# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups > N1c >  N1C in South Baltic - Caused by Varyag elite of Baltic Tribes?

## arvistro

There is this mystery as to why Balts (Latvians, Lithuanians, also former Prussian lands) have so much N1C in them. N1C ~ R1A in our lands. R1A is the hg of initial bearers of our IE language, that is believed to be quite archaic and conserved IE. 
What I have found recently googling up and reading through several English and Russian forums and sites is that Latvian/Lithuanian/Belarus/Prussian/NE Polish N1C is of different subclade than the version most popular in Finland & Estonia. I've read quite a lot of theories coming up, i.e. Balts and Baltic languages being created by mixed R1A/N1C people. All this would make sense if there was continuity with Estonia. But they (Estonians) appear to have two types of N, the Baltic one mixed with the Finnic one.

This is how it looks in Tree:

N1c1a1a1 (CTS2929/VL29): found in Russia (incl. Volga-Ural), the Baltic, Sweden and Hungary
N1c1a1a1a (L550): found throughout the Baltic and North Slavic countries, *and in places settled by the Vikings*. Varyag Rurikids of Russia was under this L550, but not further down the tree.
*N1c1a1a1a1 (L1025): found especially in Balto-Slavic countries, with a peak in Lithuania and Latvia*
N1c1a1a1a1a (L149.2, L551)- *Lithuanian Great Prince Gediminas Clan* (includes Polish, Hungarian, Bohemian temporar rulers Jagellons, Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian Princes of former Great Lithuanian Duchy territories)N1c1a1a1a1b (L591) -N1c1a1a1a1c (L1027) - *Lithuanian Prince Giedrus Clan* 
N1c1a1a1b (L1022): found throughout north-east Europe, especially in Finland N1c1a1a2 (Z1936)
N1c1a1a2a (Z1925, Z1935): found in Finland, Lapland, Scandinavia, the Volga-Ural and the Altai 


So, question is - could it be that at some point in history L550 or L1025 got into Baltic tribes aristocracy? Could be through Prussia originally. Took it over and _spread their seed_ all over the places of Grand Duchy of Lithuania (Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine) and Baltic tribes (Prussia, Latvia), and then through Jagellons in Poland. Having some offsprings as far as Slovakia, Hungary, etc where Jagellons temporarily ruled.

Please read carefully above. It comes from compilation of many sources which might not be 100% correct. So if you have information that contradicts above please share.

----------


## Ukko

> There is this mystery as to why Balts (Latvians, Lithuanians, also former Prussian lands) have so much N1C in them. N1C ~ R1A in our lands. R1A is the hg of initial bearers of our IE language, that is believed to be quite archaic and conserved IE. 
> What I have found recently googling up and reading through several English and Russian forums and sites is that Latvian/Lithuanian/Belarus/Prussian/NE Polish N1C is of different subclade than the version most popular in Finland & Estonia. I've read quite a lot of theories coming up, i.e. Balts and Baltic languages being created by mixed R1A/N1C people.* All this would make sense if there was continuity with Estonia. But they (Estonians) appear to have two types of N, the Baltic one mixed with the Finnic one.*
> 
> This is how it looks in Tree:
> 
> N1c1a1a1 (CTS2929/VL29): found in Russia (incl. Volga-Ural), the Baltic, Sweden and Hungary
> N1c1a1a1a (L550): found throughout the Baltic and North Slavic countries, *and in places settled by the Vikings*. Varyag Rurikids of Russia was under this L550, but not further down the tree.
> *N1c1a1a1a1 (L1025): found especially in Balto-Slavic countries, with a peak in Lithuania and Latvia*
> N1c1a1a1a1a (L149.2, L551)- *Lithuanian Great Prince Gediminas Clan* (includes Polish, Hungarian, Bohemian temporar rulers Jagellons, Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian Princes of former Great Lithuanian Duchy territories)N1c1a1a1a1b (L591) -N1c1a1a1a1c (L1027) - *Lithuanian Prince Giedrus Clan*
> ...


As Estonia is the arrival place of the Finnic in the Baltic it all makes sense, you should be looking to an Finnic elite as a possibility, also in Sweden.

----------


## arvistro

Yes, this is what my theory is about. 
--There were N1C hg Sweddish varyag kings (Rurik's clan, and some other clans) who came to Baltics and established their dynasty. It was not Rurik's clan in Baltics, Gediminas had differend hg. Most Balt N people would be grand...sons of these varyags. They came in small groups and probably already spoke not that distant language to West Baltic (early AD Sweddish). I believe they settled in Prussia originally, there are historical sources of Varyag trade post and settlement in Prussia. Prussians have legends of brothers Bruten and Widewut coming to Prussia and establishing statehood, could this be related? At times of Gediminas elite was already assimilated to the degree that did not want to give up Baltic language and religion easily even when pressed hard by Christians from two sides.
N1 Estonians (and to some degree N1 Latvians through Liivi) would then be somewhat mixed between N1C which was there originally and this varyag N1C imported over Baltic Sea and promoted through Balts elite. Lithuanian (and Belarussian, and of course Prussian) N1 would be varyag.

Alternative point of view that is current formal history is that Balts went more North, met N1C people and assimilated locals. But I argue Balt N1C is imported over Baltic Sea from Sweden.

Another alternative version is that one original local N1C clan got into one R1A Baltic tribe and raised to power. Which is similar to my idea. Only question is whether this clan was local "the Southern most" clan of Finnic group that arrived with Estonians/Liivi or imported "the Western most" clan of Finnic group that arrived with Sweddish varyags. This particular version of N1c was found more on Sweden, Finland than Estonia and was related to varyags (Rurik). There can be two theories - a) it got into varyags from Baltics or b) it got into Baltics from varyags :) 

This of course is an amateur speculation in hopes that some more experienced members of forum come and give their opinion, try to challenge this.

----------


## Ukko

> Yes, this is what my theory is about. 
> --There were N1C hg Sweddish varyag kings (Rurik's clan, and some other clans) who came to Baltics and established their dynasty. It was not Rurik's clan in Baltics, Gediminas had differend hg. Most Balt N people would be grand...sons of these varyags. They came in small groups and probably already spoke not that distant language to West Baltic (early AD Sweddish). I believe they settled in Prussia originally, there are historical sources of Varyag trade post and settlement in Prussia. Prussians have legends of brothers Bruten and Widewut coming to Prussia and establishing statehood, could this be related? At times of Gediminas elite was already assimilated to the degree that did not want to give up Baltic language and religion easily even when pressed hard by Christians from two sides.
> N1 Estonians (and to some degree N1 Latvians through Liivi) would then be somewhat mixed between N1C which was there originally and this varyag N1C imported over Baltic Sea and promoted through Balts elite. Lithuanian (and Belarussian, and of course Prussian) N1 would be varyag.
> 
> Alternative point of view that is current formal history is that Balts went more North, met N1C people and assimilated locals. But I argue Balt N1C is imported over Baltic Sea from Sweden.
> 
> Another alternative version is that one original local N1C clan got into one R1A Baltic tribe and raised to power. Which is similar to my idea. Only question is whether this clan was local "the Southern most" clan of Finnic group that arrived with Estonians/Liivi or imported "the Western most" clan of Finnic group that arrived with Sweddish varyags. This particular version of N1c was found more on Sweden, Finland than Estonia and was related to varyags (Rurik). There can be two theories - a) it got into varyags from Baltics or b) it got into Baltics from varyags :) 
> 
> This of course is an amateur speculation in hopes that some more experienced members of forum come and give their opinion, try to challenge this.


VL29 is most likely Finnic in origin, originating around Gulf of Finland, the rest come from it.

----------


## arvistro

Since I created the thread I had thought of the subject. At some points I started to doubt this, but then I put my attention towards East Prussian dna. 
1) I found a man with *L1025* surname Reihs in the project from East Prussia, but negative for down clades
and I found in https://www.familytreedna.com/public/rurikid/ "They shared a common male ancestor ab. 2200 years back." It was told about Gediminas and Rurik. 

2) Gediminas is down the line from L1025, means if L1025 and L1025- had common ancestor "A" 2200 years ago, then further Baltic subclades L551, L591, L1027 had common ancestor "B" already Anno Domini. Majority of N1C1 Balts then would be grand----children of a man who lived less than 2000 years ago.

3) Just assumption, but I hope it is fair. Common ancestor "A" (clan Ruriks + clan Gediminids) was unlikely from Baltic tribe. Most likely he fished salmons on the shores of Finland/ North Sweden.

4) If 3 is correct, then Baltic, proto-Baltic or proto-Balto-Slavic bearers did not have a significant amount of N1C1 before AD. OR let's say there is no reason to believe otherwise. I know there was some heated discussion on this on other site. 

5) Assumption, which I am not that sure. N1C1 in South Baltic most likely appeared after 500 AD (which is not that far after common ancestor "B"). It did not just "appear", it became ruling class. Why after 500 AD? First, there is a Prussian legend of Bruten and Widevut who established Prussian statehood around 600. Second, according to Gimbutas Balts if my memory serves me right starting after 500 AD archeological findings show that peacefull life near Baltics ended, broken arrows findings, more military equipment, etc. Third, Truso was established at the end of 8th century. 

6) I do not know the exact source. I believe it came from modern Sweden territory. Either with late East German tribes (less likely) or early vikings (most likely) migration. 

In conclusion, I hope we get some Baltic dna samples from AD 0. If I am right, there is almost exclousively R1a-z280. With some other hgs in small proportions. Elite graves after 900 AD at some point would show mostly N1C1 then, and common men mostly z280.

----------


## Ukko

> Since I created the thread I had thought of the subject. At some points I started to doubt this, but then I put my attention towards East Prussian dna. 
> 1) I found a man with *L1025* surname Reihs in the project from East Prussia, but negative for down clades
> and I found in "They shared a common male ancestor ab. 2200 years back." It was told about Gediminas and Rurik. 
> 
> 2) Gediminas is down the line from L1025, means if L1025 and L1025- had common ancestor "A" 2200 years ago, then further Baltic subclades L551, L591, L1027 had common ancestor "B" already Anno Domini. Majority of N1C1 Balts then would be grand----children of a man who lived less than 2000 years ago.
> 
> 3) Just assumption, but I hope it is fair. Common ancestor "A" (clan Ruriks + clan Gediminids) was unlikely from Baltic tribe. Most likely he fished salmons on the shores of Finland/ North Sweden.
> 
> 4) If 3 is correct, then Baltic, proto-Baltic or proto-Balto-Slavic bearers did not have a significant amount of N1C1 before AD. OR let's say there is no reason to believe otherwise. I know there was some heated discussion on this on other site. 
> ...


They where Aesti-Gothic males from Finland and Estonia, happy to help out.  :Good Job:

----------


## arvistro

Aesti are believed to be Balts. I expect R1A as big majority there. 

Goths are East Germans. They could actually pick up some N1C1 in Scandinavia, if they ever went or originated there. Ermanareiks (that is name of Ermanaric as pronounced in Gothic.. and Baltic) conquested Aesti at around end of 4th Century. So if Goths replaced local nobility, then they could have put this N1C1 guy from Scandinavia on throne. 

----Interesting piece of info is that after Ermanaric they elected Vithimiris (from South Ukraine) as new Gothic king. Vythimiris sounds Balto-Slavic. 'Vyti' is very Lithuanian (Vytautas, Vytenis), 'mir' is root associated with Slavic rulers, '-is' is again Baltic ending. His son Viderichus (Videreiks?) also would be good candidate for Balto-Gothic ruler but his advisors Alatheus and Saphrax seem from different ethnicity------

Wait, actually I think I found the answer. In wiki:
"_According to Tacitus, Aestui, the land of the Aesti, was located somewhere east of the Suiones (Swedes) and west of the Sitones (possibly the Kvens), on the Suebian (Baltic) Sea._"
Maybe Sitones (Kvens) is the original tribe that unites Rurik and Gediminas. 200 BC there was a man in Kvenland, his clan came to rule Kvens on both sides of Baltic. On the West side (L1025-) they came to live around Roslagen, became Sweddish varyags and got to rule Rus. On the East side (L1025+ was born there) they entered Baltic nobility. This is where Sitones are thought to be placed:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Empire_125.png

So, couple of theories:
1) Local - Balts assimilated East Baltic Sitones, cousines of Kvens somewhere after 200 BC. Maybe there was some quazi war which ended with remains of Sitoni tribe fleeing accross Baltic.
2) Gothic/Cimbru - N1C1 ruler arrived to Baltic lands via East Germanic tribes and got there initially as one of warlords picked up in Scandinavia. Either Gothic conquest of Aesti or Cimbru Prussian legend.
3) Early Varyags - N1C1 ruler(s) arrived to Baltic lands with early viking raids, somewhere at time of Truso establishment. Truso - Prussians? Prussian ethnonime only appeared after Truso. Then there is Jatvingr theory for Jatvings/Sudovians.

Local seems to be the most easy answer. Only problem is geography. Rurik from Roslagen Sweden L550, L1025- is better match to Baltic nobility L550, L1025+, than Estonian/West Finnish clades of L1022 which is negative for L550.
Also lack of East Asian admixture around Baltic areal (link below, Latvia, Lithuania and to lower extent Belarus, Poland). Would mean that it was only male thing and small group of males, that got Baltified quickly. Somewhat similar to R1B in Basques.
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/autoso...tml#East_Asian

----------


## arvistro

Quite funny thing. If the common ancestor (the one who created Baltic N and lived AD) instead was I or R1A or R1B. We would spoke of absolute R1A-ness of Balts (80-90% of R1a) or Balts being descendants of original hunters I people (40% of I) or Balts being mix of R1B and R1A (50% of R1B)..

----------


## arvistro

I noticed that this thread comes up in google when searching for Balts and Varyags :)
Therefore I feel a little bit more responsibility and should confess that I am neither a professional historian, nor genetics professional. Just a curious soul, so this should not be taken too seriously.

As to other new info and feedback, that I gathered recently.

1. Dating of L550+ age differs. 
*Rurikid project public info page says:*
Says: "_Gedimin(as), the Grand Duke of Lithuania, and Rurik were very distant cousins. They shared a common male ancestor ab. 2200 years back._" (Bolded part mine)
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/rurikid/

*Tomenable passed me quote from molgen forum with following estimates by forum user mouglley, dated 25.01.2013:*
In short: 
_"N1c-VL29 - common ancestor 3700-4300 years ago, Volga region
N1c-L550 - common ancestor 3300-4000 years ago, east of Pskov
N1c-L1025 - common ancestor 2500-3000 years ago, pre-Baltic (south of the Baltic Sea)"_ (Bolded part mine, also you will see later L1025 is actually West Finnic).
http://eng.molgen.org/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=844&start=40

*I found discussion from molgen forum, very last post to sum up work in progress nature of age estimates was from michal, dated 10.08.2014:
*_"It would be much more appropriate to estimate the age of this subclade by calculating an average number of reliable (i.e. YFull-verified) private SNPs under Y4338, but we can also produce a very rough estimate by deducting 1500 years (10x150) from the hypothetical age of L550 (i.e. from 2400, as suggested above based on the results for L1025). This would give us about 900 years (within a reasonable margin of error) to the most recent common ancestor of those "Para-Rurikids", as you call them (which seems much younger than expected based on the historical records for the Rurikids). Since this very provisional result also suggests an average number of only 6 private (reliable!) BigY-tested SNPs for the members of this characteristic subclade of L550, we can significantly refine our rough estimate by providing an exact average number of private SNPs under Y4338 (using as many Y4338 members as possible). If this average turns out to be significantly higher (I would expect something in the range of 8-12 SNPs, or 1200-1800 years), this would also mean that L550 might be a bit older than 2400 years (although verifying this would require including a significant number of Big Y results for L550* and L1025)._"

----------


## arvistro

Eh, needs mod approval for post to appear. That topic was about differences in age estimates for L550+, which if significantly older than 400 BC would make this Varyag theory wrong.

In the meantime moving on. New updated tree for N, by Georg Dunkel.
imag.jpg
One can see that Balts are now under here:
L550+, L1025-: Rurikids ("grandpa")
L550+, L1025+, M2783-: FennoScandian ("dad")
L550+, L1025+, M2783+: all South Baltic clades are below this. M2783 ("son") is responsible for South Baltic N1C1.

Now a lot depends on age estimates for L550, L1025 and M2783. Or hopefully results for early AD ancient y-dna from Baltics or Belarus will appear in this century to shed some light.

----------


## sparkey

> Eh, needs mod approval for post to appear.


Approved. Sorry, the system is finicky sometimes.

----------


## arvistro

*Latvija and Lietuva - Possible Norse Etimology*

Apart from looking for N1C1 origins in Balts I was also spending some time and put some thinking into ethnonime for Latvians and Lithuanians. Searching and looking for ancient tribes with let/lit/liet/lat in ancient sources brought no results.
I read formal etimology explanations in for Latvia: from 'latvis'. 'latvis' from _perhaps from Proto-Baltic *lat-, from Proto-Indo-European *lat-, *let-, *lot- (“to flow”), reflected in Ancient Greek λάταξ (látaks, “drop”), Old Irish laith (“liquid; swamp”) (< *lati), lathach (“silt, mud”) (< *latàkā), Old Norse leþja (“clay; dregs, sludge”), Old High German letto (“clay”)._
I was not impressed.
I read formal etimology for Lithuania: from 'leitis'. 'leitis' _from Proto-Baltic *lei-, *lie- with an extra -t, from Proto-Indo-European *ley-, *lī- (“to pour, to flow, to drip”). The stem was perhaps originally a reference to people from the "land of the rain" or "land of the rivers." It is also possible that there was an original river or lake name *Leitā, from which *leitā-tyā, *leityā > leiša, from which the nominative leitis could be derived_.
I was also not impressed.

First, I believed Lithuanian and Latvian (Lettigallian) came from same root. Earliest sources use 'Let' or similar forms for Lithuania and Lettigallians (tribe which made most of Latvia, which is basically just Let + 'gale', "end of lets"). There was similar root/meaning mentioned for both - 'to pour' - liet, līt, and some rivers as possible source - one for Latvians, another for Lithuanians. Both unknown.

There was another more exotic idea that Lietuva comes from 'leičiai'. I read on those guys, thought there was something to it.

Yesterday I had an heureka moment. I should have checked it once I came up with this Varyag-Baltic idea. Maybe Let, Liet forms were present in Old Norse? I grabbed my smartphone and opened Sweddish - English dictionary. Couple of checks and 'leta' - (with _efter__) search; look throughout (a place) for something._ I noticed on wictionary similar Icelandic form 'leita'. Old Norse 'leita' - to seek, to search. 

let's get back to leičiai:
*Leičiai* (singular: leitis) were a distinct social group of the Lithuanian society in the early Grand Duchy of Lithuania subordinate to the Lithuanian ruler or the state itself. Leičiai were native to the Lietuva Land and formed *the core of the Lithuanian society in pre-state era* and during the establishment of the state. Leičiai were the majority of military-economic staff of the state: they * enforced state authority in periphery, protected state borders*, and performed various other war-related functions, such as breeding riding horses. 
According the hypothesis brought forward by Lithuanian historian Artūras Dubonis and linguist Simas Karaliūnas, *the name of Lithuania (Lietuva) derived from leičiai*. Leičiai is *an old ethnonymic used by Latvians to denote the Lithuanians (leiši in Latvian)* and was historically known to the Germans in the same sense.[3] Opponents to the hypothesis which attempts to relate the words _leitis_, _leičiai_ and _Lietuva_, claim that the form _leičiai, leitis,_ with a diphthong -ei- instead of -ie-, is likely to be of Western Baltic origin.

So, *how about leičiai originated as Norse folk hired by early varyag era Lithuanian dukes to look after (leita) state borders?* Etimology and original meaning would be that of 'Watchmen'/'Scouts', searching, looking for enemy. Since those watchmen (leičiai) would be the first folk neighbor populations meet, in time they would start calling whole nation leičiai. Latvian tribe Lettigalians would get this ethnonime since were also in Lithuanian sphere of influence, probably had their own leičiai before Livonian Order or Rus Princes influence.

In time from Norse 'leit', East Baltic form 'liet' would appear for Lietuva. From 'let' (Letten, letiņš) used by German overlords 'lat' would be derived for Latvija.

----------


## Ukko

> So, *how about leičiai originated as Norse folk hired by early varyag era Lithuanian dukes to look after (leita) state borders?* Etimology and original meaning would be that of 'Watchmen'/'Scouts', searching, looking for enemy. Since those watchmen (leičiai) would be the first folk neighbor populations meet, in time they would start calling whole nation leičiai. Latvian tribe Lettigalians would get this ethnonime since were also in Lithuanian sphere of influence, probably had their own leičiai before Livonian Order or Rus Princes influence.
> 
> In time from Norse 'leit', East Baltic form 'liet' would appear for Lietuva. From 'let' (Letten, letiņš) used by German overlords 'lat' would be derived for Latvija.



What are the Norse Y-DNA haplos found in Latvia and Lithuania?

----------


## arvistro

I am thinking that N1c1 m2783+ could be of Norse clan in Balts. 
Its dad clade L1025+ m2783- is found in FennoScandia. Its Grand dad clade is Ruriks clan with his non-Russian relatives around same place.
Probably Norsified earlier Kven folk, like Rurik.

I might be terribly wrong if age of m2783 is really old. 
L1025+ m2783- and its father clade L550+ L1025- are located in North Sweden/West Finland.

M2783+ is common ancestor of n1c1 in Balts. Located SouthEast Baltic. 

Either those were Varyag colonists in Viking times (Truso, Kaup, maybe the bloody event mentioned by Saxo Gramaticus) OR some very early migrations of Finno Ugric tribes, at times they colonized Baltic and North Sweden. If m2783+ was born anno domini, then it could only be brought from North Sweden to Baltics via sea.

