusive than the simple foundation stories hint at. The sometimes partisan accounts that were nurtured for their own adherents by one group or another, and which contributed so significantly to the creation of proud local histories in Hellenistic times, form components of a broader canvas, on which the legacy of earlier interactions during the second (not to mention the third) millennium BC should find a place, when direct contacts between the interior of the east Balkan landmass and Aegean sources can be traced via imported artefacts and imitations of Aegean objects. The number of actual imports (principally copper or copper alloy weapons) is small within the material assemblages in which they were found. Nevertheless, these individual items testify to a surprising degree of inter-regional ‘connectivity’, which can be revealed by studying less visible cultural and ecological links (Horden and Purcell 2000, 123-72 ; 346-8 ; 562-71)


    Bonus round about Thracian fan fiction vs. real research:

    In general, the case of the Thracians is notable for the impressive number of far-reaching conclusions, ambitious hypotheses and speculations dedicated to them and the equally numerous deficiencies in our basic knowledge about them. To begin with, the ancient Thracian language is almost completely unknown, despite the exhausting exercises of etymology made by modern linguists. There are a number of Thracian words mentioned by ancient authors (glosses), toponyms of supposedly Thracian origin and personal names preserved in literary sources and on epigraphic monuments. But since the Thracians did not have their own script and, with certain exceptions, did not use the Greek or the Latin alphabets in their language either, there are almost no indigenous written documents. It is not even clear if all the populations labeled as “Thracian” in the ancient sources spoke the same tongue: in the 1950s appeared the theory of the existence of two paleo-Balkan languages (“Thracian” proper and “Daco-Moesian”) on the territory that was supposed to be “Thracian.” More recent research demonstrates the existence of four onomastic zones (“properly Thracian,” Daco-Moesian, “Western Thracian” and the Bithynian in northwestern Asia Minor)

    Quote Originally Posted by Huban View Post
    Just more of your blabbering nonsense about V13. There is no theory involved with Thracians and E-V13. It is you who propose that V13 is Illyrian who needs to make up theories. There are no historical BA Illyrian samples out of 3.

    In fact, I will say this: there is a considerable chance vast majority of Western Balkan E-V13 are Late Antiquity-Early Medieval time migrants from the Eastern Balkans, including most of Albanian E-V13.
    There's literally no record of any migration from the eastern Balkans to the central and western Balkans in late antiquity or the early Middle Ages. In fact, the eastern Balkans throughout antiquity were repopulated by Illyrii proprie dicti, Dalmatae, Dardani, Pannoni and other tribes which in Roman antiquity collectively identified themselves as Illyriciani. From inscriptions to lists of military units, this mass movement of people from the western and central Balkans is extremely well-documented. I don't have to "prove" anything.




    If we want to have a discussion based on facts, we will discuss about the real, documented movements of people from western/central Balkans to the eastern parts of the region. Everything else belongs to the realm of unfounded speculation.

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

     Malcia (07-19-2021)

  5. #524
    Generic Mod Account
    Posts
    3,394
    Sex
    Omitted

    A general and final warning: please keep this discussion civil. Ad hominem attacks and rude language are against our Terms of Service and will not be tolerated here. Ignoring this warning will result in more sanctions.
    Forum Reminders - Please remember to:
    Report any problematic content • Adhere to Anthrogenica Hidden Content • Discuss respectfully • Be mindful of sharing user data (both yours and others) • English language only in main forum area • PM 'Moderator' for basic maintenance tasks or information about member suspensions or bans

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Moderator For This Useful Post:

     Bruzmi (07-19-2021)

  7. #525
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,153
    Sex
    Location
    Australia
    Ethnicity
    Italian Alpine
    Nationality
    Australian and Italian
    Y-DNA (P)
    T1a2b- SK1480
    mtDNA (M)
    H95a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-S8172
    mtDNA (P)
    T2b17

    Australia Italy Veneto Friuli Italy Trentino Alto Adige Italy Ladinia Austria Tirol
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruzmi View Post
    Nope.