----------


## Ukko

> I am thinking that N1c1 m2783+ could be of Norse clan in Balts. 
> Its dad clade L1025+ m2783- is found in FennoScandia. Its Grand dad clade is Ruriks clan with his non-Russian relatives around same place.
> Probably Norsified earlier Kven folk, like Rurik.
> 
> I might be terribly wrong if age of m2783 is really old. 
> L1025+ m2783- and its father clade L550+ L1025- are located in North Sweden/West Finland.
> 
> M2783+ is common ancestor of n1c1 in Balts. Located SouthEast Baltic. 
> 
> Either those were Varyag colonists in Viking times (Truso, Kaup, maybe the bloody event mentioned by Saxo Gramaticus) OR some very early migrations of Finno Ugric tribes, at times they colonized Baltic and North Sweden. If m2783+ was born anno domini, then it could only be brought from North Sweden to Baltics via sea.



You have trouble believing they could be Baltic Finns? Why?

----------


## arvistro

> You have trouble believing they could be Baltic Finns? Why?


Because 
1) closest clades to them are associated with varyags and located North Sweden, not Estonians/North Russians that are located closer;
2) they seem to be "informed" (spread around) about Baltic cultural borders after 800. So if they got into Baltic nobility around that period it would make perfect sense;
3) there is just one rather young N1c1 clade in Balts with closest relatives over sea vs many old R1a clades that are cross shared regionally. 

Of course there might be other scenarios that might lead to similar distribution. So, please share, my brain is already infected by this idea, but maybe you can have fresh look.

----------


## Ukko

> Because 
> 1) closest clades to them are associated with varyags and located North Sweden, not Estonians/North Russians that are located closer;
> 2) they seem to be "informed" (spread around) about Baltic cultural borders after 800. So if they got into Baltic nobility around that period it would make perfect sense;
> 3) there is just one rather young N1c1 clade in Balts with closest relatives over sea vs many old R1a clades that are cross shared regionally. 
> 
> Of course there might be other scenarios that might lead to similar distribution. So, please share, my brain is already infected by this idea, but maybe you can have fresh look.



What closest clades? Before it goes to Baltic it is in West Finland.

----------


## arvistro

Exactly! Before it went into Balts it was in West Finland...

Another interesting Norse Baltic link.
According to certain Russian sources Gediminas was son of Skolmantas (one of Yatwing Princes and sorcerer).

Yatwings (before viking age known as Sudovians) etimology is now pretty much believed to come from Old Norse Jatvigr (luck in war or lucky spear). 
It is pretty much possible that Gediminas' very early ancestor was Norseman Jatvigr, founder of Jatvings clan...

The deeper I get into this, the more of Norse I find in early Balt statehood...

----------


## Ukko

> Exactly! Before it went into Balts it was in West Finland...
> 
> Another interesting Norse Baltic link.
> According to certain Russian sources Gediminas was son of Skolmantas (one of Yatwing Princes and sorcerer).
> 
> Yatwings (before viking age known as Sudovians) etimology is now pretty much believed to come from Old Norse Jatvigr (luck in war or lucky spear). 
> It is pretty much possible that Gediminas' very early ancestor was Norseman Jatvigr, founder of Jatvings clan...
> 
> The deeper I get into this, the more of Norse I find in early Balt statehood...


How does it go from Finnish to Norse?

----------


## mihaitzateo

> How does it go from Finnish to Norse?


He was a Kven that went and live between Norse people.
After,some of his ancestors went to Baltic countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yotvingians#Name

----------


## Ukko

> He was a Kven that went and live between Norse people.
> After,some of his ancestors went to Baltic countries.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yotvingians#Name



His ancestors did well in Baltic.

----------


## arvistro

Some other info from archeological finds in modern Kaliningrad:
http://www.kantiana.ru/crossroads/do...alogue_eng.pdf

Authors (Polish, Lithuanian and Russian) research viking age finds in modern Kaliningrad, ancient Prussia and finds out Norse warriors among local people. Norse chieftains graves. Large cemetery near Truso. And other finds. Among conclusions is also this note:
"It was within the limits of this interethnic (_Balts, Varangians - my comment_) contacts route where Grand Duchy of Litowsky came into being, probably as an instrument of control over its (_Neman trade route - my comment_) uninterrupted activity".

Everything starts to make sense. Piece by piece. 

Some new questions still do arise. 
1) Scandinavian colonies are attested in Prussia coastal areas (Truso, Kaup and some others, vikings from modern Sweden territory). And then we have Yatwings deeper inland. There are several touchpoints but for my theory to hold we need both sources to be in majority one clan. Can the Baltic ones (Yatwings + Truso colonists) be the same folk? Could it be there were two gangs/clans operating and later conflicting - Rurik's men and alikes (L550, L1025-) on Kiev/Novgorod trade route and Yatwigr's (?) men (L550, L1025+, possibly M2783+) on Neman trade route? 

What started as simple speculation, turned into google searches. I still dont give 100% credibility to this idea, but at least I have learned a lot on Varyag Balt early interactions :)

----------


## Ukko

> Some other info from archeological finds in modern Kaliningrad:
> http://www.kantiana.ru/crossroads/do...alogue_eng.pdf
> 
> Authors (Polish, Lithuanian and Russian) research viking age finds in modern Kaliningrad, ancient Prussia and finds out Norse warriors among local people. Norse chieftains graves. Large cemetery near Truso. And other finds. Among conclusions is also this note:
> "It was within the limits of this interethnic (_Balts, Varangians - my comment_) contacts route where Grand Duchy of Litowsky came into being, probably as an instrument of control over its (_Neman trade route - my comment_) uninterrupted activity".
> 
> Everything starts to make sense. Piece by piece. 
> 
> Some new questions still do arise. 
> ...


What other haplos do you have from the area? I1, I2, R1b?

----------


## arvistro

Hard to have anything from this particular area. If we talk about Lithuania then according eupedia:
42% - N1C
38% - R1A
6% - I1
5% - I2
5% - R1B

----------


## Ukko

> Hard to have anything from this particular area. If we talk about Lithuania then according eupedia:
> 42% - N1C
> 38% - R1A
> 6% - I1
> 5% - I2
> 5% - R1B


N1c in sweden is around 10%, they must have really been dominant if they came from Sweden.

----------


## arvistro

And some other source:
http://www.academia.edu/1244011/The_...ing_Viking_Age

If you read Russian, you may enjoy it. If you don't in short - author notices Kaup with big Scandinavian cemetery, military outposts each 30-40 km on Neman river (one day distance for viking ship) with Scandinavian goods in graves, author speculates it could be to protect the trade route, hotspot of Dirham finds in old Prussia, around Truso and Kaup. It seems more dense than in most other places, only competing with Gotland (first picture in the material). One more thing - besides Scandinavian influence he also finds Curonians actively working and cooperating.

Interesting that Truso was almost not mentioned in text, which was also varyag trading center. Probably because Truso was not on Neman river.

----------


## arvistro

This is where I sum up my findings, put them into facts/speculation:
a) facts, that archeology shows Scandinavian influence, burials, which can't be done without Scandinavian warlords and rather big population moving in, finds relate to Uppland, Roslagen, Gotland regions;
b) fact/findings that Balt N1C1 is rather young, uniform and overpresented in Balts nobility (almost exclousively ethnic Baltic nobles were N1C1) VS R1A being different clades, different ages, mixed
c) fact that L1025 pre-Baltic clades are found among modern Swedes and Finns, around Uppland and Alands. L555 (pre L1025) as well. 
d) speculation, but mainstream one, about Yotwingians/Yatwigr Norse etimology. 
e) speculation, at least attested in some sources about Gediminas (L550-> L1025-> *L551*) being son of Skolmantas (Yatwing warlord and shaman)
f) my own speculation, which comes from above, about Norse etimology for leičiai (leitis) from Old Norse 'leita' - search/look for.

and the main speculation, also my own:
*N1C1 clades entered Balts in viking age by Norsified N1C1 men.*

----------


## Ukko

> This is where I sum up my findings, put them into facts/speculation:
> a) facts, that archeology shows Scandinavian influence, burials, which can't be done without Scandinavian warlords and rather big population moving in, finds relate to Uppland, Roslagen, Gotland regions;
> b) fact/findings that Balt N1C1 is rather young, uniform and overpresented in Balts nobility (almost exclousively ethnic Baltic nobles were N1C1) VS R1A being different clades, different ages, mixed
> c) fact that L1025 pre-Baltic clades are found among modern Swedes and Finns, around Uppland and Alands. L555 (pre L1025) as well. 
> d) speculation, but mainstream one, about Yotwingians/Yatwigr Norse etimology. 
> e) speculation, at least attested in some sources about Gediminas (L550-> L1025-> *L551*) being son of Skolmantas (Yatwing warlord and shaman)
> f) my own speculation, which comes from above, about Norse etimology for leičiai (leitis) from Old Norse 'leita' - search/look for.
> 
> and the main speculation, also my own:
> *N1C1 clades entered Balts in viking age by Norsified N1C1 men.*



To me they seem Baltified, you have evidence they spoke Norse as first language? 
If you mean culturally then everyone around the Baltic was "Norsified".
You should look how Baltic Finns lived at the time, you cant tell much from material culture, if there was no Finnic speakers alive you would be calling all the finds Norse.
Thats right, you are.

----------


## arvistro

Jatvigr is Norse. Rurik's folk is Norse (you can find in net list of Rus delegation that met some foreign leader(s)). Almost exclousively those guys had Norse names written in Russian manner since the chronicle was Russian, btw among them Jatvjag Gunnarev is mentioned. 
I think also Kuningas or Koningas in Finnic comes from Norse. Knyaz in Russian, Kunigaikstis in Lithuanian. 
They in few generations got Rusified/Baltified later. I suspect they were already Norsified before, maybe also just for few generations.

----------


## Ukko

> Jatvigr is Norse. Rurik's folk is Norse (you can find in net list of Rus delegation that met some foreign leader(s)). Almost exclousively those guys had Norse names written in Russian manner since the chronicle was Russian, btw among them Jatvjag Gunnarev is mentioned. 
> I think also Kuningas or Koningas in Finnic comes from Norse. Knyaz in Russian, Kunigaikstis in Lithuanian. 
> They in few generations got Rusified/Baltified later. I suspect they were already Norsified before, maybe also just for few generations.


The second delegation especially has Finnic names and Finns used Germanic names also, like today, they still speak Finnish.

----------


## Ukko

Finnish pre-Christian names, Iron to Viking Age, many are Germanic loans according to Vahtola, even Kalevala names.

Ahti < Ahti, Achti
Alvettu < Alfheid
Asikka < Asicho
Ammakko < Amacho, Ammako
Aranti < Arand
Artukka, Artukainen < Ardoicus, Artgaud

Eura < Euracus



Halikko < Halicho
Halo < Halo
Harjavalta < Harjawalda
Hattelma < Hadelhalm
Hattu < Hathu, Haddo
Hauho, Hauhia < Hauha
Hervanta < Heriowanda

Ihamuoti < Ehamoti
Ilmari, Ilmarinen < Ildmir, Hildimar
Ingeranta < Ingebrand

Kaukaritsa < Gaugerich
Ketteli < Kettil
Kärväntä < Kaerwant

Lemminkäinen < Lehmbgen

Masku < Masco
Muotia, Muotiainen < Muota, 
Muodo, Muotine

Nihattu < Nihhad

Paaskunta < Basigunde
Paro < Baro, Paro
Parta, Parto, Partia < Bard, Barda, Bardo
Pyynikki < Byniki

Rapo < Rabo
Rekotti < Reccoz
Renko < Renco
Rikanti < Rigant

Sotavalta < Zotowald

Tapio < Dabo, Tapo, Dapicho 
Turenki < Thuring 
Turso < Thursja

Ulvila < Ulv, Ulf
Unto, Untamo < Unto, Unda, Undi

Vanattara < Wanathere
Vermunti < Wermund
Vihti < Vihti
Villanti < Willand
Väinä, Väinämöinen < Weni, 
Weniman


These are pure Finnic maybe but to me some have the same vibe.

Anettu
Harmaa
Haukka
Himottu
Hirvas
Hirvi
Huono
Hurtta
Huuhka
Hyvä
Hyväri
Hyvitty
Hyvälempi
Härkä
Härkäpää
Ihalempi
Ilo
Iloittu
Ilmo
Jalkava
Kaivattu
Karhu
Karva
Kettu
Kokko
Kova
Kukko
Kurittu
Kurja
Kurki
Käetty
Käki
Kärppä
Kärsä
Lemmitty
Lintu
Miero
Mustia
Musto
Noita
Nousia
Nuolia
Ohto
Oinas
Orava
Otava
Peura
Pitkä
Pitkäpää
Päivä
Päivi
Pöllö
Pääsky
Rautio
Ruskea
Saukko
Seppä
Suorsa
Terärautia
Toivo
Toivottu
Torittu
Vallittu
Vihattu
Voipa
Yletty
Äijä

http://www.aikakauslehdet.fi/content...nkki/nimet.htm


http://www.aarnimetsa.org/sites/defa...s/lastu08a.pdf

----------


## Kristiina

I would propose a different etymology for the name Lithuania that would also explain Latvia and Livonia. Wikipedia tells us that ”since the word Lietuva has a suffix (-uva), the original word should have no suffix. A likely candidate is Lietā. Because many Baltic ethnonyms originated from hydronyms, linguists have searched for its origin among local hydronyms. Usually such names evolved through the following process: hydronym → toponym → ethnonym. A small river not far from Kernavė, the core area of the early Lithuanian state and a possible first capital of the would-be Grand Duchy of Lithuania, is usually credited as the source of the name. This river's original name is Lietava. Kernavė is a small town in the southeastern part of Lithuania, in Širvintos district, located on the right bank of the river Neris, on the upper Neris terrace.”

Thus, the ending ”uva” of Lietuva and ”avé” of Kernave would be derived from the word ”upa” meaning river (cfr. Lithuanian/Latvian upe, Welsh afon, Irish abhainn, Basque hibai; Saami appe, Finnish aapa a kind of an open swamp). As regards the first part of the word ”lietā”, in Finnish there is a word ”liete”/”lieto” which means sand by the river (in Inkeri lēte, Estonian leede) and ”letto which means rich treeless fen with lawn-like vegetation. A similar word with the meaning of meadow or grass is also found elsewhere in Europe: Breton leton, Slavic leto summer (which may originally have meant grass time). I would propose that the etymology of Lithuania is “meadowy river”. This same word meaning meadow/grass could then well be also found in the word Latvija, which according to Wikipedia is derived from the name of the ancient Latgalians which have the following forms: “*Latgalians*, sometimes also *Ancient Latvians* (Latin: _Lethi, Letthigalli_, Low German: _Letti, Lethi_, modern Latvian: _latgaļi, letgaļi, leti_, variant translations also include *Latgallians*, *Lettigalls* or *Lettigallians*). Latvians would then be “river meadow gallians”. 

It is interesting to note that this same idea could also be seen in the name Livonia. According to Wikipedia, the Livonians or Livs are the indigenous inhabitants of Livonia, a large part of what is today northwestern Latvia and southwestern Estonia. They spoke the Uralic Livonian language, a language which was closely related to Estonian and Finnish. In Finnish there is a word “liiva” which means sand by the seashore. A similar word meaning meadow is widespread in Europe: Slovenian liváda, Bulgarian liváda, Albanian livadh, Greek livádi.

----------


## Dagne

Arivistro, you're so enthusiastic about your theory, so I don't want to spoil it. But the general explanation is that all N1C1 were just there in the Lithuanian territory from Narva culture times...

----------


## Ukko

> Arivistro, you're so enthusiastic about your theory, so I don't want to spoil it. But the general explanation is that all N1C1 were just there in the Lithuanian territory from Narva culture times...


The problem is that recent datings dont support that.

----------


## arvistro

First I enjoyed your version river for Lats/Lets and sea for Liivs, but then I checked words in dictionaries.

How did you arrive from something which to me means either bog, fen or mud, clay in Finno-Ugric (liete, lieto, leede or letto) to meadow of grass? :) Besides leede apparently does not mean sand by the river but just muddy sand. Latvia has many bogs, mud and clay, so it is ok for etimology version on its own, why meadow? Also Old High German has letto - clay. Which could explain why Latvian ethnonime whatever it was appeared exactly in this form in German written chronicles. 

And I have some comments regarding the rest:
Ending -uva/-ava is simply common in Baltic languages - guļava (sleepy person, gulēt+ava), līgava (bride, līgt+ava), Daugava (daug/daudz+ava), for lands, for rivers, for abstract things made of concrete things. It is long not related to upe, if it ever was.

“river meadow *gallians*” - wrong. In Latvia there are plenty of locations named -gale or -male _(-end or -side; I think best English interpretation for both would be -side)_. Semigallians - (zemgaļi, from zem/low and end/gals) Lowsiders/Lowenders, they live in Latvian lowlands. Just North of Lithuanian Žemaiši who are Lowers, live in Lithuanian lowlands. Lettigallians - letgaļi/latgaļi - Lettsiders/Letenders, they live on the side/end of Letts. Just North of Lithuanians. Compare to Leišmale - archaic way how Latvians called borderlands with Lithuania - Leiši side. Lettimallians :)

----------


## arvistro

> Arivistro, you're so enthusiastic about your theory, so I don't want to spoil it. But the general explanation is that all N1C1 were just there in the Lithuanian territory from Narva culture times...


I know the general explanation. I propose new one.

----------


## Kristiina

Here you have a photo from Lieto (a place in southwestern Finland)
http://anninaruottu.fi/lieto/

Here you have a photo from the river Neris (Lietava) next to the town Kernavė
http://regular.neregetalietuva.lt/nuotrauka.en.php?id=9

This Finnish toponym ”Lieto” goes back to the form "leeto" (in the Middle Ages Lethe). It is near the Estonian "leede" (sand bank). In any case, the majority of toponyms in the Lieto area are derived from Estonian words (for example Loukinainen and Moisio).

My etymological dictionary says that the Estonian word ”leede” means ”sand beach” and ”sand bar/bank” and the Google translation is sand bar. This word is found in all Finnic languages with the following meanings: Inkeri ”silt”, Karelian ”sand on the beach, beach, silt”, Lyydi ”sand”, Vepsian ”sand, silt, sand on the beach”, Vatja (dry) sand on the beach, Liivi ”drift sand”.

This root may have a wide distribution in Europe, and, in fact, I noticed that there is also the Italian word ”lido” of unknown origin, as well as the Latin word ”litus”, both meaning coast, beach and riverside. In any case, the meaning in Finnic (Estonian, Finnish) languages fits very well the geography related to toponyms Lietava, Lithuania and Latvia, although you are right that I should perhaps argue that ”Lietava” means only river side and Latvians would then mean “river side gallians”. However, the meaning of a meadow along the river is not very far, and many etymologies usually allow much more far-fetched comparisons. 

In any case, the Baltic area and Finnic area (=the area around the Gulf of Finland) form a close cultural unity and their archaelogical history is closely linked, so I think that it is only natural that they would share the same words. Nowadays, we also know that they are genetically close to each other and share this yDNa N1c which is under examination here. 

It is funny that usually nobody wants to be associated with an East Asian male N1c but once it is detected in the modern and ancient nobility, Lithuanian N1c becomes a Norse y line and the Rurikid line becomes a Swedish y line, although these lines are rare in these countries and their origin must be Finnic (=south of the Gulf of Finland). By the way, Wikipedia tells us that Rurik’s ”N1c1 haplotype possesses the distinctive value DYS390=23, also rarely found in Scandinavia, but with the closest relatives being found in coastal Finland, among the Swedish-speaking Finns”. I would suggest that Rurik was born somewhere on the Finnish coast, where he got involved with the Varangians and, due to his success, his line spread to Sweden.

----------


## arvistro

Kristina :)
Before claiming unknown origin of Italian lido which came from Latin litus please check the wictionary:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/litus#Latin
First sentence: "Probably from Proto-Indo-European _*lei (“to flow”), perhaps the same source as the name of Lithuania." :)

_There are many words that are shared on Proto-IE level between Baltic languages and Latin.

Please also re-read my explanation on Gallians. There are no such thing in Latvian language, trust me I speak it. But we have -galieši, -gaļi, in English they would be siders or enders. Semigallians are on Žemaičai side. Lettigallians are on Lietuva side. That is it. I sometimes do bad stuff to my hair when I see a smart person coming up with Semigallians as semi Gallians :) That is absolutely unprofessional and shows that person has researched nothing on our language before proposing mysterious links. 

Also no need to create exact Lietuva, for etimilogy purposes root "let", "liet", "leit" has to be proposed and later explained. There is this nice Baltic word "liet" - "to pour", "lietus" - "rain". Your proposal is also valid as a version. Be it mud or meadow or pouring water, all are valid versions. I prefer leičai version, since we call Lithuanian "leitis" and Lithuania "leišmale" since long, long times ago.

I think when you say "among the Sweddish-speaking Finns" I agree with you. But I would go farther than that. Have you heard of Kvenland? According to map on this site Kvens (which later became Sweddish speaking Finns) lived in Northern 2/3 of Sweden + Finland at early viking times.
http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingLi...viaFinland.htm

Also I have noticed another thing paternally.
L550+L1025- can be found in Scandinavia, around Uppsala
L550+L1025+, M2783- also can be found in Scandinavia, around Uppsala, but those are very rare cases
L550+L1025+M2783+ it is Baltic clade.

It seems that L1025 tribe suffered heavy losses somewhere at viking ages. The L1025 clan M2783 who went into South Baltics survived in big numbers. The L1025 clan Y4706 which stayed in FennoScandia was heavily beaten, almost dissappeared. It is so rare that not long ago (few months ago) everyone thought simply L1025 was South Baltics. 

I think a lot of surprises await us once ancient dna from both sides of Baltics appear. First, everyone will be surprised to see no South Baltic clade in Balts in early AD samples. Second, everyone will be surprised seeing much more N1C1 in Sweden in early AD samples (in upper 2/3 of Sweden). And I will be all smiles: "I told ya!" :)

----------


## Ukko

> Kristina :)
> Before claiming unknown origin of Italian lido which came from Latin litus please check the wictionary:
> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/litus#Latin
> First sentence: "Probably from Proto-Indo-European _*lei (“to flow”), perhaps the same source as the name of Lithuania." :)
> 
> _There are many words that are shared on Proto-IE level between Baltic languages and Latin.
> 
> Please also re-read my explanation on Gallians. There are no such thing in Latvian language, trust me I speak it. But we have -galieši, -gaļi, in English they would be siders or enders. Semigallians are on Žemaičai side. Lettigallians are on Lietuva side. That is it. I sometimes do bad stuff to my hair when I see a smart person coming up with Semigallians as semi Gallians :) That is absolutely unprofessional and shows that person has researched nothing on our language before proposing mysterious links. 
> 
> ...



The 550 and 1025 people are in Finland, deep inland in old family lines, not in Swedish speaking areas.
At the time you are speaking about there where no Swedish speakers in Finland!
*The areas where that are now Swedish speaking have toponomy from originally Finnish names or the areas where under the sea at the time!
*
In 500-1000AD all of modern Finland was dominated by Finnish language, Sami in the more remote parts.




> The L1025 clan Y4706 which stayed in FennoScandia was heavily beaten, almost dissappeared.


Event that would fit this is Briger Jarls occupation of West Finland after he had decimated the Svea/Uppsala nobels

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sparrs%C3%A4tra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Swedish_Crusade




> Birger Jarl seems to have headed for Finland just after having both crushed theFolkung uprising of 1247-1248 and finalized the Treaty of Lödöse with Norway earlier in the summer of 1249.
> Sweden's previous attempts to gain a foothold in Estonia in 1220 may have urged Sweden to settle for what was still available. Eric's Chronicle also points out the threat from Russians, mentioning that the "Russian king" had now lost the conquered land.


I like that you think out of the box but you really should study the period in Finland and Estonia more.

----------


## Ukko

Also look at the Svea and Geats, Skara was the center of Geats, Uppsala the Sveas, they where not the same and Sveas dominated the Geats.

Birger Jarl was an Geat and basically started a coup e'etat, he ended the old Uppsala domain, he basically broke the constitution with the help of foreign mercenaries.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uppsala_%C3%B6d*

----------


## Sile

> Here you have a photo from Lieto (a place in southwestern Finland)
> http://anninaruottu.fi/lieto/
> 
> Here you have a photo from the river Neris (Lietava) next to the town Kernavė
> http://regular.neregetalietuva.lt/nuotrauka.en.php?id=9
> 
> This Finnish toponym ”Lieto” goes back to the form "leeto" (in the Middle Ages Lethe). It is near the Estonian "leede" (sand bank). In any case, the majority of toponyms in the Lieto area are derived from Estonian words (for example Loukinainen and Moisio).
> 
> My etymological dictionary says that the Estonian word ”leede” means ”sand beach” and ”sand bar/bank” and the Google translation is sand bar. This word is found in all Finnic languages with the following meanings: Inkeri ”silt”, Karelian ”sand on the beach, beach, silt”, Lyydi ”sand”, Vepsian ”sand, silt, sand on the beach”, Vatja (dry) sand on the beach, Liivi ”drift sand”.
> ...


The Italian word for beach is not Lido, it is SPIAGGIA

the venetian word for beach is LIDO

according to Paabo, venetic language originates from Finnic

----------


## Kristiina

Forget that ”gallian” in my proposal if it disturbs you. I took it directly from Wikipedia (_Latgalians, sometimes also Ancient Latvians (Latin: Lethi, Letthigalli, Low German: Letti, Lethi, modern Latvian: latgaļi, letgaļi, leti, variant translations also include Latgallians, Lettigalls or Lettigallians_) and left it there, because I was not proposing any etymology to it. You did it yourself and I appreciate it.

Moreover, I remind you that first you proposed yourself that Lithuania and Latvia go back to the same word: ”In time from Norse 'leit', East Baltic form 'liet' would appear for Lietuva. From 'let' (Letten, letiņš) used by German overlords 'lat' would be derived for Latvija.”

I do not think that Finland Swedes agree with you and argue that they came from Kvenland (=from the North, even from Lapland), and their original yDNA was the Karelian or Saami N1c or a more autochtonous northern y line that may have disappeared altogether. Neither am I convinced that this Rurikid y line that is found in coastal Swedish speaking Finns is a new migrant y line from Sweden. Usually Finland Swedes are considered autochtonous inhabitants of the Finnish coast. Moreover, I would imagine that it was a big advantage for Rurik in Novgorod area if he was fluent in both Swedish and Finnish.

IE-languages are spoken almost everywhere in Europe and they have been in contact with all languages of Europe, so this means that you can argue that almost all words in Europe are IE words if the criterium is that they are found at least in a few languages. In my opinion, IE-languages are a behemoth or a black hole which is gobbling up everything on its way.

----------


## arvistro

Kristina, Kvenland included 2/3 of Sweden + West Finland in some maps, not the far North.
Ukko, thanks, I will read on Birger Jarl more. 
I am focused on Uppsala because archeology shows Baltic finds of Viking age to be related to Sweddish area around Uppsala. It could be that L1025 clans lived around there and got decimated or fled to Finland. 
Btw those L1025 samples that are not m2782 that I had seen, had Sweddish surnames? Can you check on your sources how many Swe and Fin surnames are there?
Kristina, Ukko, trust me I admire your nation. And always root for Finland in ice hockey (that is after Latvia ofc). 
I see Norse culture as blend of Germanic+Finnic. Not as Germanic enemy of Finnic. 
And now I started to see L1025 Finnic tribe as one of co-creators of Norse. They lived on Roslagen islands and perhaps spoke some heavily norsified finnic dialects, like paralel with Old Prussian samples from XVIII century that were bland of Germanic/Baltic, their names though were Germanic then. 
They were the first to be hit by the infamous Birger, right?

----------


## Ukko

> Kristina, Kvenland included 2/3 of Sweden + West Finland in some maps, not the far North.
> Ukko, thanks, I will read on Birger Jarl more. 
> I am focused on Uppsala because archeology shows Baltic finds of Viking age to be related to Sweddish area around Uppsala. It could be that L1025 clans lived around there and got decimated or fled to Finland. 
> Btw those L1025 samples that are not m2782 that I had seen, had Sweddish surnames? Can you check on your sources how many Swe and Fin surnames are there?
> Kristina, Ukko, trust me I admire your nation. And always root for Finland in ice hockey (that is after Latvia ofc). 
> I see Norse culture as blend of Germanic+Finnic. Not as Germanic enemy of Finnic. 
> And now I started to see L1025 Finnic tribe as one of co-creators of Norse. They lived on Roslagen islands and perhaps spoke some heavily norsified finnic dialects, like paralel with Old Prussian samples from XVIII century that were bland of Germanic/Baltic, their names though were Germanic then. 
> They were the first to be hit by the infamous Birger, right?



Thanks but this is not some nationalistic issue for me, previously I was sure they where pure Swedes , lately I have started to doubt as the pattern of the migration does not make much sense.
I think I will change my mind many times before this is sorted.

I read a Swedish re-analysis from Svealand archeological finds and the Swedish author suspected a Norse-Finnic hybrid culture so there is talk around this.
Finnish is a very similar to germanic culture, actually the language is the only thing separating us, but the cultural flow from Finnic to Norse would be news.

It is very important to find out when the N1c got in to Svea proper and the Uppsala area, also Gotland, it also has almost 10% N1c.

There really is no good map on Kvenland but the regions in modern Finland where all Finnic in this period, there is no question about it by any expert.
Norse was lingua franca but nothing more, even Åland was in majority Finnish speaking until the end of Viking Age.

Are you talking about the historical surnames or present ones?
If you are talking about historical names then you wont find any Finnis names, they where almost all written down in the Swedish from.

----------


## mihaitzateo

> The Italian word for beach is not Lido, it is SPIAGGIA
> 
> the venetian word for beach is LIDO
> 
> according to Paabo, venetic language originates from Finnic


Oh so this is why Venetians built their city on water?
To remind them of the swamps from where they came?
 :Laughing: 
I would remind you another word Italian aqua,Romanian apa and Finnish aapa meaning acording to Kristiina some kind of swamp.
Maybe this word is also Fino-Ugrian influence in Romanian and Italian,who knows.
Romanian apa - Italian acqua - means water.

----------


## arvistro

I read Gotland was "cleaned" by Teutones Order, so unless there was later inflow of N, which btw is possible, 10% is what was left uncleaned. 
On L1025+ m2782-, I think the guys that I had seen with this particular set up had Sweddish surnames and lived around Uppsala, although I recall few Finnish as well. I will check once more, info should be in relevant topics at molgen forum. 
About how N got in Swe I don't know yet, but Liivi in Latvia survived best and for longest on the sea side. Even until early XX century some fisher villages. 
History of N in Sweden is a new subject for me and intriguing one. My knowledge on SWE history and filology is low, a lot of reading ahead.

----------


## arvistro

Although I know one thing for sure. It is the loss of -az for male names after 500ad in Norse. I don't insist on that yet, but it could be explained by rather large non-native population that started use Norse.
What is also known is general depopulation of Europe after 500 AD. Wiki - extreme weather conditions (forgot the year) + Justinian plague (I hope I had it right). Around 50% of population was lost. So, if Germanic folk had hard times, maybe Finnic folk survived harsh times better and pushed South.
Or even better. It was always there. The Kvenland map that I think you showed on Eupedia matches perfectly borders of two different forest types. Same forest types divided IE (Balts) and FU tribes on Eastern Baltic since bronze age. 
Just guessing above.

----------


## gyms

> Oh so this is why Venetians built their city on water?
> To remind them of the swamps from where they came?
> 
> I would remind you another word Italian aqua,Romanian apa and Finnish aapa meaning acording to Kristiina some kind of swamp.
> Maybe this word is also Fino-Ugrian influence in Romanian and Italian,who knows.
> Romanian apa - Italian acqua - means water.


What about the river name Oka?

----------


## gyms

> The Italian word for beach is not Lido, it is SPIAGGIA
> 
> the venetian word for beach is LIDO
> 
> according to Paabo, venetic language originates from Finnic


According to Vékony Gábor Vistula Veneti were Finno-Ugric people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%A1bor_V%C3%A9kony

----------


## LeBrok

> According to Vékony Gábor Vistula Veneti were Finno-Ugric people.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%A1bor_V%C3%A9kony


We might never know who they really were, especially if scholars can't even agree on exact location. In future through genetic testing of peoples through history we might be able to put some picture together who was who, and where did they go.

----------


## arvistro

Ukko, after extensive reading and search of Sweddish viking historical info in wiki I think I found something. I need to consolidate my findings, but currently fingers I found point to this:
1. There was a *Yingling Dynasty in Sweden that came from Eastern Land (Finland)*. It was proto-historical thing. The last king was Ingjald Illrade according to most historians. But there is another variant - _Moreover, both in Icelandic sources and in the Gesta Danorum, king Sigurd Ring would become the ancestor of the houses of Ragnar Lodbrok and would thus be the semi-legendary ancestor of the House of Munsö through Björn Ironside_ (wiki)
2. *House of Munso ruled from 750/800 until 1060*, (*Rurik got to rule Rus in 862*) end of this dynasty marks few things:
a) according to wiki: diplomacy between Varyangian Kingdom of Russia and Sweden Tribes ceased around 1050
b) throne went into hands of dynasty from Vastergotland (Stenkils) who were keen on promotion of Christianity

Those events (throne) apparently also added some propeller to I1 clade popularity in Sweden, since another Geat clan king Birger Jarl was found I1 and I1 hotspot seems to be former Geat lands in Sweden.

As usual some speculations:
- Apparently since Yinglings time who held throne in Uppsala, N1C1 was there, and Munso Dynasty was N1C1. Problem to direct descending from Yinglings is Ragnar Lodbrok as piece in the chain. If that guy was N1C1, I suppose much more N1C1 blood would be around also in Western countries.
- Russian Varrangians knew this and were also N1C1 related clans. Probably Rurik even was from the Munso line directly. Prussian/Lithuanian Neman trade company probably was related clan. Relations ceased between Rus and Swe when Geats assumed throne.
- With rather big certainty one can say they were not Finnish speaking as first language by then. As attested by viking dynasties in their host countries, they assimilated in few generations. Yinglings were in Norse for centuries.

The above should be reassessed and events that led to decline of N1C1 folk in Sweden should be found. As I mentioned somewhere L1025 tribe, for example, had this destiny - M2782+ clan got much life in Balts, the other clan/clans are now limited to very little folk. 

Need more investigation. A lot more ancient dna. But things start to make sense.

----------


## Kristiina

Arvisto, I am not at all so well acquainted with history, but, of course, I have nothing against your above findings. In any case, I think that there are still many many new things to learn about history and I hope that the genetic testing will greatly help us.

----------


## arvistro

Thanks, Kristina. Let's hope some day they dig up a guy from early mythical yinglings, burial places are known. For example, king Agne. And do some y-dna testing.

Ukko, can you provide source of Finnic-Norse hybrid archeological finds you mentioned? Was it by any chance before 500 AD and included Uppsala? 

Also I need someone to explain this pattern:
Birka (Sweden): originated mid 8th - silenced 960
Old Ladoga (Russia): founded 753 - until 950 one of the most important trade centers (wiki)
Truso (Prussia): founded end 8th - stopped 2nd half of 10th century
Kaup (Prussia): founded early 9th - flourished until end of 10th century
Alands (Finland): academics dispute over possible depopulation late 10th century.
Daugmale (Latvia): until mid 10th century it was Semigallian port, after that mixed Liivi, Lettigallians, etc.

I could not find a source from sagas or elsewhere explaining such local Armageddon of second half 10th century. Apparently something happened. But trade did not dissappear, Sigtuna replaced Birka.
______
_In Latvia 10th century some new places were founded Jersika and Koknese, allegedly ruled by Polotsk Rurikid vassals. Polotsk was ruled then by Ragvolod (ruled 945-978). Reading on. Latvian version of wiki states - Ragvolod's grandsons from daughter line traced their line to maternal (Ragvolod) not paternal (Rurik) and explains this by Ragvolod belonging to Ynglings unlike Rurikids. But this is not in Russian or English versions, I wonder who wrote it and based on what :)

According to the Knytlingasaga and Fagrskinna, Jomsborg was built by the Danish king Harold Bluetooth (910-985/86) in the 960s.[2][10] The Jomsvikinga Sagamentions Danish Viking Palnatoki as its founder._

----------


## Ukko

> Thanks, Kristina. Let's hope some day they dig up a guy from early mythical yinglings, burial places are known. For example, king Agne. And do some y-dna testing.
> 
> Ukko, can you provide source of Finnic-Norse hybrid archeological finds you mentioned? Was it by any chance before 500 AD and included Uppsala? 
> 
> Also I need someone to explain this pattern:
> Birka (Sweden): originated mid 8th - silenced 960
> Old Ladoga (Russia): founded 753 - until 950 one of the most important trade centers (wiki)
> Truso (Prussia): founded end 8th - stopped 2nd half of 10th century
> Kaup (Prussia): founded early 9th - flourished until end of 10th century
> ...


I will try to find it but I think it was later, Viking Age Birka finds having Finnic influence, speculation on the extent of the contacts.

This is something I would like to read, please link if you can find it.

_Redating and contextualizing the mounds of Uppsala and other monumental mounds 2008_

http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:40157

Another interesting paper from Birka.

_Eastern archery in Birkas Garrison_

http://www.academia.edu/1429936/East...rka_s_Garrison

----------


## Ukko

Just found this,cant comment and will just post it here.

_The dating of Ynglingatal

_http://www.academia.edu/1342069/The_...of_Ynglingatal

----------


## arvistro

Guys, shame on me!!!! I was so obssessed looking for Scandinavs in Prussia/Lithuania that totally forgot and ignored our own Latvian site.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grobi%C5%86a (or look Grobina online)

Please read following quotes from wiki:
_During the Early Middle Ages, Grobiņa (or Grobin) was the most important political centre on the territory of Latvia. There was a centre of Scandinavian settlement on the Baltic Sea, comparable in many ways to Hedeby and Birka but probably predating them both. About 3,000 surviving burial mounds contain the most impressive remains of the Vendel Age in Northern Europe._*

*OR
_Nerman found remains of an earthwork stronghold, which had been protected on three sides by the Ālande River. Three Vendel Agecemeteries may be dated to the period between 650 and 800 AD.

_Further in text he states Gotland influence, but I need to check if Gotland culture differed from Alands (Ālande River?). I think I know or soon will know the full story. Much disputed depopulation of Alands c.a. 950 must be checked.

----------


## arvistro

In Gimbutas "Balts" she notes that Baltic finds were frequently found in *Gotland*, *Alands* and Central Sweden (*Uppsala*). Another thing is that Curonians (Baltic tribe that lived around Grobina) started to play the leading role in Baltic tribal affairs throughout viking ages. This is confirmed also with Kovalov's finds on Neman trade route where frequently among clearly Scandinavian finds he also notices Curonian ones. When I first read it (couple of post up you can read my first note on this) I thought hmm..

I am running ahead horses as usual. That is me. But this is the last updated scenario:
1. Tribe L1025+ lives on Aland islands
2. Clan M2782+ moves to Grobina (Curland) ~600-800 AD
....
3. After 750 AD. Same folk gets involved in Neman trade route, Truso and also Kaup in later centuries. Not only this folk, other varyags and locals too, but I believe initial managers were those guys. Either local Grobina's folk or new arrivals from Alands/Uppsala.
...
4. After 950 AD. Danish King Bluetooth and Norwegian king Hakon raided Baltics and "changed operators" of Baltic Sea trade. Truso stopped 950, Birka stopped 950, Daugmale went from Semigallian hands into Livonian/Latgalian mix, end of 10th century, On Daugava Polotsk rulers built two more forts Koknese and Jersika on 10th century, Old Ladoga lost importance end of 10th century. Archeological finds stop at Aland islands after 950.

_note: 
on 1 - is my assumption based on Ālande (Spelled like Aalande) river in Grobiņa, and Aland, Gotland, Uppland triangle for Baltic finds. 
on 2 - is my assumption based on 'M2782+' popularity in Baltics, 'M2782-' clan/clans stayed in Alands
on 3 - other varyag folk of course also was present, just like local Balts, West Slavs, East Slavs, etc. But I believe main role was M2782+.
on 4 - this is the wildest assumption. Can't find on sagas about Birka's decline. But I found in some sources about Danish/Norwegian friendship and their common raids in Baltics ca 970. Also archeology shows all my mentioned declines/changes at the same period. Sagas on Uppsala kings from 900-1000 are silent. The ones that I found. Some king names are mentioned, but without much extra info. As if nothing really happened. On other hand I might be wrong, if those declines were related to Danes or Norges, then their sagas would feature those events with much pride :) So, maybe, nothing really happened?_

----------


## Ukko

> In Gimbutas "Balts" she notes that Baltic finds were frequently found in *Gotland*, *Alands* and Central Sweden (*Uppsala*). Another thing is that Curonians (Baltic tribe that lived around Grobina) started to play the leading role in Baltic tribal affairs throughout viking ages. This is confirmed also with Kovalov's finds on Neman trade route where frequently among clearly Scandinavian finds he also notices Curonian ones. When I first read it (couple of post up you can read my first note on this) I thought hmm..
> 
> I am running ahead horses as usual. That is me. But this is the last updated scenario:
> 1. Tribe L1025+ lives on Aland islands
> 2. Clan M2782+ moves to Grobina (Curland) ~600-800 AD
> ....
> 3. After 750 AD. Same folk gets involved in Neman trade route, Truso and also Kaup in later centuries. Not only this folk, other varyags and locals too, but I believe initial managers were those guys. Either local Grobina's folk or new arrivals from Alands/Uppsala.
> ...
> 4. After 950 AD. Danish King Bluetooth and Norwegian king Hakon raided Baltics and "changed operators" of Baltic Sea trade. Truso stopped 950, Birka stopped 950, Daugmale went from Semigallian hands into Livonian/Latgalian mix, end of 10th century, On Daugava Polotsk rulers built two more forts Koknese and Jersika on 10th century, Old Ladoga lost importance end of 10th century. Archeological finds stop at Aland islands after 950.
> ...



What where the Baltic Finns doing at this time?

----------


## arvistro

I copy link of this here. Since it may be relevant to whole issue. It is about climate catastrophy of 536/537 and its consequences. ca 50% population loss in Estonia, Latvia, South Sweden, Norway, North Germany (everywhere where land cultivation was major source of food); but almost no loss in Finland. End of old trade networks, beginning of new trade networks operated by Finns without middlemen in Estonia or Scandinavia. 
http://www.kirj.ee/public/Archaeolog...14-1-30-56.pdf

----------


## arvistro

This not to be taken extremely serious, but nevertheless interesting.

Reading Simmon Grunnaw's chronicle. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Grunau

Obviously this chronicle is full of legends.

So, in general his story is this:
1. Some folk was replaced from Britania to Scandinavia by Drusus (apparently some Roman guy)
2. Apparently some of that folk in turn had to withdraw from Scandinavia to Cymbria (which later in text is defined as modern Gothland)
3. Early 6th Century Goths lost to Justinian and had to withdraw from Ravenna. They asked for place to live and Danish king let them live in Cymbria, since folk that lived there would not pay taxes to Danish king.
4. Goths went to Cymbria and renamed it into Gothland later, but* Cymbrians (former Gothland folk) had a choice to obey Goths or leave*
5. *Cymbrians (46,000 folk) went to Ulmiganea (Prussia), build castles and became their overlords*
6. Bruten and Widewut were two Cymbrian brothers who became kings in Prussia, Widewut of course had 12 sons who were named in 12 Prussian tribal names :) and ruled 12 tribes, *including Lithuania*
7. Interesting that they mention, when first nobles of joint nation was of Cymbrian origin their name would end on -o (neuter?), but when first locals would get to nobility -s (Baltic origin). 
8. He mentions use of (pagan) religion to unite and make local folk obey Widewut/Bruten.