    Greeks and Thracians. Geography and culture (2010):

    The story of how Greeks and Thracians developed irregular encounters into long-term relationships is much larger and more inclusive than the simple foundation stories hint at. The sometimes partisan accounts that were nurtured for their own adherents by one group or another, and which contributed so significantly to the creation of proud local histories in Hellenistic times, form components of a broader canvas, on which the legacy of earlier interactions during the second (not to mention the third) millennium BC should find a place, when direct contacts between the interior of the east Balkan landmass and Aegean sources can be traced via imported artefacts and imitations of Aegean objects. The number of actual imports (principally copper or copper alloy weapons) is small within the material assemblages in which they were found. Nevertheless, these individual items testify to a surprising degree of inter-regional ‘connectivity’, which can be revealed by studying less visible cultural and ecological links (Horden and Purcell 2000, 123-72 ; 346-8 ; 562-71)


    Bonus round about Thracian fan fiction vs. real research:

    In general, the case of the Thracians is notable for the impressive number of far-reaching conclusions, ambitious hypotheses and speculations dedicated to them and the equally numerous deficiencies in our basic knowledge about them. To begin with, the ancient Thracian language is almost completely unknown, despite the exhausting exercises of etymology made by modern linguists. There are a number of Thracian words mentioned by ancient authors (glosses), toponyms of supposedly Thracian origin and personal names preserved in literary sources and on epigraphic monuments. But since the Thracians did not have their own script and, with certain exceptions, did not use the Greek or the Latin alphabets in their language either, there are almost no indigenous written documents. It is not even clear if all the populations labeled as “Thracian” in the ancient sources spoke the same tongue: in the 1950s appeared the theory of the existence of two paleo-Balkan languages (“Thracian” proper and “Daco-Moesian”) on the territory that was supposed to be “Thracian.” More recent research demonstrates the existence of four onomastic zones (“properly Thracian,” Daco-Moesian, “Western Thracian” and the Bithynian in northwestern Asia Minor)



    There's literally no record of any migration from the eastern Balkans to the central and western Balkans in late antiquity or the early Middle Ages. In fact, the eastern Balkans throughout antiquity were repopulated by Illyrii proprie dicti, Dalmatae, Dardani, Pannoni and other tribes which in Roman antiquity collectively identified themselves as Illyriciani. From inscriptions to lists of military units, this mass movement of people from the western and central Balkans is extremely well-documented. I don't have to "prove" anything.




    If we want to have a discussion based on facts, we will discuss about the real, documented movements of people from western/central Balkans to the eastern parts of the region. Everything else belongs to the realm of unfounded speculation.
    Moesia is one of the 4 thracian provinces, it became more celtic from the 90000 bastarnae people ( a celtic-germanic mix of people ) who where invited there by philip the fifth of Macedonia and later also the, celtic Scordistic tribe , who settled there after a failed attempt to take Greece

    The people who think these bastarnae are a scythian/germanic mix seem in error because the sycthian/sarmatian mix had not occurred at the time of the bastarnae

    The units you mentioned are all AD times and does not reflect the original inhabitants pre Roman times


    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

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

     Riverman (07-20-2021)

  9. #526
    Registered Users
    Posts
    49
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by vettor View Post
    Moesia is one of the 4 thracian provinces, it became more celtic from the 90000 bastarnae people ( a celtic-germanic mix of people ) who where invited there by philip the fifth of Macedonia and later also the, celtic Scordistic tribe , who settled there after a failed attempt to take Greece

    The people who think these bastarnae are a scythian/germanic mix seem in error because the sycthian/sarmatian mix had not occurred at the time of the bastarnae

    The units you mentioned are all AD times and does not reflect the original inhabitants pre Roman times
    About what bastarnae do you talk ? Also, bastarnae indeed were celto-germanic population but heavily influenced by the scythians. It's a fact.