I have no idea if Gothland was ever called Cymbria or if Cymbrians have anything to do with Prussians or Goths whatsoever. Also if Goths had anything to do with Gothland. Obviously king having 12 children and hence 12 tribal names is also a legend. 
But known thing is Grobiņa (large scale Scandinavian colony in Curland, Seeborg), where _"About 3,000 surviving burial mounds contain the most impressive remains of the Vendel Age in Northern Europe.". 
"Three Vendel Age cemeteries may be dated to the period between 650 and 800 AD. One of them was military in character and analogous to similar cemeteries in the Mälaren Valley in Central Sweden, while two others indicate that there was "a community of Gotlanders who were carrying on peaceful pursuits behind the shield of the Swedish military"."_

So my interpretation of Simon Grunau work is that probably there was some folk memory on large scale (incl ruling class) immigration from Gothland that was known to Grunau. Even centuries seem to match (after 500 in Grunau vs Vendel age cemetery dated 650).

Some other wiki quote on Simon Grunau:
_For example, he took a description of Prussian holy place Romove (Romuva temple) from Peter von Dusburg and improved it by adding an eternally green oak, decorated with portraits of three idols and guarded by vestal virgins. Scholars agree that this addition was most probably borrowed from Adam of Bremen and his description of the Temple at Uppsala.[4]_
Or alternatively - it was there because the Temple of Uppsala influenced Romove.

----------


## arvistro

Couple of other relevant items to topic in question
1) I have started to get some doubts as I noticed post from user Huck Finn from biodiversity forum on the subject. Apparently there is specific type of axes that is called Malar axes and dated to bronze age. This is distribution of axes finds (their origin could have been Volga):


Notice big red circle in Lithuania? Could this be the origin in M2782+ in Balts? Maybe.

2) Found another interesting work on viking trade in Baltics. 
http://www.academia.edu/485512/The_b...y_emporia_2010
With two pictures from there showing Arab Dirham finds. Find two differences! :) Very strange phenomenon in South Baltics:
finds dated 780-830

And
finds dated 850-900

It looks like Prussians withdrew from Viking trade route quite early. 850. Truso was still operating after that date but apparently that particular Arab trade route was closed. Also author states interesting Prussian phenomenon - there were no silver and gold finds after 850 and author states the following on page 356:
"Early Medieval  Prussian tribes were remarkably immune to influence of the Baltic region silver economy. This is known also, thanks to Adam of Bremen, who noted that Sambians and Prussians:  Aurum et Argentum pro minimo ducunt (Tschan ed. &transl.1959,199)

----------


## Ukko

> Couple of other relevant items to topic in question
> 1) I have started to get some doubts as I noticed post from user Huck Finn from biodiversity forum on the subject. Apparently there is specific type of axes that is called Malar axes and dated to bronze age. This is distribution of axes finds (their origin could have been Volga):
> 
> 
> Notice big red circle in Lithuania? Could this be the origin in M2782+ in Balts? Maybe.



Must be the Volga Norse.  :Rolleyes:

----------


## arvistro

This picture from forum molgen by user Аббат Бузони
http://s010.radikal.ru/i311/1410/4a/4ad326d5a43f.jpg

It shows lack of N1C L550+ in Galindian tribe which is somewhat outside Neman trade route and also Truso/Kaup Prussia. Maybe it has something to it.

----------


## Tomenable

> Prussians have legends of brothers Bruten and Widewut coming to Prussia and establishing statehood


There never existed any kind of statehood among Baltic-speaking Old Prussians.

----------


## Tomenable

> Obviously this chronicle is full of legends.


Written between 1517 and 1529... Not legends but rather complete fiction. And even your own link says so:




> No such manuscripts are known to exist and scholarly consensus is that the entire story was invented by Grunau.[4]


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




> It shows lack of N1C L550+ in Galindian tribe



Sorry, but this map shows haplogroups *of modern inhabitants (!)*. You are overlooking 800 years of demographic changes.

Moreover, *Peter de Dusburg* in his* "**Chronicon terrae Prussiae"*, wrote that Galindia was uninhabited already when Teutonic Knights came.

So already in 1225 Galindia had very few inhabitants. Perhaps it was due to previous Polish, Danish and Yotvingian invasions.

For example the last Danish raid against Galindia took place in year 1210 (according to *"**Liber Census Daniae"*).

It is doubtful whether Galindian tribe existed in year 1225, *before* Teutonic Knights came. Let alone after the conquest...

There were - at least until year 1267 - some groups of people, especially in eastern parts of Galindia (near modern Mrągowo and Giżycko). But there was no any organized Galindian tribe. It had been destroyed (as an organized and numerous community) already before 1225.

Galindia was in any case the most sparsely populated of Prussian territories, and became part of* Great Wilderness (die Grosse Wildnis).*

----------


## Tomenable

> Prussians have legends


Not Prussians, but German immigrants who settled in Prussia. Simon Grunau was not a native Prussian, but an ethnic German monk. 

And his "_Preußische Chronik"_ is largely modelled on various heroic stories from Ancient Graeco-Roman mythology.

Other - equally fictional and invented - early histories of Prussia were:

_"De Borvssiae antiqvitatibvs libridvo"_ - published by Erasmus Stella in 1518 (bishop of Pomesania - Hiob von Dobeneck - inspired Stella to write it).

_"De situ et origine Pruthenorum,de Livonia eiusque ortu et situ, de bello Turcarum et Hungarorum"_ - written in 1454 by future Pope Pius II.

The one written by Enea Silvio Bartolomeo Piccolomini (since 1458 known as Pope Pius II) was based on _"Getica"_ (written in 551 AD by Jordanes).

As for that 1518 work by Erasmus Stella. Stella was pro-Teutonic (he called Teutonic Knights "sanctosancta militia") and his text was a propaganda pamphlet written in order to justify German rights to Prussia. That's why he claimed that first inhabitants of Prussia were Ancient Germans.

Stella's work were his own biased interpretations of Claudius Ptolemy, Pliny, Pomponius Mela, Tacitus, Strabo, Solinus and Jordanes.

According to Stella Prussia had a history of constantly getting conquered by various tribes, and the last tribe to do so were Non-Germanic Prussians. But remnants of "native" Germanic population in Prussia survived and rebelled against their Baltic Prussian oppressors and occupiers. When they rebelled, Emperor Frederick Barbarossa (sic!) supported them and nominated as their leader certain "Konrad Duke of Massobiorum" (sic!), who was "of Old Saxon blood" (sic!). However, local "Germanic Saxons" (sic!) led by "Konrad of Massobiorum" were unable to defeat Prussians, so they invited the Teutonic Knights to help them in defeating their Prussian oppressors. This is what Erasmus Stella wrote in the 1510s, trying to legitimize German presence in Prussia.

Also S. Grunau invented fictional stories to claim "eternal Germanness" of Prussia, to justify immigration of German colonists and discrimination of Old Prussians (most of surviving Prussians were reduced to the status of serfs with no rights and later became outnumbered by immigrants). Grunau was trying to prove that Germans were native to Prussia since times immemorial, and not that they immigrated there since the 13th century.

If you read Polish then here is a good paper on Grunau's pamphlet:

http://prusowie.pl/dane/Grunau.pdf

----------


## Tomenable

What you are doing in this thread is inventing similar fairy tales, as those 16th century German monks & bishops, who persecuted Prussians. 42% of Lithuanians are not descended from any German(ic) guy, and Gediminids were a native Baltic dynasty, which (who) had nothing Germanic.

Baltic Prussians weren't ruled by any foreign elite, but by themselves. You apparently don't know that Prussians did not even have any hereditary nobility, but were a pretty democratic society in which noble status was not determined by blood, but by heroic deeds in battles (if you were a good warrior you were achieving noble status, but your children were not going to inherit that status - they also had to be good warriors to become nobles).

And nobles were around 15% of Old Prussian society (of course that percent was fluent, but an average of 15% is a reliable estimate).

East Prussian Germans were not descendants of Old Prussians, but mostly of West German immigrants, invited to Prussia by Teutonic Knights (like previously they brought in colonists to eastern Transylvania, where they had briefly ruled for a few dozen years before Hungarian kings expelled them) and established cities and villages on German law. Some native Prussians survived, but vast majority were at the bottom of the society because the Teutonic Order and the Church made them into feudal serfs with no rights, and persecuted them. Only Prussian traitors and collaborators enjoyed some privileges.

*No more than 20% up to 33% of genetic ancestry of the population of East Prussia in year 1816 could be from Old Prussians:*

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post448429

The rest of East Prussians were of immigrant stock (not only German but also Polish, Lithuanian and other), who came during 800 years.

Moreover - native Baltic population of Prussia was marginalized by the Teutonic Order and reduced largely to the role of peasant serfs.

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

*Graphs below illustrate this most optimistic (for Old Prussians) variant of 33% (but 20% - 25% is actually more realistic):*





Other includes Curonians (who settled along the Curonian Spit), Scandinavians, Jews, etc.

----------


## Tomenable

> - As attested by viking dynasties in their host countries, they assimilated in few generations.


Abraham ben Jacob, a 10th-century Iberian Jewish traveller, wrote about the Rurikid Dynasty:* "they speak Slavic, because they interbred with them."* But he did not write what language had they allegedly spoken before that, and he did not write why did he think that originally they did not speak Slavic (let's add that Abraham ben Jacob never actually visited Russia, in years 961 - 962 he personally visited Italy, Germany, the Danes, the Czechs, and the Obotrites).

Moreover, A. Bajor in his Rurikid DNA Project found the following 7 Y-DNA haplogroups among descendants of the Rurikids:

*N1c1, R1a-L260, R1a-P278, R1a-Z92, R1a-M458, R1a-Z280, I2a1
*
As you can see he found not a single "Germanic haplogroup" among them, which raises doubts if the Rurikids ever actually spoke Germanic.

He also confirmed the old theory that Oleg I of Chernigov was not biological but adopted son of Sviatoslav II of Kiev.

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

The theory that the Rurikids were Germanic by origin was first proposed by Gerhardt Friedrich Müller in 1749, but finds no confirmation in modern genetics. If there were some Germanics in service of the Rurikids is another thing. Byzantine Emperors also employed foreign mercenaries, including Scandinavians.

----------


## Tomenable

From: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451206




> IIRC Ken Nordtvedt and Vadim Verenich estimate the age of formation of I2a1b1 as 2800 years ago and its TMRCA as 2500 years ago. Place of formation was Eastern or East-Central Europe according to them. This young age combined with its presence among Slavic (especially East Slavic and South Slavic) populations and its lack of presence among Baltic populations, suggests that this mutation originally formed in one of members of the Proto-Slavic community around year 800 BCE. The time when the Balto-Slavic community split (an event illustrated by the graph below), forming Proto-Slavs and the other two groups (Proto East Balts and Proto West Balts - according to Kromer's 2003 theory) has been variously estimated at between 1500 BCE and 500 BCE, but most authors place it between 1400 and 1200 BCE


Interestingly, Baltic clades N-L550 and N-L1025 have similar ages and TMRCAs as I2a1b1:

N1c1a1a1a (L550): found throughout the Baltic and North Slavic countries
N1c1a1a1a1 (L1025): found especially in Balto-Slavic countries, with a peak in Lithuania and Latvia

N-L550 formed 3300 ybp, TMRCA 2700 ybp
N-L1025 formed 2700 ybp, TMRCA 2500 ybp

Now compare this to I2a1b1 which (according to Nordtvedt & Verenich) formed 2800 ybp, TMRCA 2500 ybp.

Data on distribution of N1c1a (old name N3) and R1a in Lithuania - from *Kasperaviciute 2004:*

http://genofond.invint.net/genofond....df?file_id=966



*Map (southern region marked as SA - inhabited largely by ethnic Poles - has 61,8% R1a and only 29,4% N3):*

----------


## Tomenable

*From: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups...sea/about/news*




> *SNP L1025+ isolate from N-L550+ sub-branch characteristic for* *the Balts* descendants A mutation L1025+ discovered in February 2012 in FT DNA WTY Program participant distinguishes Baltic Tribes descendants from other representatives of the N-L550+ branch. This conclusion applies not only to the modern Balts: Lithuanians and Latvians - but also to the descendants of extinct tribes West Balts: Prussians, Curonians, Yotvingians, and even to the majority of this inhabitants of the modern Belarus, which belongs to N1C1 haplogroup. This is a present look for genetic evolution of Balts:









> Picture on the link (created by S. Melnyk) show structure of N-L1025 subclade as we see it in May 2014:









> Internal STR evolution of L551+ L1025+Terminal Subclade. In my opinion the DYS557 mutation 14=>13 was the first step in splitting the subclade and thus making it a very important marker. In the earlier work of Vladimir Volkov (2012, Nov.) this marker was not used in his calculations.

----------


## Ukko

Anyone know where from is YF03409 ?

http://www.yfull.com/tree/N-VL29/

----------


## Tomenable

N1c haplogroup was found in a burial of *Zhizhitskaya culture* at Serteya (Smolensk Oblast, Russia), from ca. year 2500 BC.

Check: Chekunova E. M. et. al. (2014), The first results of genetic typing of local population and ancient humans in Upper Dvina region, in A. Mazurkevich, M. Polkovnikova and E. Dolbunova (eds.), Archaeology of lake settlement IV-II mill. BC, pp. 290-294.

Actually, two samples of N1c were found there - that from Zhizhitskaya culture from 2500 BC, and another, younger sample:

http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...Uralics/page12




> Younger N1c is from "Long Barrows" culture, older is from neolithic Zhizhitskaya
> culture (never heard about it before). Zhizhitskaya culture is at least partially derived from Comb Ceramic horizon.
> 
> About archeological context and time frame. If I'm reading the confusing map correctly, the Zhizhitskaya folks are sitting in the crossroads of Globular Amphora, Corded Ware, Fatyanovo and Yamna

----------


## bicicleur

> Couple of other relevant items to topic in question
> 1) I have started to get some doubts as I noticed post from user Huck Finn from biodiversity forum on the subject. Apparently there is specific type of axes that is called Malar axes and dated to bronze age. This is distribution of axes finds (their origin could have been Volga):
> 
> 
> Notice big red circle in Lithuania? Could this be the origin in M2782+ in Balts? Maybe.


any dates for this phenomenom?

could it be ca 3.2 ka?

it looks like after the Tollense battle ca 3.25 ka battle Norse people were at war with Urnfield people 
they didn't get any metal ores from the Carpathian basin any more
they set out some expeditions to find the Caucasus ores

----------


## arvistro

Hm. Actually it is 1000 bce-700 bce.
Baltic M2783 has TMRCA of 600 bce.
But the impulse would come from East to West, same impulse probably brought ancestors of Baltic-Finns into Baltics. And same or related impulse apparently brought M2783 to Balts.
Do you have more info about Norse exploring Caucasus ores 1000 bce?

----------


## Norvila

Hi everyone,
I'm new to the forum, but would like to draw your attention to the matching of big group of Lithuanians to the Riurikids prices DNA.
Comparing Lituania Propria DNA Project
min-max in groups hg N (L1025+> Z16981+ & predicted) , hg N (L1025+> Z16981+ > CTS8173+/Z16980+), hg N (L1025+> Z16981+ , CTS8173-) , 
to the Rurikid Dynasty DNA Project 
111461 Puzyna kniaz Puzyna: Bazyli Hłazyna, b.c.1420, Smolensk
200703 Korybut Woroniecki Prince Lucjan Korybut Woroniecki, 1806-1875
There is matching 99 out of 102 markers.
Historically Riurikds were rulers and elite of the territory from Kiev to the Novgorod and Polock. Most likely in Lithuania also.

----------


## Norvila

There is interesting results from *Polish Y-DNA Haplogroup Summary Table* (please google).
LTNQ

6.9%
N (M231)
5.2%
N-L550
5.0%
N-M2783
4.6%
N-Z16975
1.9%











N-Z16981
1.1%



So 6,9% out of 38,53M population is 2.659M N1C1.
I think it's more than LT+LV+EE N1C1 all together.

----------


## Norvila

It is about climate catastrophy of 536/537 and its consequences. ca 50% population loss in Estonia, Latvia, South Sweden, Norway, North Germany (everywhere where land cultivation was major source of food); but almost no loss in Finland. End of old trade networks, beginning of new trade networks operated by Finns without middlemen in Estonia or Scandinavia.









There are more looses for countries with intensive agriculture than for countries where hunting is a food source.
It's easier hunting with snow, than without.
It should trigger migration to the North.

----------


## Volat

> Exactly! Before it went into Balts it was in West Finland...
> 
> Another interesting Norse Baltic link.
> According to certain Russian sources Gediminas was son of Skolmantas (one of Yatwing Princes and sorcerer).
> 
> Yatwings (before viking age known as Sudovians) etimology is now pretty much believed to come from Old Norse Jatvigr (luck in war or lucky spear). 
> It is pretty much possible that Gediminas' very early ancestor was Norseman Jatvigr, founder of Jatvings clan...
> 
> The deeper I get into this, the more of Norse I find in early Balt statehood...


A bit late to the discussion. 

There is only one Russian source that mentions ‘Skolomend’

Gradnd duke of Lithuania Algirdas had a son Andrei from marriage with Maria Yarslavna of Vitsebsk. There is a Russian chronicle Zadonshina written in late 14th early 15th century in which Andrei corresponds to his brother Dmitri "Brother Dmitri, we are two brothers, sons of Algirdas, grandsons of Gedyminas, great grandsons (pravnuki) of Skolomend"

pravnuki in Russian can also mean distant descendant.

S.C. Rowell suggests in his books Lithuania Ascending: _A Pagan Empire Within East-Central Europe, 1295-1345 (pp 54-55)_ that Skolomend could be powerful Sudovian warrior Skumantas. Also known as Skomantas in other sources. If this is true then Skomantas could be an ancestor of Gediminid dynasty. But this maybe another fanciful hypothesis.


--

Yatvyag (Yotvingian) may have Norse etymology. Unlikely, the term was a self-identification term of western Baltic tribe. This was exoethnonym applied to them in Ruthenian chronicles. Teutons had another term for them – Sudova. As per Lithuanian scholar A Tautavicius Yotvingians were divided into four groups: 

Poleksians (Slavic term)– western Balts settled around eastern Belovezha forest, just north of Brest city. They were the most southern group of Balts at the time.
Sudova were those who lived nearest to other western Balts (Prussians). Present day north-eastern Poland. 
Dainava lived in today’s southern Lithania and north-western Belarus. Dainava was also an ethnographic region of southern Lithuania. The guys who have plenty of R1a1.
Yotvingians were western Balts of present day western Belarus and eastern Poland

_Tautavicius A. Jotvingiai, dainaviai, sOduviai, poleksnai ir... / Lietuvos mokslas, II tomas, 1 (2) knyga. Vilnius, 1994, p. 4-14._.

----------


## Volat

> I would propose a different etymology for the name Lithuania that would also explain Latvia and Livonia. Wikipedia tells us that ”since the word Lietuva has a suffix (-uva), the original word should have no suffix. A likely candidate is Lietā. Because many Baltic ethnonyms originated from hydronyms, linguists have searched for its origin among local hydronyms. Usually such names evolved through the following process: hydronym → toponym → ethnonym. A small river not far from Kernavė, the core area of the early Lithuanian state and a possible first capital of the would-be Grand Duchy of Lithuania, is usually credited as the source of the name. This river's original name is Lietava. Kernavė is a small town in the southeastern part of Lithuania, in Širvintos district, located on the right bank of the river Neris, on the upper Neris terrace.”


 I like the hypothesis about Lithuania being derived from a hydronym. The root of the word 'Lit-' , 'Liet-' , 'Lyut-' is common in Baltic and Slavic languages. For example, there is a toponym in Slovakia 'Lytva’. 

Many archaeologists associate East Lithuanian barrow culture with a group of eastern Balts that were known as Litva in Ruthenian chronicle. A group of eastern Balts that established the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the mid 13th century. That group of east Baltic people that gave the name to the state and ethnonym to Balts of different origins living on territories of present day Lithuania.

Geographic location of original Lithuania was in the basin of Neris river. The old name of Neris river is Vilia . Vilia s a Baltic hydronym. Belarusians still call the river this way. Vilnius city derives its name from the river Vilia. But that’s another story. 


Geographic location of East Lithuanian barrow culture. PS I cannot post the links until I get 10 posts. Just add URI in front of the link


cs407522.vk.me/v407522071/5b9c/R1Gkixp4y_4.jpg

----------


## Volat

> Arivistro, you're so enthusiastic about your theory, so I don't want to spoil it. But the general explanation is that all N1C1 were just there in the Lithuanian territory from Narva culture times...


We now know the clade that the Balts have is N1c1-M2783. The mutation of M2783 occurred 2,500 years before present. It's too young for the Narva culture. But you may be right and some N1c1 carrier lived in Narva culture. Ancient DNA from Lithuania has already been done. We have to wait until the results are released.

----------


## Volat

Archaeological cultures on territories of modern day Lithuania in chronological order.



Swiderian culture 11K-8.2K BC Paleoeuropeans.
Neman culture. Southern Lithuania. 7K-5KBC. Paleoeuropeans
Kunda culture 8K-5K BC. Paleoeuropeans.
Narva culture 5.3K-1.75K BC. Paleoeuropeans.
Comb ceramic culture 4.2K-2K BC. In the past scholars considered this culture Finno-Ugric. Nowadays many scholars hold an opinion that this culture was also paleoeuropean, as Finnish linguists suggest that proto-Finnic language spread into Baltic shores only 3,000 ybp (1K BC).
Corded ware culture 3.2K-2.3K BC. Earliest Indo-Europeans
Zhutsevskaya culture was a local variant of Corded ware culture. 3K-2K BC. Earlieast Indo-Europeans.
Sambian barrow culture 6BC-1AD. Western Lithuania. Early western Balts
West Baltic barrow culture 5BC-1AD. Western Lithuania . Early western Balts
Stroked-pottery culture 7BC-5AD. Central and eastern Lithuania . Early eastern Balts
East Lithuanian barrow culture 5AD-12AD . South-eastern Lithuania. Eastern Balts
Stone barrow culture 4AD-13AD . South-west Lithuanians . Western Balts (Dainava, Yotvingians)

----------


## LeBrok

Very informative posts Volat. Welcome to Eupedia.

----------


## Norvila

> Archaeological cultures on territories of modern day Lithuania in chronological order.
> 
> 
> 
> Swiderian culture 11K-8.2K BC Paleoeuropeans.
> Neman culture. Southern Lithuania. 7K-5KBC. Paleoeuropeans
> Kunda culture 8K-5K BC. Paleoeuropeans.
> Narva culture 5.3K-1.75K BC. Paleoeuropeans.
> Comb ceramic culture 4.2K-2K BC. In the past scholars considered this culture Finno-Ugric. Nowadays many scholars hold an opinion that this culture was also paleoeuropean, as Finnish linguists suggest that proto-Finnic language spread into Baltic shores only 3,000 ybp (1K BC).
> ...



I should correct Volan
Formation of East Lithuania Barrow Culture begins

in the late second – early third century (the first stage:

phases B2–C1/C1a – till phase D1). The process was pro-

voked and directly influenced by migration of west Baltic people from the south-western territories 
ISSN 1392–6748

----------


## Norvila

Please consider statistics 
Lithuania has 840 hill forts, 792 of them comes from Roman and Migration periods (A.Bliujienė 2013, Zabiela)
LV - 470, EE - 90(?) from Final Iron Age hill forts (Tvauri 2012).
So LT has 2 times higher density of hill forts than neighbors and 4 times EE.
Timing matches with East Lithuania and Stone barrow cultures also Migration period.
There are papers stating cultures expanded North.

----------


## Norvila

*A History of the Baltic States Andres Kasekamp on Google books*

browse "Hillforts were errected first in Lithuania in the Early Roman Age" (sorry I'm not allowed to post screenshots nor links)

----------


## Volat

The map of Baltic hydronyms below is based on research done by several leading linguists from Lithuania and Russia. The inner area shows a large number of Baltic hydronyms, while the outer area shows few Baltic hydronyms on the map.

Add URI in front of link.

4.bp.blogspot.com/-9-DFhfz1jUs/Unq3NwdmRGI/AAAAAAAAAGA/7gRv8ZrmlK4/s1600/kalba-zemel.jpg


Archaeological cultures listed below are widely considered Baltic by archaeologists. The Baltic archaeological cultures located in Lithuania, Latvia, north-eastern Poland, Belarus , western Russia are coinciding with the area of Baltic hydronyms. These are

Western Baltic Barrow and related cultures
Sambian barrow culture 6BC-1AD.
Stroked-pottery culture 7BC-5AD
Dniepr-Dvina cultures 8BC-4AD
Moshinskaya culture 4AD-6AD related to Dniepr-Dvina culture
Upper-Oka culture of Iron age related to dniepr-Dvina culture
Milograd culture 7BC-1AD
Yukhnovskaya culture 5BC-2BC
Eastern Lithuanian barrow culture 3AD-12AD
Bantser-tushemlya archeological culture – 4AD-6AD
Stone barrow culture 4AD-13AD
Possibly Kolichinsk (5AD-7AD) and Kiev (2AD-5AD) archaeological cultures.


PS The dating of archaeological cultures is approximate.

----------


## Norvila

> I like the hypothesis about Lithuania being derived from a hydronym. The root of the word 'Lit-' , 'Liet-' , 'Lyut-' is common in Baltic and Slavic languages. For example, there is a toponym in Slovakia 'Lytva’. 
> 
> Many archaeologists associate East Lithuanian barrow culture with a group of eastern Balts that were known as Litva in Ruthenian chronicle. A group of eastern Balts that established the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the mid 13th century. That group of east Baltic people that gave the name to the state and ethnonym to Balts of different origins living on territories of present day Lithuania.
> 
> Geographic location of original Lithuania was in the basin of Neris river. The old name of Neris river is Vilia . Vilia s a Baltic hydronym. Belarusians still call the river this way. Vilnius city derives its name from the river Vilia. But that’s another story. 
> 
> 
> Geographic location of East Lithuanian barrow culture. PS I cannot post the links until I get 10 posts. Just add URI in front of the link
> 
> ...


Theories are up to like or dislike.
But I should quote "there is no other country name derived from hydronim" (S.Karaliūnas "Baltų etnonimai" 2015).
So this version is quite speculative.
CZ + SK has 4 Litava rivers + one Leitha / Litava on other side of Danube near Viena.
There massive bunch of antonyms with Lit- there and in C.Europe.

----------


## Volat

> Theories are up to like or dislike.
> But I should quote "there is no other country name derived from hydronim" (S.Karaliūnas "Baltų etnonimai" 2015).
> So this version is quite speculative.
> CZ + SK has 4 Litava rivers + one Leitha / Litava on other side of Danube near Viena.
> There massive bunch of antonyms with Lit- there and in C.Europe.


The hypothesis is plausible described by many scholars.

Balts didn't have their writing for a long time leaving no written evidence about themselves from earliest times. In earliest Ruthenian chronicles Lithuania or more correctly litъva (ъ is short 'a' which is no longer used in literally East Slavic languages) was applied to a group of east Baltic people. Thus, in the Tale of Bygone Years (Primary Chronicle) compiled in Kiev around 1113 by monk Nestor 'litъva' people are mentioned en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle

Excerpt from Primary Chronicle. Use google translator if needed.

_В Иафетовой же части сидят русские, чудь и всякие народы: меря, мурома, весь, мордва, заволочская чудь, пермь, печера, ямь, угра, литва, зимигола, корсь, летгола, ливы. Ляхи же и пруссы, чудь сидят близ моря Варяжского.

литва - Litva (Balts)
зимигола - Semigalians (Balts)
корсь - Curonians (Balts)
летгола - Latgalians (Balts)_

In other early chrincles 'litva' was applied to people too.

Later, the name Litva was applied to the state. It is also known that many people identified themselves after the regions in which they lived. Thus neighbouring Slavic tribe of northern Belarus 'Polochans' were named after Polota river. Slavic tribe Buzhane were named after Bug river. As the previous poster suggested Baltic tribes also had identification terms after rivers. I cannot think of many example. Litva (Lietuva) is one the example.

In this case hydronym -> ethnonym -> country name.

----------


## Norvila

It's seems we've lost original topic.
Avistro thinks variags could brought N1C1 to the Baltics, That's plausible.
I point there was earlier inflow of the people - 2-3CAC and then massive Migration period that changed archeological cultures all over Europe and Scandinavia.

As to the Litva/Leita A.Dobonis published "LDK leičiai" research in 1995. This become official theory since then accepted by historians and linguistics. 
Google book *Foreword to the Past– A Cultural History of the Baltic People*

Autorius (-iai): Endre Bojtár

----------


## Volat

> It's seems we've lost original topic.
> Avistro thinks variags could brought N1C1 to the Baltics, That's plausible.
> I point there was earlier inflow of the people - 2-3CAC and then massive Migration period that changed archeological cultures all over Europe and Scandinavia.
> 
> As to the Litva/Leita A.Dobonis published "LDK leičiai" research in 1995. This become official theory since then accepted by historians and linguistics. 
> Google book *Foreword to the Past– A Cultural History of the Baltic People*
> 
> Autorius (-iai): Endre Bojtár


 Avistro stated this 2 years ago. Since then he learned many things and probably changed his mind about migration path of N1c1.

1. N1c1 came into east Baltic from the East.
2. The earliest known N1c1 is found in western Smolensk (Zhizhitskaya culture 4, 500 years before present). Right on the border of Russia and Belarus in the basin of Dvina (Daugava) river.

Likely, N1c1 traveled in Scandinavia from Finland. Although Finns have their own subclades of N1c1 , Few Finns also share subclade of N1c1 similar to that found in Rurikid. 

Gediminid and Rurikid do not share the same subclade Although both had a common ancestor.

----------


## Volat

According to Lithuanian anthropologist Gintautas Chesnis there was a migration from Scandinavia to Lithuania in Neolithic. Other than that Scandinavians and Balts are different genetically, anthropologically, ethnographically.



PS add www to the following link


delfi.lt/news/daily/lithuania/lietuviu-proteviai-skandinavai-o-pusbroliai-baltarusiai.d?id=20646059

----------


## arvistro

> Avistro stated this 2 years ago. Since then he learned many things and probably changed his mind about migration path of N1c1.
> 
> 1. N1c1 came into east Baltic from the East.
> 2. The earliest known N1c1 is found in western Smolensk (Zhizhitskaya culture 4, 500 years before present). Right on the border of Russia and Belarus in the basin of Dvina (Daugava) river.
> 
> Likely, N1c1 traveled in Scandinavia from Finland. Although Finns have their own subclades of N1c1 , Few Finns also share subclade of N1c1 similar to that found in Rurikid. 
> 
> Gediminid and Rurikid do not share the same subclade Although both had a common ancestor.


Yes, that is correct. What made (some) sense 2 years ago, does not make much sense now. 
My current belief is N-L1025 came into Baltics together with art of metals and fortification that also brought Baltic Finns into region. Somewhere 1st Millenium BC.

----------


## Norvila

Arvistro,
That exactly what I came to conclusion too.
Fortifications and art of metals was standard skills of legionaries.
Nero amber expedition and Tacitus book was the turning points.

----------


## Norvila

The first smithy in Žardė hillfort near Klaipėda has C14 dates 420 -160+60 BCE.
About the same age smithies discovered in S.Finland with later roman artifacts.

----------


## Volat

> There are papers stating cultures expanded North.


In my opinion migrations into eastern Baltic occurred along waterways. Into Latvia along Dzvina (Daugava) river from western Russia and northern Belarus. Into Lithuania along Neman and Vilia (Neris) rivers from Belarus.

----------


## Norvila

> In my opinion migrations into eastern Baltic occurred along waterways. Into Latvia along Dzvina (Daugava) river from western Russia and northern Belarus. Into Lithuania along Neman and Vilia (Neris) rivers from Belarus.


Please google papers on Eastern Lithuanian barrow culture (R.Lietuvos pilkapių kultūrą).

Baltic sea was the biggest waterway and free market until Danish expansion and Swedish - Novgorodian war.

Litgen project clearly shows more Ra1 along the river Nemunas and more N1C in N.Lithuania without transit waterways.
Then Ra1 is more common along the Daugava and N1C1 in Estonia.

I suppose this indicates Ra1 moved down by the rivers from the south were max is in Dneper basin.

----------


## Volat

> Please google papers on Eastern Lithuanian barrow culture (R.Lietuvos pilkapių kultūrą).
> 
> Baltic sea was the biggest waterway and free market until Danish expansion and Swedish - Novgorodian war.
> 
> Litgen project clearly shows more Ra1 along the river Nemunas and more N1C in N.Lithuania without transit waterways.
> Then Ra1 is more common along the Daugava and N1C1 in Estonia.
> 
> I suppose this indicates Ra1 moved down by the rivers from the south were max is in Dneper basin.


Eastern Lithuanian borrow a relatively late archaeological culture of mid and late Iron age . During Iron age there was a Slavic migration into Belarus and western Russia splitting autochthonous population (wester, eastern and Dniepr Balts). Indo-European migrations into Lithuania and Latvia happened since late Neolithic and Bronze ages. Both R1a and N1c came from the east with R1a and R1b migrating on a more southern path reaching all the way to British Isles. The Baltic sea was a natural barrier for a northern migration of N1c1.

Population geneticist Kushniarevich published a paper in which she described a migration along Neman and Pripyat' rivers. In the past people settled near the rivers to have access to water. They migrated along the rivers too.

Speaking of Balts, they were mostly inland people. The only sea-fares among the Balts that I can think of were Curonians.

----------


## Volat

There was a migration from Scandinavia into east Baltic during Bronze age. Those were proto-Germanic settling mostly in coastal (western) Finland, western Estonia and nother-western Latvia. 

Formation of Proto-Finnic – an archaeological scenario from the Bronze Age / Early Iron Age by Valter Lang, University of Tartu, Estonia. Paper was presented at International Finno-Ugric congress , 2015. http://www.oulu.fi/sites/default/files/content/CIFU12-PlenaryPapers.pdf

----------


## Volat

> Eastern Lithuanian borrow a relatively late archaeological culture of mid and late Iron age . During Iron age there was a Slavic migration into Belarus and western Russia splitting autochthonous population (wester, eastern and Dniepr Balts).


 There was a small migration into south-eastern Lithuania during Iron age. Archaeologist Valentin Sedov describes Kirivichi settlement among people of Litva. Those Kirivichi that lived around Polotsk and Vitsebsk cities. 



Litva and Krivichi , Lietuvos Archeologija. . 2001. T 21, p. 81-88. ISSN 02-07-8694 http://talpykla.istorija.lt/bitstrea...A_21_81-88.pdf

----------


## Angela

Razib Khan has just opined on the new "N" paper.

See:
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-rise-of-...polar-edition/

For convenience, here is the original paper:
http://www.cell.com/ajhg/abstract/S0002-9297(16)30160-4

----------


## Norvila

> There is interesting results from *Polish Y-DNA Haplogroup Summary Table* (please google).
> 
> LTNQ
> 6.9%
> N (M231)
> 5.2%
> N-L550
> 5.0%
> N-M2783
> ...


Calculating in absolute figures I came to conclusion there are more N1C1 people in PL+LT+LV+EE than in FI.
Should be this haplogroup called South East Baltic?

----------


## arvistro

The n1c1-M2783+ is already called like this at least unoffically.
But according to my best knowledge there are minimum cases of more basal lines of N1c1 there. Even L1025+ M2783- is no more SE Baltic.

----------


## Volat

> So 6,9% out of 38,53M population is 2.659M N1C1.
> I think it's more than LT+LV+EE N1C1 all together.



The result look from a commercial database. If that the case then the result are skewed. If I am not mistaken in few published studies with large sample size across the country the frequency of N1c1 in Polish population was between 2.2-5%.

Also, you are multiplying the entire population on frequency, while y-chromosome markers are present in male population only.

----------


## Volat

Belarusians

There is a study based on a sample size of 1086 subjects representing all ethnographic regions of Belarus proportionally. 109 out of 1085 (10%) were tested for N1c1-L550 . Back then it was call South-Baltic clade.

Russians were also in the study represented by 545 subjects from different regions of Russia. Overall frequency of N1c1 was 14% among Russians. But only 40%-50% of N1c1 (5.6%-7% overall) was N1c-L550. Other clades were similar to those found in Ural and Karelia. 

Source: _Белорусы: этногенез и связь с другими славянскими народами с позиции ДНК-генеалогии (2011)


_

----------


## arvistro

When compare populations is ok to multiply with whole. Because if Poland > Latvia + Lithuania
Then Poland/2 > Latvia/2 + Lithuania/2
Early class math.

----------


## Volat

> When compare populations is ok to multiply with whole. Because if Poland > Latvia + Lithuania
> Then Poland/2 > Latvia/2 + Lithuania/2
> Early class math.


I guess unless there are differences in male to female ratios between the countries.

----------


## arvistro

Significant enough to change the outcome, that I doubt.
Whether N is 2 or 6% of Poles is more significant.

----------


## Volat

> Significant enough to change the outcome, that I doubt.
> Whether N is 2 or 6% of Poles is more significant.


If there are 55:45 female to male ratio and opposite in another country, then it can be significant. Even in early school maths students are precise presenting their answers. In this instance it doesn't matter. The entire populations can be used for comparison.

----------


## Norvila

Interesting material to think about.


Prof. А. К. Матвеев Ural university Onomastic centre founder in 1962 stated
"placenames with ending -is, -as are massive in Russia north and left by tribe related to modern Lithuanians".
He refer to another earlier research in Komi.
http://onomastics.ru/sites/default/f...991/VT%201.pdf

----------


## Volat

> Interesting material to think about.
> 
> 
> Prof. А. К. Матвеев Ural university Onomastic centre founder in 1962 stated
> "placenames with ending -is, -as are massive in Russia north and left by tribe related to modern Lithuanians".
> He refer to another earlier research in Komi.
> http://onomastics.ru/sites/default/f...991/VT%201.pdf


 
In the article the author states

Dvina - Dvynai (Lithuanian twins). Because northern Dvina is formed at confluence of two rivers Sukhona and Vychegda. In Finnish Dvina is Viena, so it could be formed from Lithuanian vienas (English unified) because the river is form from two rivers.


---

If Dvina - Dvynai (Lithuanian twins), then why not from Russian 'Dvoinya' (twins) ?

As several authors noted, the river Dvina in northern Russia was named after Dvina that runs through northern Belarus and Latvia (Daugava). The name of the river was mentioned in earliest primary chronicle well before Slavs reached Archangel region of northern Russia. The names of the river are northern and western Dvina today. The etymology of Dvina is debatable among scholars. Both Baltic and Finnish etymologies are offered. Thus Belarusian scholar Zhuchkevich suggested that Dvina has Baltic Finnic etymology - silent, calm (тихая, спокойная)

Semantics of the following hydronyms are also interesting. 


Chulas - Sulas (Lith.) - Pole in the fence.
Sargas - sargas (Lith) - Guard.

Maybe there was a reason to name a river as a 'Pole in the fence'. 

The fact that Matveev makes reference to hydronyms that have formants similar to -as and -is similar to that of Lithuanian is an interesting fact. Semantics a bit far fetch. It's well known that western Russia in the direction of Belarus from Moscow has many Baltic hydronyms. The very well known is Moskva (Moscow ) of Baltic origin according to Baltist Toporov, where eastern Galindians were settled. But in northern Russia? Keep in mind the article is a bit dated written in 1962. Thanks for sharing the article.

---

A comprohensive collection of papers on Balto-Slavic studies held at the Russian Academy of sciences authored by Baltic and Slavic authors. There’s plenty on Baltic linguistics and ethnography. http://www.inslav.ru/izdaniya/arxiv/...47-42/108--l-r

----------


## arvistro

> Semantics of the following hydronyms are also interesting. 
> 
> 
> Chulas - Sulas (Lith.) - Pole in the fence.
> Sargas - sargas (Lith) - Guard.
> 
> Maybe there was a reason to name a river as a 'Pole in the fence'.


Nothing wrong with sargas. In Latvia we have Sargupe and in Lithuania there is at least one Sargupis. It perhaps has more to do semantically with 'sargāties' (to be beware of, Russian cognate storozhitsa). 
Chulas - Sulas is perhaps wrong a bit wrong. Further in text is Chauras = Siauras, if we go this way, Chulas - Siūlas makes more sense. Siūlas means thread in Lithuanian.

I agree they look different from other toponyms in area. I agree to author they sound IE-an.
I am however a bit vary that they are too Lithuanian-ish. Not archaic Baltic-ish or Baltic-ish, but exactly Lithuanish.

----------


## Norvila

I doubt if scientists discoveries could be outdated. They were politically uncomfortable therefore discontinued.
I found his research after massive strange names in N.Dvina basin - Vaga, Lupja, Litvinovo, Litvinskoje, Kotlas, Lambas in Шенкурский район, Архангельская область 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ncxln6eho...%20x2.jpg?dl=0
Lithuanian antonyms in N.Russia were confirmed by Toporov
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qfatzeh0ss...nymes.jpg?dl=0

----------


## Norvila

Another interesting fact http://gramoty.ru/index.php?no=590&act=full&key=bb
грамота за номером 590. Найденная в слоях последней трети XI века в 1981 году, она содержит всего один загадочный знак и четыре слова: «Литва въстала на Корелу». Знаменитый исследователь Новгорода, академик Валентин Янин, пишет о ней: «Грамота №590 является донесением новгородского лазутчика о начатых Литвой действиях.
But how Litva managed to sneak to Karela so the Novgorodian spy should report this 
огибая Финский залив, литовский военный отряд не­минуемо должен был пройти вблизи центральных, районов Новго­родской земли, создавая непосредственную угрозу этим районам http://www.kirjazh.spb.ru/biblio/piz...bg/pizv_g0.htm
I think «Литва въстала на Корелу» means «Литва вoстала на Корелу» - Litva already was in Karela and made uprising.
It was no Lithuanian kingdom that time and Литва could mean traveling and leading service in the sense A.Dubonis wrote.

----------


## arvistro

8-3bd9866dce.jpg
I think this is nice article to sum up the latest on Baltic hydronims in Russia (picture above comes from it, it shows min darker region and max region of Baltic toponyms):
Проблематика изучения гидронимии балтийского происхождения на территории России (2015, Valery Vasilev).

I think what really lacks is research of timeframes and exact Baltic source (Lithuanian, Lettigalian, East Baltic, West Baltic, proto-Baltic, Baltoid?) for those.

----------


## Volat

> Another interesting fact http://gramoty.ru/index.php?no=590&act=full&key=bb
> грамота за номером 590. Найденная в слоях последней трети XI века в 1981 году, она содержит всего один загадочный знак и четыре слова: «Литва въстала на Корелу». Знаменитый исследователь Новгорода, академик Валентин Янин, пишет о ней: «Грамота №590 является донесением новгородского лазутчика о начатых Литвой действиях.
> But how Litva managed to sneak to Karela so the Novgorodian spy should report this 
> огибая Финский залив, литовский военный отряд не­минуемо должен был пройти вблизи центральных, районов Новго­родской земли, создавая непосредственную угрозу этим районам http://www.kirjazh.spb.ru/biblio/piz...bg/pizv_g0.htm
> I think «Литва въстала на Корелу» means «Литва вoстала на Корелу» - Litva already was in Karela and made uprising.
> It was no Lithuanian kingdom that time and Литва could mean traveling and leading service in the sense A.Dubonis wrote.