  10. #527
    Registered Users
    Posts
    382
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by vettor View Post
    Moesia is one of the 4 thracian provinces, it became more celtic from the 90000 bastarnae people ( a celtic-germanic mix of people ) who where invited there by philip the fifth of Macedonia and later also the, celtic Scordistic tribe , who settled there after a failed attempt to take Greece

    The people who think these bastarnae are a scythian/germanic mix seem in error because the sycthian/sarmatian mix had not occurred at the time of the bastarnae

    The units you mentioned are all AD times and does not reflect the original inhabitants pre Roman times
    I mentioned these units in full knowledge that we are discussing about AD times. I think that this what we should be discussing about. If we want to infer meaningful information about the links of modern populations to ancient populations we have to trace human mobility from our era to the past. If want to explain haplogroup distribution today in the region, we have to understand how the region looked like in the immediate pre-Slavic era. What it looked like 1000 years before that isn't very helpful in my opinion. It might actually lead us to believe that X group lived in an area which wasn't inhabited by that group in the Roman Balkans. Or we might perceive a group in a way which only applies to a certain period of their prehistory.

    Case in point: the Celtic Scordisci. The original Scordisci who arrived in the late Iron Age Balkans were indeed a Celtic people. But what about the Scordisci of the Roman era?

    Pannonia and Upper Moesia by András Mócsy:


    If we think that the Roman era Scordisci were a Celtic people and we find E-V13 among remains from Scordisci settlements, we might be led to believe that these are E-V13 lineages spread by a Celtic population. Reality, however, might be very different.

  11. #528
    Registered Users
    Posts
    401
    Sex
    Omitted

    At least for the Dacians there are sources saying the migrated inland to Moesia when the Romans gave up the Dacian province, although it's unclear how big that migration was, and how many of those that migrated had Dacian roots (instead of being descendants of recent Roman colonists) . I can't think of any other sources but the lack of sources alone is not conclusive off course, it's possible migrations happened but were not recorded. From the 3rd century on Moesia was frequently invaded from the easts by Carpi, Goths, Sarmati,... To me it would not seem unlogical that people living close to the border would move westwards and southwards to safer places. Vice versa I would assume that in various periods where the threats were gone the border regions were repopulated from the west and south.

    Recently there has been some discussion on S7461, this is quite an important branch of V13 and one of the only to show a quite different distribution across the Balkans. The fact that is much more common in the east might support the idea that there was no big movement from east to west. But it's also possible that S7461 was originally most common even more northeasterly, and so when moving westward/southward it couldn't get as far as clades that were already prominent in say Thracia.

    We really need adna, and lot's of it, to clear up questions like these. Sadly all that is coming (according to rumors) are the Roman era samples, but at least it would be something.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rafc For This Useful Post:

     Michał (07-26-2021),  Riverman (07-24-2021)

  13. #529
    Registered Users
    Posts
    49
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruzmi View Post
    Case in point: the Celtic Scordisci. The original Scordisci who arrived in the late Iron Age Balkans were indeed a Celtic people. But what about the Scordisci of the Roman era?

    Pannonia and Upper Moesia by András Mócsy:
    If we think that the Roman era Scordisci were a Celtic people and we find E-V13 among remains from Scordisci settlements, we might be led to believe that these are E-V13 lineages spread by a Celtic population. Reality, however, might be very different.
    I agree only partially with Andras statements, sorry. How did he supposed that Celtic Scordisci formed only a thin upper class in 278 BC ???????????? I didn't imagine, when records from 180 years later describes Balkan nowadays Serbia scordisci as a very strong and a very 'celtic' people/tribe ?

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to leonardus For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (07-25-2021)

  15. #530
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,683
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by leonardus View Post
    I agree only partially with Andras statements, sorry. How did he supposed that Celtic Scordisci formed only a thin upper class in 278 BC ???????????? I didn't imagine, when records from 180 years later describes Balkan nowadays Serbia scordisci as a very strong and a very 'celtic' people/tribe ?
    That's one of those questions which only ancient DNA will solve. They might have been ethnolinguistically clearly Celtic with or without a big Celtic demic input. But I too would suggest that we should not underestimate the historically attested migrations and their genetic impact anywhere.

Page 53 of 116 FirstFirst ... 343515253545563103 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Arabic Q-m25 cluster origin theory
    By Afshar in forum Q
    Replies: 33
    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
  •