Litva fought Novgordians and Pskovians in early 12th and 13th century. Approximate carbon dating of the birch-bark (gramota 590) is (1075–1100)

--
_В 1198 году под контроль Литвы переходит Полоцк[2], с этого времени Полоцкая земля становится плацдармом для экспансии Литвы на север и северо-восток. Начинаются литовские вторжения непосредственно в новгородско-псковские (1183, 1200, 1210, 1214, 1217, 1224, 1225, 1229, 1234)_
---

In the past some Karelians (Korela) lived a further south and south-west than present day Karelia. Present day Tver Karelians migrated in Tver region (east of eastern Latvia ) after Sweden defeated Russia in 1617. Orthodox Karelians refused to convert in Lutheran religion. The original home-land of Tver Karelians was 
'Votskaya pyatina'. Ancestors of Tver Karelians lived just north of Novgorod to the west of Volkhov river in western Votskaya Pyatina. See the map below. If Litva fought Novgorodians, then Karelians settled to the west of the Volkhov river were within their reach.

----------


## Norvila

Thanks for info about Tver karelians, but it's almost 500 year later.
Toporov wrote Lithuanian antonyms comes from middle of I c AD.
It fits with E.Lithuanian barrow culture expansion.
Also antonyms never changed after one or several military attacks unless old population wiped out and new settled.
There are mentions Litva served in Polock as mercenaries and later took over.
In 1240, Polotsk became a vassal of Lithuanian princes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polotsk
Polotsk received a charter of autonomy guaranteeing that the grand dukes _′will not introduce new, nor destroy the old′_.
This warranty wouldn't change antonyms. 
And it's 150 years later uprising in Karela.

Another interesting story about Kalevala.
It appears KALEVAALA was a fiction story from 19c. based on "very common placenames Kalevaala" and "kalevaala comes from Lithuanian "kalvis" - "smith" or diminutive "kalviala". https://www.dropbox.com/s/wruom3abcp...alvis.jpg?dl=0

It fits with Litva function - to provide traveling guiding service you need horses that needs horseshoes. So smithy was necessary in every horse changing station.

----------


## teftelis

There's also a birch bark letter saying that in 1066 Lithuanians attacked Karelia.

Novgorod treebark tablet #590


Also there was some Lithuanian involvement in Novgorod/Ingria later on in 14th/15th few Lithuanians served as princes/military rulers. Such as Narimantas his son Patrikas and later Lengvenis

----------


## Volat

> Thanks for info about Tver karelians, but it's almost 500 year later.


Their home-land was west of Volkhov river recorded in the 15th century. it was described on the map after Moscow principality destroyed Novgorodian republic. Likely Karelians lived to west of Volkhov river in the 11th and 12th centuries too. There's no reason to assume that region was empty and Karelians settled it after 11th century.

----------


## Volat

> T
> 
> 
> Also there was some Lithuanian involvement in Novgorod/Ingria later on in 14th/15th few Lithuanians served as princes/military rulers. Such as Narimantas his son Patrikas and later Lengvenis


Litva had close contacts with Pskovians and Novgorodians. Dovmont (Domant) was likely son of Mindiaugas and older brother of Troiden. He his home-land and became a prince of Pskovians. He was a talented commander defeating Orden on several occasions. During his time Pskovians escaped Novgorodians vassalage/

----------


## lyakh

Case of N1c-M2783+ is interesting. Its closest relatives are found in Sweden and Finland. Why it is SO common, especially among Baltic people and their descendants?

There are quite large amounts of N-L550 in Belarus and Russia (they are Slavic countries, not Baltic)?




> Belarusians





> There is a study based on a sample size of 1086 subjects representing all ethnographic regions of Belarus proportionally. 109 out of 1085 (10%) were tested for N1c1-L550 . Back then it was call South-Baltic clade.
> 
> Russians were also in the study represented by 545 subjects from different regions of Russia. Overall frequency of N1c1 was 14% among Russians. But only 40%-50% of N1c1 (5.6%-7% overall) was N1c-L550. Other clades were similar to those found in Ural and Karelia.


Two kits from Poland (#172478 and #N9209) - first from Lower Silesia, second from Greater Poland - are Y4706+. Y4706 is a "brother" clade for M2783.

----------


## Volat

> Case of N1c-M2783+ is interesting. Its closest relatives are found in Sweden and Finland. Why it is SO common, especially among Baltic people and their descendants?
> 
> There are quite large amounts of N-L550 in Belarus and Russia (they are Slavic countries, not Baltic)?
> 
> [FONT=Verdana]


M2783+ is likely a Baltic legacy , just as Z92+. But Balts were probably not genetically homogeneous given vast territories they settled in the past.

----------


## Norvila

> There's also a birch bark letter saying that in 1066 Lithuanians attacked Karelia.
> 
> Novgorod treebark tablet #590
> 
> 
> Also there was some Lithuanian involvement in Novgorod/Ingria later on in 14th/15th few Lithuanians served as princes/military rulers. Such as Narimantas his son Patrikas and later Lengvenis


How Litva managed to sneak to Karela so the Novgorodian spy should report this? 
огибая Финский залив, литовский военный отряд не­минуемо должен был пройти вблизи центральных, районов Новго­родской земли, создавая непосредственную угрозу этим районам http://www.kirjazh.spb.ru/biblio/piz...bg/pizv_g0.htm
I think «Литва въстала на Корелу» means «Литва вoстала на Корелу» - Litva already was in Karela and made uprising.
It was no Lithuanian kingdom that time and Литва could mean traveling and leading service in the sense A.Dubonis wrote.

----------


## teftelis

Lithuanian involvement was mainly with Novgorod it was just that Karelia was contested region and Swedes with Novgorod fought over control of it, Lithuanians supported Swedes.


1183 – 1184 m. žiemą Lietuva staiga surengė pirmą didelį antpuolį į Rusios žemes. Lietuviai nusiaubė ne tik Polocko kunigaikštystę, bet pasiekė net ir Naugardo žemei priklausantį Pskovą, kuriam padarė daug žalos. (Novgorodo pirmasis metraštis)
1188 m. Konflikte tarp Švedijos ir Naugardo karelai buvo Naugardo sąjungininkai. Kovodami prieš juos, lietuviai rėmė švedus.
Lietuvių antpuoliai į Naugardą jau buvo įprastas dalykas. Rudenį polockiečiai ir lietuviai jau kartu puolė Velikije Lukus. (Novgorodo pirmasis metraštis)
1191 m. Polocko ir Naugardo kunigaikščiai planavo pulti Lietuvą, bet savo planų neįvykdė. Naugardiečiai, atrodo, norėjo atkeršyti lietuviams už tai, kad, jiems kariaujant su Švedija, lietuviai užpuolė Naugardo sąjungininkus karelus. Tai rodo, kad Lietuva turėjo politinių interesų tolimuose kraštuose.
1198 m. lietuvių antpuoliai į Naugardą jau buvo įprastas dalykas. Daug ką pasako metraštininko užuomina, kad Naugardo kunigaikščio Jaroslavo sūnus Iziaslavas „buvo pasodintas [Velikije] Lukuose kunigaikščiauti ir ginti Naugardą nuo Lietuvos, ir ten [1198 m. mirė“. Tų pačių metų rudenį polockiečiai ir lietuviai jau kartu puolė Velikije Lukus. Kai žiemą Jaroslavas išžygiavo prieš Polocką, “polockiečiai pasitiko [jį] nusilenkdami” ir sudarė taiką. Matyt, Naugardo žemę jie puolė tik lietuvių verčiami.

----------


## Norvila

> lietuviai užpuolė Naugardo sąjungininkus karelus. Tai rodo, kad Lietuva turėjo politinių interesų tolimuose kraštuose.


Tai Baranausko interpretacijos :)

Karela was nowadays Finland + Karelia before Swedish-Novgorodian treaty and partition 1323. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedis..._its_aftermath
They managed to take and burn down Swedish capital - Sigtuna in the summer 1187.
Erik chronicle says about Karelian foray: 
_They went on a and calm one that in the storm to Mälaren and they stayed quite secretly in the archipelago of Svea usually with the secret army. Once they got such a notion that they burned Sigtuna, burned it along the bottoms and the town did not get help anywhere. The archbishop Jon was killed there and many heathens were happy from it that the Christians were so unlucky. And the whole of Karelia and Russia were happy about it._ 


No such military operation heard form Litva that time.
Hundred years later during Mindaugas reign territory was small East Lithuania http://www.sarmatas.lt/wp-content/up...o_lietuva2.jpg.
How Litva could fight powerfull Karela in 11c AD? 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/305t8f659r...01335.jpg?dl=0

----------


## teftelis

>How Litva could fight powerfull Karela in 11c AD? 
Up until about 1180~ served as mercenaries/auxiliaries for Polotsk dukes and were under their influence so they might have or not served their interest and you severely underestimating their ability. After 1180~ there were Lithuanian military raids in all directions Livonia/Rus/Poland between 1201-1263 there are recorded 75 raids. Even prior Mindaugas people such as Zvelgaitis raided Estonia and gathered slaves in there, I don't see how they couldn't reach Karelia. Yes the state surely couldn't exist in 11th century, but then again sources about Lithuania in 11th century are really scarce and speculating what really was happening from one sentence from that birch bark is far fetching. The same Hypatian Codex mentions that in 1230 there were Lithuanian merchants in Novgorod and this is all prior the formation of state and Mindaugas coming into power. 

And I think in 1187 those were Curonians with Oeslians who burned Sigtuna, not Karelians.

----------


## Norvila

Let's place sources together with statements and opinions.
Žvelgaitis raided Estonia in 1205 and it's only half way to Karela.
Karelians paid tribute to Novgorod with bronze Sigtuna cathedral doors not Curonians.

----------


## Norvila

"Before 1180 Lithuania was a relatively weak duchy and was not militarily active. In 1183 she assumed the offensive. The entry for 1183 in the first Novgorod Chronicle tells us that: "In that winter the people of Pskov fought with the Lithuanians and suffered great losses." Thus, in the winter of 1183 - 1184 the Lithuanians organized their *first* independent raid on Ruthenian lands and even passed through the Duchy of Polotsk on the way to Pskov." Tomas Baranauskas. Lietuvos valstybės ištakos. Vilnius: "Vaga", 2000. P. 245-272. http://viduramziu.istorija.net/en/state.htm

So what could mean «Литва въстала на Корелу» 10-20 years before?

----------


## Norvila

Interesting mentioning about aftermath of the Novgorod-Polock war from 1021 by Scandinavian mercenary prince Eimund. 
Брячислав Изяславич Полоцкий Рюрикович [Рюриковичи Полоцкие] 1003 - 1044, Полоцк, Великое княжество Русское, _Князь Полоцкий
А потом изменила часть варягов. Впрочем, у наемников такое поведение не считалось изменой. Ярославу служил скандинавский принц Эймунд с дружиной викингов. Брячислав пообещал заплатить щедрее, и Эймунд перешел к нему. И не просто перешел, а помог завершить войну.
http://id.rodovid.org/wk/Istimewa%3AChartInventory/568

_Eimund(as), Eimant(as) nowadays still considered as traditional Lithuanian name. 
_Eimantas_ (4936), Edmundas (5985), https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C4%8...t%C4%99_vardai

----------


## Volat

* Norvila*



Are you trying to suggest there were Lithuanians living in Karelia pointing to the fact that Lithuanians could not bypass Novgorodians who ought to have recorded Lithuanians reaching Karelians in a reference to a birch-bark sentence stating Lithuanians fought Karelians? Not even Balts at large in Karelia, but ancient Lithuanians who lived on the fringe of Slavic and Baltic worlds in the basin of Vilia (Neris) river. Many people will not take your arguments seriously. Ancient Lithuanians were eastern Balts settling in Vilia (Neris) river basin. Their descendants are modern day south-eastern Lithuanians (Dzukai) of Lithuania and north-western Belarus. To some extent north-western Belarusians , whose ancestors were Baltic adopting Slavic language and culture in the last 700-800 years. The home-land of ancient Lithuanians is swampy with little fertile land. Lithuanias had to fight and pirate others - Slavs, Balts, Finns, Germans – whoever they could reach. Vikings fought and pirated others for the same reason. They had to sustain their communities.

Anyway, ancient Lithuanians are associated with eastern Lithuanian barrow archaeological culture. These are the archealogical sites of ancient Lithuanians. Not in Karelia. :)

----------


## Norvila

I just asking to help elaborate hypothesis explaining facts:
- "massive Lithuanian placenames in N. Russia" (Matveev, Toporov)
- «Литва въстала на Корелу» 1066-1072, despite all raids are named by the leader in other cases.
- massive "Kalevaala" placenames in Karela and roots in Lithuania
- 500+ loanwords from Lithuanian to Finish from the first loan before German, Swedish, Russian (Liukkanen), no known back loanwords
- Saami has some more Lithuanian loanwords than Suomi (Suomi considered as a LT loanword).
- Suomi and Hungarians has only 129 common words
- exact quantity of phonemes in LT and FI, when other FU languages has 0 including Hungarian.

So Lithuanian placenames discovered in huge territory from the West of Berlin (Krahe), Austria, Bavaria (Steinhouser), Dnieper (Toporov), North Russia (Matveev).
Comparing to Mindaugas Kingdom ratio is similar to Spain - Latin America, Portugal - Brazil, UK-Commonwealth.
Meanwhile distribution of Scandinavian placenames outside Scandinavia is much smaller.

----------


## arvistro

Kaleva shares roots with Hlefr - Sea beast in Norse mythology.

----------


## Volat

It’s well known that Finnish, Estonian, Saami have large layers of Baltic loan-words. Finnish and Estonian scholars suggest that their ancestors, proto-Baltic-Finnic speakers, had contacts with the Balts as they were migrating toward the Baltic shores from Volga-Oka region.

Saami and other languages having '_Lithuanian_' loan-words is a bit far-fetched. Maybe Baltic loan-words , there maybe explanations about ancient contacts. But not Lithuanian. 

I know Toporov is an authority on Baltic linguistics. I'd like to see the references of Toporov stating 'there are massive Lithuanian toponyms in northern Russia" .

----------


## Norvila

> Kaleva shares roots with Hlefr - Sea beast in Norse mythology.


I prefer we quote scholars rather than express our opinion. 
Please check foreword to Kalevipoeg https://www.dropbox.com/s/wruom3abcp...alvis.jpg?dl=0

----------


## Norvila

> there are massive Lithuanian toponyms in northern Russia" .


Please check link to prof. Matveev A.K. 1962 publication I gave earlier. Exact quote sounds like "placenames -as, -is are massive in N.Russia and they left by the speakers very similar to Lithuanian".

Suomi and Saami migration routes are very unclear - both started in S.Finland, but there are no migration traces in continent.

----------


## Volat

> Please check link to prof. Matveev A.K. 1962 publication I gave earlier. Exact quote sounds like "placenames -as, -is are massive in N.Russia and they left by the speakers very similar to Lithuanian".
> 
> Suomi and Saami migration routes are very unclear - both started in S.Finland, but there are no migration traces in continent.


I asked for references to Toporov. Matveev is unknown person in linguistics.

----------


## arvistro

> I prefer we quote scholars rather than express our opinion. 
> Please check foreword to Kalevipoeg https://www.dropbox.com/s/wruom3abcp...alvis.jpg?dl=0


Mikko Heikkilä
Kaleva and his Sons from Kalanti –
On the Etymology of Certain Names in Finnic Mythology

----------


## Norvila

Matveev A.K. is well known scientist - Член-корреспондент РАН с 7 декабря 1991 по Секции гуманитарных и общественных наук (языкознание). Профессор УрГУ им. А. М. Горького (Екатеринбург), основатель Уральской ономастической школы.

Toporov work https://www.dropbox.com/s/w0x9apwpkn...Litva.JPG?dl=0

----------


## Norvila

> Mikko Heikkilä
> Kaleva and his Sons from Kalanti –
> On the Etymology of Certain Names in Finnic Mythology


Thank you Arvistro,
Kalevalaa is romantic fairytale from 19c. 
Kalevaala is a common placename in Karela and has routes from Kalvis (demin. kalviala). 
These facts stated in the foreword of Kalevipoeg by the authors.
I doubt if we need to go further in mythology.

I like Suomi, but they needed to "invent" nation to move away from Swedish ties. The same was in Lithuania vs Poland. 
Germans helped in both cases. Some said plan was to have puppet states between Germany, Sweden and Russia.

There is interesting read how Cheushesku "invented" nation by ordering celebrate 2050 anniversary of Dacian state.
“For many the Geto-Dacian „heritage‟ has become equal to the pride of being Romanian. The deliberate exaggerations from the Golden Age [i.e. the Ceauşescu period] and other times have become deeply rooted in the collective memory and have made it so that in the common perception Romanian nationalism is tied tightly with a population whose heritage we „preserve‟, significantly diluted, in our DNA”, i.e. the Dacian myth has become cemented in the identity of contemporary Romanians; a phenomenon which owes more to Nationalist–Communist state propaganda than to archaeological facts, and which is mirrored exactly in Bulgaria.
https://www.academia.edu/27923462/On...a_and_Bulgaria

So I prefer to quote scientist from other nations than subject they are writing about.

I think we're kind of community where members trust and help each other. Only with these conditions will happen further discoveries.

----------


## arvistro

No, giant Kaleva comes from Sea giant Hlevr (*Kalevaz) not smith Kalvis..

Kalevaz -> Halevaz -> Halevr -> Hlevr (Norse)
Kalevaz -> Kalevas -> Kaleva (Finnic)

----------


## Volat

> Matveev A.K. is well known scientist - Член-корреспондент РАН с 7 декабря 1991 по Секции гуманитарных и общественных наук (языкознание). Профессор УрГУ им. А. М. Горького (Екатеринбург), основатель Уральской ономастической школы.



In all due respect to this scholar, he could not work out the fact that term Dvina originated 1,000 km from Archangel region stating that Dvina is derived from Lithuanian Dvynai (twins ) because there is а confluence of two rivers that make up northern Dvina. 

One does not need to be a linguist to see there is something wrong here. A thorough review of this article by a professional linguist or linguists will be welcomed.




> Toporov work https://www.dropbox.com/s/w0x9apwpkn...Litva.JPG?dl=0



I don't read Lithuanian. What's Toporov's conclusion? Lithuania in northern Russia is myth or reality? Here's the entire article (in Lithuanian) : http://etalpykla.lituanistikadb.lt/f....ARTIC/content

----------


## Volat

arvistro posted the map of Baltic hydronyms by linguist Vasiliev already.



Article published in journal of Linguistics by Vasiliev in 2015




> *The problems of studying the Baltic origins of hydronyms on the territory of Russia*
> 
> 
> _Валерий Л. Васильев
> 
> _
> 
> *Abstract*
> 
> ...




In short, there are maximum number of Baltic hydronyms till Ilmen lake (outer shaded area). Minimum number of hydronyms till middle Volkhov river (inner shaded area) . There enclaves with high concentration of Baltic hydronyms. There are no Baltic hydronyms further north ie in Karelia and Archangel region of Russia.

----------


## Norvila

Toporov states baltiški Šiaurės ir Šiaurės vakarų hidronimijos bei to- ponimijos bruožai jau buvo atskleisti (jų kilmę su tam tik- romis išlygomis galima priskirti laikotarpiui nuo I tūkstant- mečio antrosios pusės) Baltic antonyms in Russia North and North West most likely comes from the second half of the first millennia. "There are no Baltic hydronyms further north ie in Karelia and Archangel region of Russia." - this is simply not true. Check the map around Litvinovo, Vaga, Kotlas, Lambas in Archangelsk oblast if you mistrust academic Matveev A.K. https://www.dropbox.com/s/v47a5spn0w...Dvina.png?dl=0 I can't find such scientist Валерий Л. Васильев on google. I doubt if he knows Matveev A.K. works from literature list. It's not very scientific way to state something doesn't exist if you didn't found it yet :)

----------


## Volat

> Toporov states baltiški Šiaurės ir Šiaurės vakarų hidronimijos bei to- ponimijos bruožai jau buvo atskleisti (jų kilmę su tam tik- romis išlygomis galima priskirti laikotarpiui nuo I tūkstant- mečio antrosios pusės) Baltic antonyms in Russia North and North West most likely comes from the second half of the first millennia. "There are no Baltic hydronyms further north ie in Karelia and Archangel region of Russia." - this is simply not true. Check the map around Litvinovo, Vaga, Kotlas, Lambas in Archangelsk oblast if you mistrust academic Matveev A.K. https://www.dropbox.com/s/v47a5spn0w...Dvina.png?dl=0 I can't find such scientist Валерий Л. Васильев on google. I doubt if he knows Matveev A.K. works from literature list. It's not very scientific way to state something doesn't exist if you didn't found it yet :)



Vasiliev, Valery Leonidovich - Russian linguist, doctor of philological sciences, professor in Department of Russian language of Novgorod State University. He is the author of more than 100 works on the history of the Russian language and dialectology, Slavic onomastics, general and Slavic linguistics. 

He lived and worked in Novgorod having published many papers on the subject of toponyms in northern Russia. Search his name Васильев Валерий Леонидович топонимы.

The papers go through editorial for peer-reviews. The paper of Vasiliev I referenced above was published in a respectable journal of linguistic. Vasiliev outlined the issues in previous study I referenced. Some of the Baltic toponyms had equivalent in Finland. If one really tries he or she will find Baltic toponyms all over Europe and western Asia with dubious explanations or referencing Indo-European cognates. Linguistics is not exact science where is you get right or wrong answers. There are plenty discussions and debates particularly in the field of toponymy. Just because Matveev published a paper on Lithuanian (not even ancient Baltic) hydronyms in Archangel region does not mean he was right.

----------


## arvistro

If you have Litvinovo (!!) in Archangelsk, you should not be too surprised to find some Lithuanian toponyms around.
Other story is how old they are (look rather young-ish) and how widespread and when how this colony came to be.

----------


## Volat

> If you have Litvinovo (!!) in Archangelsk, you should not be too surprised to find some Lithuanian toponyms around.
> Other story is how old they are (look rather young-ish) and how widespread and when how this colony came to be.


There are many places around Litvinovo in Russia. Probably in Siberia and the Far East too. I think the toponym maybe be derived from a common surname Litvinov. It is not uncommon to have villages and small towns to have such names. The surname Litvinov is derived from a citizen of Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In Russia back in the days Litvin was either Belarusian or Lithuanian. In some instances to Poles. Jews were called Litvaks. Maybe in some instances the toponym is derived from the fact there were immigrants from the Grand Duchy. The origin of the surname Litvinov. http://www.ufolog.ru/names/order/%D0...BD%D0%BE%D0%B2

----------


## Volat

There are Lithuanians living in Karelia. But those migrated during Soviet era in search of employment.





> Национально-культурная литовская автономия Карелии, а также все наши друзья и едиономышленники. 
> По данным переписи населения 2002 года в Республике Карелия проживает тысяча семьдесят три представителя литовской национальности. Большинство литовских семей обосновались здесь в советское время, когда многие отправлялись в Карелию на лесозаготовки. Поэтому большая часть литовцев проживает в отдаленных районах республики. В Петрозаводске живут двести двадцать восемь литовцев. В 2004 году по инициативе Генерального консульства Литвы в Санкт-Петербурге литовцы Карелии впервые собрались в Петрозаводске и решили основать свою общественную организацию – местную национально-культурную автономию. Официальное оформление состоялось 29 декабря 2005 года. Так впервые в истории Карелии появилась общественная организация призванная возрождать и поддерживать самобытность литовцев на карельской земле.
> 
> 
> Their social-network page : https://vk.com/club621530

----------


## Norvila

Dear colleagues,
I think we're not in the position to judge conclusion of the eminent scientists.
Expressing of the personal opinion will hardly lead to the fruitful discussion.

----------


## arvistro

> Dear colleagues,
> I think we're not in the position to judge conclusion of the eminent scientists.
> Expressing of the personal opinion will hardly lead to the fruitful discussion.


What to do when eminent scientists have disagreements? :) Stop discussing?

----------


## Volat

> Dear colleagues,
> I think we're not in the position to judge conclusion of the eminent scientists.
> Expressing of the personal opinion will hardly lead to the fruitful discussion.


 All major studies are given consideration by scholars. If one picks only selected studies to fill his or her views or opinions pointing to the credentials of the author, then it is not a scholarly approach. Such approach is prone to a selection bias. We are not linguists, I know I am not. But I am not offering thorough review of linguistic studies either.

----------


## Volat

Matveev argues that formants with suffixes -as -us cannot be not derived from Baltic-Finnic languages in general. Then he explained possible meanings of hydronyms searching for equivalent in Lithuanian language making reference to ancient Baltic substrate among numerous Finnic toponyms of the Russian North.

In conclusion, he states that he was only proposing a hypothesis and he was far from convinced the issue with hydronyms having -as and -us suffixes was resolved at the time he was publishing the article. As Saami hydronyms were not analysed. Komi-Permic languages have hydronyms with similar -us and -as formants. 

Also, Uralic origin of hydronyms with suffixes -as and -us in northern Russia was supported by linguist Eino Kalima of Finland. Scholars E. M. Pospelov, G. J. Simina, A. I. Popov of Russia. And others.

Matveev was a prolific publisher. I wonder if he changed his opinion given new data and research since 1962. 


Conclusion of Matveev on the subject in article (1962).

----------


## Norvila

I'm glad Matveev publication finally qualified to read till the end :)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rd0gq2rj4u...20-us.jpg?dl=0
You should keep in mind CCCP political climate of that time.
It was official theory Balts came from the Volga Dnieper basin.
Matveev brave statement means they were also in the Russia North.
It's very likely someone advised to keep away from the topic that contradicts political line "druzba narodov".
It was very common in soviet time Lithuania also.

----------


## Norvila

I'd like to explain why Vasiljev works doesn't contradicts Matveev and Toporov.
It's all about the method they used.
Each of them analyzes antonyms in the specific geographical area - Valsiljev - Novgorod, Matveev - North East Siberia, Toporov - around Moskva and south.
All of them has found Baltic antonyms, but non of them checked entire Russia or Europe with methods available now.
Vasiljev didn't quote Matveev and seems like didn't knew his publications nor antonyms he discovered.
So I think it's fits well together.

----------


## Volat

> I'm glad Matveev publication finally qualified to read till the end :)
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/rd0gq2rj4u...20-us.jpg?dl=0
> You should keep in mind CCCP political climate of that time.
> It was official theory Balts came from the Volga Dnieper basin.
> Matveev statement means they were also in the Russia North.


Baltic hydronyms outside Lithuania, Latvia, eastern Prussia were found in Belarus and Smolensk in early 1900s.

Later, in western Moscow, upper Oka and western Tver regions. A bit later even further south of upper Oka in upper Don. Toporov and Trubachev have published plenty on Baltic hydronyms of western Russia. 

The aforementioned article of Vasiliev has a good account of major studies published on Baltic hydronyms. And the issues with studying Baltic hydronyms in Russia. Soviet scholars didn’t have political dogmas as to where were Baltic and Finno-Ugric settlements to the best of my knowledge. The had for Slavs though. Politicians were maintaining eastern Slavs are the same people for political reasons. 

In addition, all archaeological cultures of Baltic origin coincide with the regions of numerous Baltic hydronyms. Research in archaeology and linguistic was done independently.

Matveev was probably the only scholar suggesting hydronyms with -as and -us to be Baltic in northern Russia. There are probably ancient Baltic hydronyms in northern Russia. But their number is scarce. Baltic Finns have a large layer of ancient Baltic loan-words which they obtained as pre-proto-Finns were migrating from Volg-Oka region towards Baltic shores. In theory, some of those ancient Baltic loan-words could be used to name waterways and lakes in Karelia.

I am looking at dictionary of hydronyms in Vologda region published in 2010. The author states in reference to another source that hydronyms with -us in Vologda are Saami in origin and hydronyms with -as suffix are Baltic Finnic. Page 8 : http://www.booksite.ru/fulltext/natu...lovar/text.pdf






---


If there were some historic records, archaeological cultures or Baltic hydronyms in abandance in northern Russia, then readers may accept Lithuanian or Aukstaitian settlements in Karelia and Archangel in iron age or medieval times. Otherwise, it seems to be far-fetch making such claims on the basis of few Baltic hydronyms by 1-2 authors

----------


## Volat

> I'd like to explain why Vasiljev works doesn't contradicts Matveev and Toporov.
> It's all about the method they used.
> Each of them analyzes antonyms in the specific geographical area - Valsiljev - Novgorod, Matveev - North East Siberia, Toporov - around Moskva and south.
> All of them has found Baltic antonyms, but non of them checked entire Russia or Europe with methods available now.
> Vasiljev didn't quote Matveev and seems like didn't knew his publications nor antonyms he discovered.
> So I think it's fits well together.



Matveev published plenty on hydronyms of northern Russia, so has Vasiliev on north-western Russia. Very likely he knows the works of Matveev and probably referenced him in his other studies. The focus of Vasiliev's study was on Baltic hydronyms, while Matveev studies of northern Russia are mostly on Finno-Ugric hydronyms.

----------


## Norvila

I think problem is in "national science" mentality i.e. territory > tribe > nation > country.
Common approach is - mono linguistic tribe lived in the territory and evolved to the nation>country.
But in the reality many languages were spoken in the same territory by different social classes.
After "spring of nations" it was common to search for the roots of the "nation" and protect from others by denying other views to the facts.
F.e. there are number of publications stating Fino-Ugric language group is artificial and languages has nothing in common.
But Finish scientists take this as an attack to the national pride.
If someone ask them about loanwords they react the same.
It went to the new level after 90-ties in Russia.

----------


## arvistro

Wait, wait! 
No serious scientist is saying Finno-ugric language group is artificial. All serious scientists acknowledge presence of loanwords in Baltic Finnics. Extensive work is in progress in Finnish linguistics to locate time and source of loanwords. Reading their works on Baltic loans in Finnic is very educational to get better view on our own languages.

----------


## Norvila

Baltic loanwords to Finnish and Saami are the best kept secret.

The first wrote about them Danish scientist Thomsen (1869; 1890).
He found about 400 loanwords also gave approximate timing of the transfer 200 BC-700 AD.
No internet publication available.

Then _Liukkonen_ 1999 found loanwords could reach 500+.
No internet publication available.

Baltic loanwords are from the are of construction, agriculture and all family relations.
Loanwords didn't came via Latvia, Estonia - they has less. Saami has more.
Loanwords are from the earliest time - before German, Swedish, Russian loanwords.
So later loanwords could replaced earlier Baltic.

 Example of this could be loanword from the „dermo“ (Liukannen 1999).
Means initially it could be thousands of Baltic loanwords to Finish. 


Finish has exact quantity of phonemes as Lithuanian, other FU languages has no.
No publication about this.

Hungarians first disagree about grouping with fins. 
There are Italian linguists publications also.
Check 
*The Untenability of the Finno-Ugric Theory* *from a Linguistic Point of View.* 
Today’s Finnish linguistic science strongly revises the Finno-Ugric language theory. Finnish linguists research the Finnish-Old Germanic relationship, or are the followers of the theory of Finnish continuity, rather than the Finno-Ugric language relationship.
http://www.magtudin.org/Maracz%20L.%...c%20Theory.htm

----------


## Volat

> Hungarians first disagree about grouping with fins. 
> There are Italian linguists publications also.
> Check 
> *The Untenability of the Finno-Ugric Theory* *from a Linguistic Point of View.* 
> Today’s Finnish linguistic science strongly revises the Finno-Ugric language theory. Finnish linguists research the Finnish-Old Germanic relationship, or are the followers of the theory of Finnish continuity, rather than the Finno-Ugric language relationship.
> http://www.magtudin.org/Maracz%20L.%...c%20Theory.htm



There was a debate if Finnic , Ugric and Samoydic should be grouped together as single Uralic branch. Or even Finno-Ugric ie Finnic and Ugric without Samoyedic. Finnic is a linguistic group, which includes Baltic-Finnic (Finnish, Estonians, Veps, Karelians) , Volgaic-Finnic (Erzyan, Moksh, Mari), Permic (Komi, Udmurt) and Saami. Saami maybe grouped with Baltic Finnic or Volgaic Finnic. Some related languages disappeared such as Livonian; languages of Merja, Meschera, Muroma. There is no debate about Finnic languages being related as per different sources.

----------


## Norvila

> The first wrote about them Danish scientist Thomsen (1869; 1890).
> He found about 400 loanwords also gave approximate timing of the transfer 200 BC-700 AD.


It fits material culture finds and wooden hill forts construction.

----------


## Volat

According to archaeologist Lang of Tartu university pre-proto-Finnic having met and absorbed Baltic loan-words in areas south-east of Baltic shore (Russia) meeting
proto-Germanic in coastal areas of Estonia and Finland. Contacts of proto-Finnic with proto-Baltic was earlier than contacts between proto-Finnic and proto-Germanic. The first point of contacts between pre-proto-Finnic and proto-Balts was between Estonia and Moscow. 




> As to the formation of Proto-Finnic, it is important to keep in mind that the South-Western Passage served at the same time as a contact zone of Finno-Ugric and Baltic settlements (the so-called Upper-Oka, Dnieper-Dvina, and Striated Pottery cultures). If the Finno-Ug rians moved(together with their pots) in this passage, their language could have adopted Proto-Baltic loans on their way to the west. Certainly they could have absorbed some Baltic loans already in the Oka–Moscow region earlier, before moving out, as linguistically argued by Parpola (2012: 155). However, as they then still were hunters rather than farmers, it does not explain so much the loans in the sphere of agriculture (as exemplified by Vaba 2011: 751, 753 and Junttila 2012). Thus, they had to adopt a big share of Baltic loans later when moving westwards, or as also argued by Santeri Junttila (2012: 261): “we could look for the contact area somewhere between Estonia in the west and the surroundings of Moscow in the east, a zone with evidence of Uralic settlement in the north and Baltic on the south side”.


Lang goes into details why he holds such opinion on pages 70-72


_Formation of Proto-Finnic – an archaeological scenario from the Bronze Age / Early Iron Age by Valter Lang, University of Tartu, Estonia. Finno-Ugric congress , 2015_. http://www.oulu.fi/sites/default/fil...naryPapers.pdf

----------


## arvistro

> Baltic loanwords to Finnish and Saami are the best kept secret.


What? :)
I can tell you a secret:
*ON THE "EARLY BALTIC LOANWORDS IN COMMON FINNIC*. *PETRI KALLIO:*
https://www.academia.edu/1103450/On_..._Common_Finnic
One more secret:
Baltic loanwords in Mordvin
http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust266/sust266_grunthal.pdf
One more secret:
AREAL RELATIONS OF INDO-EUROPEAN LOANWORDSIN FINNIC DIALECTSVilja Oja (google it)
One more secret:
https://www.academia.edu/24412838/Pr...ltic_languages
One more:
http://etalpykla.lituanistikadb.lt/f...002.1.01.ARTIC
(Baltic loanwords in Saami, by Blažek and Hofirkova)
More:
https://www.academia.edu/1103685/Str...words_in_Saami
(Petri Kallio)

If you get into details, you would notice that most of authors (except for Blažek) are Finnic. And all of them acknowledge early Baltic (Balto-Slavic) loanwords into different Finnic languages. Extreme objectivity could be noticed by Mr Junttila's "Proto-Finnic_loanwords_in_the_Baltic_languages", where he disputed proto-Finnic loanwords in Baltic. 




> Hungarians first disagree about grouping with fins.
> There are Italian linguists publications also.


Those are Hungarian and Italian problems :) Italians in particular have some truly strange people getting their PhDs. Mario Alinei for example. 




> Today’s Finnish linguistic science strongly revises the Finno-Ugric language theory.


Only thing they revise is the exact branching of Finno-Ugric/Uralic...




> Finnish linguists research the Finnish-Old Germanic relationship,


Yes, how and when Pre and Proto Germanic loanwords entered Finnish language. That is what they research.




> or are the followers of the theory of Finnish continuity, rather than the Finno-Ugric language relationship.
> http://www.magtudin.org/Maracz%20L.%...c%20Theory.htm


Oh man...
I have seen such people. There is a number of Finnish guys on forums, who goes like this:
a) Finno-Ugric does not exist, (i.e., we are blond race not related to those Syberians...)
b) if a) fails, all Finno-Ugrics were originally blond whites from Europe, who then went into Syberia.
Something similar for some Hungarian machos too.

But you have to differentiate between people doing great science like those Finnish authors I copied and people who go after some agenda. 

Kotlets to kotlets and flies to flies.

----------


## Norvila

"The idea of a Finnic migration into Finland in the Iron Age is much older 

than Thomsen. It had been presented already by Henrik Gabriel Porthan (1859: 

46), the initiator of the research into the history of Finland, who actively devel-

oped his ideas by adopting an interdisciplinary approach. The idea was probably 

based on a general conception of the Migration Period as a chaotic era that gave 

birth to the European nations. Thomsen (1890: 151) still connected the move-

ments of the Finnic peoples with the Slavic migrations northward from about 

the 8th century, and thus estimated the time of Baltic–Finnic contacts at just a 

couple of centuries before them, between 0 and 500 AD. According to Thomsen, 

the Baltic–Finnic contacts would have had to begin before the contacts between 

Finnic and Germanic, since the Germanic loanwords have not gone through all 

the same Finnic phonetic changes." http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust266/sust266_junttila.pdf

 _Fri, Jan 10, 2014_ 


Roman Iron Age artifacts and other finds may significantly alter the known history of an area near the northeastern shores of the Gulf of Finland.
Two of the furnaces have been dated using AMS to between 204 BCE and 180 CE, within the Roman Iron Age period

"Some of the objects found also relate to the Migration Period and Viking Age activity in the Kymi River area," says Jäppinen, "such as a casted bronze ”triangle legs buckle”, which is the first artifact found from the Migration Period in southeastern Finland. Other artifacts are from the Roman Iron Age, and indicate a connection with Estonia and also Sweden. However, based on the asbestos ceramics found, there also appear to be connections to the inlands of Finland through the rivers." 

http://popular-archaeology.com/issue/12012013/article/new-iron-age-sites-discovered-in-finland

Beginning of the Kalevala?

----------


## Volat

There has been much research in archaeology, linguistics, population genetics and other disciplines done since Porthran and Thompsen expressed their opinions in mid and late 19th century. What's a point of posting dated studies and studies based on the facts obtained during research of 20th century? To find some sources, even they are of the 19th century, so as to support your opinion there was a Baltic migration into Finland based on " _on a general conception of the Migration Period as a chaotic era_". ?

Roman artifacts found in Finland, Sweden , Estonia were brought by the Vikings . They traveled to Byzantium, Persia, western Roman empire trading and pirating those places. Swedes , Karelians, and other people in Finland traded. Apart from Curonians, Balts were not sea-farers or river-farers.

----------


## Norvila

Can you indicate new linguistic publications that refer to these archeological finds?

Porthan and Thomsen "estimated the time of Baltic–Finnic contacts between 0 and 500 AD and during Migration period".
_Jan 10, 2014_ "Two of the furnaces have been dated using AMS to between 204 BCE and 180 CE, within the Roman Iron Age period...Some of the objects found also relate to the Migration Period"
 
Why Porthan and Thomsen should be outdated if the recent archeological finds matches their timing of the Baltic loanwords?

----------


## Norvila

S.Finland finds fits furnaces C14 dates in Žardė forthhill near Klaipėda - 420 BCE+160-60.
So new guys with metal technology appeared in SE Baltic about the same time.

----------


## Volat

> Can you indicate new linguistic publications that refer to these archeological finds?
> 
> Porthan and Thomsen "estimated the time of Baltic–Finnic contacts between 0 and 500 AD and during Migration period".
> _Jan 10, 2014_ "Two of the furnaces have been dated using AMS to between 204 BCE and 180 CE, within the Roman Iron Age period...Some of the objects found also relate to the Migration Period"
>  
> Why Porthan and Thomsen should be outdated if the recent archeological finds matches their timing of the Baltic loanwords?




I posted above. See the article presented by archaeologist Lang of Tartu University at the conference of Finno-Ugric studies last year in Finland. He was cross-referencing linguists stating the contacts between Balts and proto-Finns were ancient 2,500 years ago on territories between present day Estonia and Moscow. See the bibliography of the study for modern linguistic studies.




> As to the formation of Proto-Finnic, it is important to keep in mind that the South-Western Passage served at the same time as a contact zone of Finno-Ugric and Baltic settlements (the so-called Upper-Oka, Dnieper-Dvina, and Striated Pottery cultures). If the Finno-Ug rians moved(together with their pots) in this passage, their language could have adopted Proto-Baltic loans on their way to the west. Certainly they could have absorbed some Baltic loans already in the Oka–Moscow region earlier, before moving out, as linguistically argued by Parpola (2012: 155). However, as they then still were hunters rather than farmers, it does not explain so much the loans in the sphere of agriculture (as exemplified by Vaba 2011: 751, 753 and Junttila 2012). Thus, they had to adopt a big share of Baltic loans later when moving westwards, or as also argued by Santeri Junttila (2012: 261): “we could look for the contact area somewhere between Estonia in the west and the surroundings of Moscow in the east, a zone with evidence of Uralic settlement in the north and Baltic on the south side”.


_Formation of Proto-Finnic – an archaeological scenario from the Bronze Age / Early Iron Age by Valter Lang, University of Tartu, Estonia. Finno-Ugric congress , 2015_.
http://www.oulu.fi/sites/default/fil...naryPapers.pdf

--- 

Arvistro posted several studies too. 

Possible contacts between 0-500AD between Baltic Finns and Balts were those of Curonians, Semigalians, Latgalians and Livonians and possibly other Finnic of northern Pskov region and south-eastern Estonia. What you are trying to prove are the linguistic contacts between Finns and Karelians and the Balts. There is no evidence of extensive linguistic contacts occurring between 0-500AD.

----------


## arvistro

This is excerpt from Kallio:
"Although many Fenn(o-Ugr)icists speak of Proto-Baltic loanwords, there did not necessarily even exist any Proto-Baltic stage, but it was already Proto-Balto-Slavic that simultaneously split up into at least three dialects, namely West Baltic ( > Old Prussian), East Baltic ( > Lithuanian and Latvian), and Slavic. Thus, unless the concepts of ‘Proto-Baltic’ and ‘Proto-Balto-Slavic’ are considered synonymous, we should in fact talk about Proto-Balto-Slavic loanwords. According to the most realistic estimations (e.g. Kortlandt 1982: 181), the splitting up of Proto-Balto-Slavic took place around 1000BC,which also ﬁts the traditiona lFenn(o-Ugr)icist datings of these loanwords"

However Kallio finds two layers of Baltic loanwords:
1) from Balto-Slavic (the earliest) 
2) from "North Baltic" (some dialect close to West Baltic) 

"Even though my analysis of the material was anything but detailed, we may arrive at the conclusion that the “Early Baltic” loanwords in Finnic consist of the two chronologically diﬀerent layers: while the earlier stratum corresponds to Kortlandt’s Proto-Balto-Slavic stage (1989: 43-46) the later one represents an otherwise unattested Balto-Slavic dialect, whose phonological system was approximately the following [].
While the consonant system strictly corresponds to the Proto-Baltic stage by Christian Stang(1966:88-113), the vowel system (even including diph-thongs) in turn reminds me of the Pomesanian dialect of Old Prussian (see e.g. Levin 1974: 5, Kortlandt 1998: 115)! Therefore, no matter what we think about Eino Nieminen’s Old Curonian hypothesis, he might after all have been on the right track that *the source language of the “Early Baltic”loanwords was indeed West Baltic rather than East Baltic. Even so, at least I still prefer the safer concept of ‘North Baltic’ just in case*."

I hope they continue deeper research into these matters, such as comparison of semantics of Balto-Slavic vs Early Baltic.

----------


## Norvila

Colleagues,
I think we should lean back and agree on basic. 
We all have our own views to the history that up to us to revise.
There are several history hypothesis and that's OK. 
The Probability Theory states "probability has only positive values between 0-1" i.e. there is no such thing that "can't happen". Only the probability value differ.

So there was Porthan and Thomsen theory from 19c stating Baltic loanwords came during 200BC-700AC or during Roman-Migration ages. It's confirmed by recent archeology finds.

Then during the "Europe nations spring" and after WWII some national scientist decided to invent history of the nation way back to the Bronze age and earlier.
I've posted about Cheushesku Dacian aspirations before. That happened in all communist countries incl. Finland.
We still have some academics here in Lithuania with high national aspirations that deny even classification "Roman - Migration - Viking age" replacing with various stages of "formation of Baltic tribes". 
The theory of the "Fins met Balts in Siberia or Volga-Oka 1000BC and got loanwords" has number of shortcomings. It's missing archeological evidences.

The rest of the Europe incl. Swedes don't needed to "invent the nation", starts their history from 600AC. 

BTW there are interesting new finds from Migration age in Krants, Konigsberg (Zelenogradsk, Kaliningrad) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxuEmSnLon0

Also please check Tacitus Germania about Fenni tribe . http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...3Achapter%3D46

----------


## arvistro

> So there was Porthan and Thomsen theory from 19c stating Baltic loanwords came during 200BC-700AC or during Roman-Migration ages. It's confirmed by recent archeology finds.


What recent archaeological finds prove that Baltic loanwords describing primitive agriculture came 200BC-700AD?

----------


## Volat

> The Probability Theory states "probability has only positive values between 0-1" i.e. there is no such thing that "can't happen". Only the probability value differ.


It follows from one the Kolmogorov's probability axioms that an event that cannot occur has probability of 0. You've just written about values of probabilities. 

But the remark about probabilities reminds me of a joke about blonds. 

A blond was asked: What's probability of you meeting a dinosaur on the street?
She replied : fifty-fifty (1/2 to be precise)
- How?
- I will either meet the dinosaur or I will not. 


We are not dealing with probabilities but facts and arguments. The authors of the 19th centuries had little information presenting their best opinions for those times.

----------


## Norvila

I like your example :))).
We're here in the kind of genetics forum and we know all birds has evolved from dinosaurs.
Therefore probability to meet them on the street could be much higher than blond estimated. :)))

I suppose this picture better represents 50/50 probability.

vorobiev.jpg

----------


## Norvila

Timing of the Baltic loans and placenames in the North we could imagine as the rocks washed on the shore after the storm.
We can take Roman and Migration periods as the latest storm recorded and connect rocks on the shore with latest storm.
But some "innovative scientists" states "no, no, these rocks came from the storm 1000 BC. We don't have evidences, but prof.X and Y wrote they are from distant location Z".

I haven't heard arguments against Porthan and Thomsen theory.
Suomi scientists with national aspirations just tries to reduce and split the Baltic loans to the "confirmed", "not confirmed", "early" and "late".
Baltic loanwords consists of several groups:

EngineeringCommercialFamilyCult 
The Tacitus Germania indicates Aesti were poor early farmers without soc.structure, currency and Fenni as hunters gatherers living in the woods.
Wulfstan 891AC wrotes about Esti in Trusa. He describes rich full soc. structure and funeral habits known in Greeks, Dacians. Also mentions "many castles and kings".
So no chance Aesti could transfer engineering loans 1000BC to Fenni and naturally to connect with timing of wooden hill forts along the Baltic sea and in Finland.

----------


## arvistro

> Suomi scientists with national aspirations just tries to reduce and split the Baltic loans to the "confirmed", "not confirmed", "early" and "late".


This is a great thing they are researching Baltic loans in Finnish and trying to categorize and time them. Scrutiny must be applied to "confirm" or "not confirm" (it is clear that if Norvila did it, without any national aspirations, he would find 10,000 of Baltic loanwords in Finnic... 9,000 of them from Lithuanian language :)) 

Someone has to do proper scientific research and there is no good Lithuanian/ Latvian linguist who would deal with those matters, but there are good and objective Finnish analysis.
So, by applying proved linguistic methods they had arrived at two sources:
1) early, from the stage of Proto-Balt(o-Slav)ic. Grabbed on their way to East of Baltics. Somewhere ~ 1000 bce.
2) later, from the West Baltic dialect. 

So, let's wait for those "national aspirations" scientists to research this matter further and categorize loanwords into early and later and see what kind of categories relate to which stage.

----------


## Volat

Belarusian language has Baltic loan-words from Lithuanian. Not only loan-words but also grammar - syntax, semantics, morphology, phonetics. Lithuanian scholar Jūratė Laučiūtė published a dictionary of Baltisms in Slavic languages as part of her dissertation. 

_Ukrainian language has 60 loanwords, Russian - 200 , Polish – 400 and Belarusian language has over 550 loanwords. These are literary languages._

The dictionary of north-western Belarusian dialect in 5 volumes contains 1,200-1,300 Baltic loan-words. 

Good article on the subject "Borrowings in Belarusian from Lithuanian: Structure, Semantics, Functioning" : http://www.biblioteka.vpu.lt/zmogusi...ionok38-42.pdf


From encyclopedia of Belarusian language published by Belarusian State University in 1994





> Благодаря балтской языковой основе (субстрату), современный литовский и беларуский языки имеют ряд общих черт в фонетике, морфологии и синтаксисе: это позиционная мягкость согласных, йотация при стечении гласных, звательный падеж, сравнительная степень прилагательных и наречий с предлогом «за», особая форма повелительного наклонения для выражения совместного действия, дробные числительные, структурно-семантическая близость некоторых местоимений, общая валентность отдельных глаголов, конструкции типа «хворому палепшала", преимущественное употребление родительного падежа с отрицанием, конструкции с глаголом «мецъ», дословное совпадение сочетаний типа «ставіць хату» и другие особенности. 
> 
> 
> Source: Войніч I., Свяжынскі У. Літоўская мова. / Беларуская мова (Энцыклапедыя). Мн., 1994, с. 314.




Belarusian and Polish had linguistic contacts with Lithuanian. Belarusian grammar was influnced in some way. Linguistic contacts between Lithuanian and Finnish ...That maybe difficult to prove.

----------


## Volat

> So, by applying proved linguistic methods they had arrived at two sources:
> 1) early, from the stage of Proto-Balt(o-Slav)ic. Grabbed on their way to East of Baltics. Somewhere ~ 1000 bce.
> 2) later, from the West Baltic dialect.


Did Finnish authors suggest about possible western Baltic tribe that could have contacts with the Finns? Could they be Curonians travelling across the seas? Some linguists are undecided about the language of Curonians ie if it was eastern Baltic or western Baltic.

----------


## arvistro

@Volat, will just requote myself quoting Kallio :)
Basically reminds them of WB Pomesanian dialect vowels and Proto-Baltic consonants. It might have been Curonian, but can't say with confidence.




> This is excerpt from Kallio:
> "Even though my analysis of the material was anything but detailed, we may arrive at the conclusion that the “Early Baltic” loanwords in Finnic consist of the two chronologically diﬀerent layers: while the earlier stratum corresponds to Kortlandt’s Proto-Balto-Slavic stage (1989: 43-46) the later one represents an otherwise unattested Balto-Slavic dialect, whose phonological system was approximately the following [].
> While the consonant system strictly corresponds to the Proto-Baltic stage by Christian Stang(1966:88-113), the *vowel system (even including diph-thongs) in turn reminds me of the Pomesanian dialect of Old Prussian* (see e.g. Levin 1974: 5, Kortlandt 1998: 115)! Therefore, no matter what we think about Eino Nieminen’s Old Curonian hypothesis, he might after all have been on the right track that *the source language of the “Early Baltic”loanwords was indeed West Baltic rather than East Baltic. Even so, at least I still prefer the safer concept of ‘North Baltic’ just in case*."

----------


## Norvila

I heard no quotes or arguments against Porthan and Thomsen theory so far, except is "too old" for some.

Let's look at the Helsinki university page:*Frequently Asked Questions about Finno-Ugrian Languages*

*The Bend of the Volga or Northern Central Europe?*

Some scholars have proposed that Uralic languages would have been spoken far more westward, even in what is now Northern Germany and Denmark. Especially Kalevi Wiik, a professor of Phonetics, has claimed that Germanic languages were originally "Indo-European spoken with a Uralic accent".
http://www.helsinki.fi/~jolaakso/fufaq.html
So prof. Kalevi Wiik is accepted scholar.

He states in his book "Origins of the Europeans" "Baltic language was the lingua franca in Finland 1000BC".
That way Baltic loans were transferred to Suomi, Saami and others.

So let's count arguments we've:
1. 400 Baltic loans in Finish theory by Porthan and Thomsen dating them 200BC-700AC.
2. 500+ Baltic loans in Finish by K.Liukkanen dating them about 600AC.
3. Baltic language as the lingua franca in North by K.Wiik dating 1000BC
4. Massive Baltic placenames in the Russia North by Matveev A.K.
5. Baltic Russia North place names by Toporov dating I c AC
6. Massive Baltic place names around Novgorod by Vasiljev

----------


## teftelis

Kalevi Wiik isn't renowned among scholars received many critique and many of his theories are rejected.

----------


## arvistro

Yes, Wiik is well known freak in linguistics.

As to Baltic loanwords in Finnish, I recommend Junttila's work:
http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust266/sust266_junttila.pdf

Very good work, detailing words in categories and in relevance (clear, dubious, erroneous).

----------


## Norvila

One more scientist about migration eastward from Lithuania:
Согласно археологическим (В.В. Седов) и лингвистическим (В.Н. Топоров) изысканиям, в первые века нашей эры наблюдается переселение некоторой массы людей с балтийского побережья будущих Восточной Пруссии и Литвы на земли нынешней Беларуси и Центральной России. Тогда же в последней появляется пласт западно-балтских гидронимов, отличающихся от восточно-балтских.
https://rufabula.com/articles/2015/1...of-greatrussia

----------


## Volat

> One more scientist about migration eastward from Lithuania:
> Согласно археологическим (В.В. Седов) и лингвистическим (В.Н. Топоров) изысканиям, в первые века нашей эры наблюдается переселение некоторой массы людей с балтийского побережья будущих Восточной Пруссии и Литвы на земли нынешней Беларуси и Центральной России. Тогда же в последней появляется пласт западно-балтских гидронимов, отличающихся от восточно-балтских.
> https://rufabula.com/articles/2015/1...of-greatrussia


But this study is in reference to migration of eastern Galindians (Golyad') who settled in what's today western and south-western Moscow. There was also settlementd of Prussian refugees in the 13th century on territories in what's today Lithuania and Belarus after Teutonic invasion. This migration is attested in chronicles.

----------


## Norvila

We both understand "в первые века нашей эры" means beginning of the 1st c AD, not 13th AD.
It scientists noticed movement eastward talking about Novgorod - Moscow area, migration to the direction of Estonia-Finland or East-North could have a chance also I suppose.

Dr. Santeri Juntila is a "new star" in the Baltic - Finish linguistic. Abstract in his PhD defended in spring 2016 starts with:
"The old layer of vocabulary of Baltic origin in Finnic, or the Baltic loans in Proto-Finnic, was described by Vilhelm Thomsen in his monographs from 1869 and 1890. Altogether over one thousand Finnic words have been associated with this layer of loans in various sources." 
https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/158777

----------


## Volat

> We both understand "в первые века нашей эры" means beginning of the 1st c AD, not 13th AD.
> It scientists noticed movement eastward talking about Novgorod - Moscow area, migration to the direction of Estonia-Finland or East-North could have a chance also I suppose.
> 
> Dr. Santeri Juntila is a "new star" in the Baltic - Finish linguistic. Abstract in his PhD defended in spring 2016 starts with:
> "The old layer of vocabulary of Baltic origin in Finnic, or the Baltic loans in Proto-Finnic, was described by Vilhelm Thomsen in his monographs from 1869 and 1890. Altogether over one thousand Finnic words have been associated with this layer of loans in various sources." 
> https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/158777




It's not about Finnic languages having old layer of Baltic loan-words and newer layer of west Baltic loan-words. Older layer of Baltic loan-words were obtain during migration of Baltic Finns from Volga-Oka towards the shores of eastern Baltic. It's about finding hydronyms on what's today Karelia and Finland to support your idea about the presence of Lithuanians or Balts living on territories of present day Finland and Karelia. Novgorod region has Baltic hydronyms as per Vasiliev, but this region is not part of Karelia or Finland. Makeev stated there are Baltic hydronyms ending with -as and -is suffixes in Karelia but he also suggested that the issue about this type of hydronyms is not settled. Some Finnish and Russian linguists didn't agree with Makeev suggesting such hydronyms can be Finnic in origin. I referenced the dictionary of hydronyms from Vologda region showing that hydronyms ending with -as and -is are Finnish.

Two scholars living in the 19th century which you often reference suggested that the could be Baltic settlements in Finland. But they didn't do linguistic analysis of the hydronyms as per the source you've quoted. I doubt there was an expedition to collect hydronyms of small rivers, creeks and waterways in Finland and Karelia in the 19th century. Makeev was among the first who organised expeditions in Karelia in 1950s. All those two authors of the 19th century stated is that during the migrations of people around Europe some Balts could settled in Finland.

---

Galindians were first mentioned by Ptolemy who lived in Alexandria having never visited north-eastern Europe. In those times north-eastern Europe was a world away Alexandria. Later, scholars presented different maps showing the tribes described by Ptolemy. Let's assume Galindians (western Galindians) lived in Prussia. Modern scholars assumed that tribe Golyad' first attested in the 11th century in eastern Slavic chronicle were descendants of western Galindians and they migrated in the 4AD or earlier settling in what's today western Moscow region and Kaluga region. Golyad' (eastern Galindians) are associated with the Moshchiny (Мощинская) archaeological culture dated to 4AD-6AD: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C...83%D1%80%D0%B0

Hydronyms cannot be dated accurately. So scholars associated Golyad' (eastern Galindians) with the Moshchiny archaeological culture dated from 4AD. During linguistic analysis it's often difficult to separate Slavic and Baltic hydronyms due to common origins of the languages let alone to separate west Baltic and east Baltic hydronyms. Let's assume Golyad' spoke western Baltic language and there are west Baltic hydronyms in aforementioned region. How does all this help to prove your idea there were Lithuanians or western Balts living in Karelia or Finland?

----------


## arvistro

> https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/158777


Nice source, hope one day it gets translated into English.

----------


## Ukko

> I think problem is in "national science" mentality i.e. territory > tribe > nation > country.
> Common approach is - mono linguistic tribe lived in the territory and evolved to the nation>country.
> But in the reality many languages were spoken in the same territory by different social classes.
> After "spring of nations" it was common to search for the roots of the "nation" and protect from others by denying other views to the facts.
> F.e. there are number of publications stating Fino-Ugric language group is artificial and languages has nothing in common.
> But Finish scientists take this as an attack to the national pride.
> If someone ask them about loanwords they react the same.
> It went to the new level after 90-ties in Russia.



07fd0a67bff2355c976afbccd774b7a3.jpg

Only issue we have is with IE tribes accepting the Uralic peoples, you even question our existence.
We are still here and not going away, just live with it.

----------


## Ukko

> S.Finland finds fits furnaces C14 dates in Žardė forthhill near Klaipėda - 420 BCE+160-60.
> So new guys with metal technology appeared in SE Baltic about the same time.



 :Rolleyes:

----------


## Ukko

> Colleagues,
> I think we should lean back and agree on basic. 
> We all have our own views to the history that up to us to revise.
> There are several history hypothesis and that's OK. 
> The Probability Theory states "probability has only positive values between 0-1" i.e. there is no such thing that "can't happen". Only the probability value differ.
> 
> So there was Porthan and Thomsen theory from 19c stating Baltic loanwords came during 200BC-700AC or during Roman-Migration ages. It's confirmed by recent archeology finds.
> 
> Then during the "Europe nations spring" and after WWII some national scientist decided to invent history of the nation way back to the Bronze age and earlier.
> ...



Lol, Tacitus and the Fenni, here is this BS again, "Finn" as an ethnonym is an IE (Baltic?) loan but that went right past you. 

Btw, Swedish "nation" was largely invented after 1200 AD on many different occasions.

----------


## arvistro

> "Finn" as an ethnonym is an IE (Baltic?) loan.


Finn would be German loan. Balts a) lack "f" sound in native words; b) have never called Finns Finns, we used sāmi for Baltic Finns (as in Sāmsala - sāmi island/Saaremaa).

----------


## Ukko

> Finn would be German loan. Balts a) lack "f" sound in native words; b) have never called Finns Finns, we used sāmi for Baltic Finns (as in Sāmsala - sāmi island/Saaremaa).


That is also a loan if related.





> My dissertation shows that Proto-Germanic, Proto-Scandinavian, Proto-Finnic and Proto-Sami all date to different periods of the Iron Age. I argue that the present study along with my earlier published research also proves that a (West-)Uralic language – the pre-form of the Finnic and Samic languages – was spoken in the region of the present-day Finland in the Bronze Age, but not earlier than that. In the centuries before the Common Era, Proto-Sami was spoken in the whole region of what is now called Finland, excluding Lapland. At the beginning of the Common Era, Proto-Sami was spoken in the whole region of Finland, including Southern Finland, from where the Sami idiom first began to recede. An archaic (Northwest-)Indo-European language and a subsequently extinct Paleo-European language were likely spoken in what is now called Finland and Estonia, when the linguistic ancestors of the Finns and the Sami arrived in the eastern and northern Baltic Sea region from the Volga-Kama region probably at the beginning of the Bronze Age.* For example, the names Suomi ʻFinlandʼ and Viro ʻEstoniaʼ are likely to have been borrowed from the Indo-European idiom in question*.


https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/135714

----------


## Volat

The earliest eastern Slavic chronicle compiled around 1113 in Kiev has the following terms for Finnic people.

Yam' or Yem' derived from Finnish jäämit . It was applied to some people of Fennoscandia most similar to those living in Häme.

Sum' derived from Suomi. Finns in south-western Finland.

Vod' - Votia; Ves' - Vepsi; Liv' - Livonians

Chud' was a collective term for Vod', Ves', Sum', Yem', Liv', Karelians.

Lop' - Saami.

In other chronicles, Karelians - Korela.

In short Baltic Finns of Finland and north-western Russia, Estonia and Latvia were differentiated . Common collective term for them was Chud'.

I cannot recall a specific term for Estonians. They would have been known as Chud'.

-----


Tacitus referred to some people as Fenni. 


Tacitus wrote




> "I hesitate to classify Peucini peoples, Veneti and Fenni to the Germans or Sarmatians. However , the Peucini, whom some call the Bastarnians, behave as Germans in regards to speech, lifestyle , habitat and housing. They all live in mud, while their nobility is in a state of idle. They [Peucini] uglify themselves through intermarriages as Sarmatians do. Veneti learned a lot from the morals, as they walk around forests in robber gangs between Peucini [Bastranians] and Fenni. However, they [Veneti] should rather be referred to the Germans, because they build houses, wear shields, and they have an advantage in fitness and speedy infantry. All this distinguishes them [Veneti] from the Sarmatians who are living in the wagon or on horseback. "(Tac. Germ.)





> "Their [Fenni's]food is grass; their clothes are animal skins; their bedding is ground. They hunt using bone arrowheads."(Tac. Germ. 46)



Veneti lived between Pecuni (Bastrians) and Fenni. Fenni could be people in north-east that led hunter-gatherer's life style 2,000 years ago. They don't necessarily have to be ancestors of Estonians or Finns. The term Fenni could have been transferred to Finland by Latin and Germans later. Although linguistic connection between Fenni and Finland terms is disputed.

----------


## Norvila

Colleagues,
Please check the map of archaeological cultures https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C...83%D1%80%D0%B0
All cultures has changed in 5th c AD. That was the Migration period, before was Constantine religion change, climate change, Crisis of the Third Century, also known as Military Anarchy or the Imperial Crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis..._Third_Century
Around 400AD 14 legions were disband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_legions
14 legions with families and support personnel could reach up to half million people.
Plenty of reasons to leave Roman Empire.
East Baltic was known as place with no kings from Tacitus and good place to hide or settle therefore.
Swedish scientists notice rapid increase in settlements during Migration period.
It would be strange if other territories South or East of Baltics wouldn't be affected.
Total change in habits was noticed by Wulfstan in 891 to those known in Greece and Dacia .
I think it proofs migration here.

----------


## Ukko

> Colleagues,
> Please check the map of archaeological cultures https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C...83%D1%80%D0%B0
> All cultures has changed in 5th c AD. That was the Migration period, before was Constantine religion change, climate change, Crisis of the Third Century, also known as Military Anarchy or the Imperial Crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis..._Third_Century
> Around 400AD 14 legions were disband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_legions
> 14 legions with families and support personnel could reach up to half million people.
> Plenty of reasons to leave Roman Empire.
> East Baltic was known as place with no kings from Tacitus and good place to hide or settle therefore.
> Swedish scientists notice rapid increase in settlements during Migration period.
> It would be strange if other territories South or East of Baltics wouldn't be affected.
> ...


People from Northern Europe served in the Roman Auxilia, it continued with the Byzantines, other than that your theory has no base in reality.

----------


## Norvila

Did anyone read a book? - Ancient Hillforts of Finland: Problems of Analysis, Chronology and Interpretation with Special Reference to the Hillfort of Kuhmoinen
ISBN 9519056971, 9789519056975

----------


## Norvila

Good read "Problems of Ethnicity" by John H. Lind http://www.helsinki.fi/venaja/nwruss...e/pdf/Lind.pdf

----------


## Norvila

Check documentary about V.Toporov. http://infa.lt/3654/vladimiras-topor...ke-ir-erdveje/
35:00min he tribute the book *В. Л. ЯНИН. НОВГОРОД И ЛИТВА: ПОГРАНИЧНЫЕ СИТУАЦИИ XIII-XV ВЕКОВ*

That states "Baltic place names are massive around Novgorod and down to the Moskow" already in 13-15c. Means they appeared much earlier.

On other hand indicated only several viking place names in Russia - 6 Dneper river rapids. http://www.viking.no/the-viking-heri...mes-in-russia/

What language spoke vikings in Novgorod then?

----------


## arvistro

Some interesting stuff
"As *we do not see Y-haplogroup N in any of the male samples from Lithuania and Latvia dated as late as 230 calBCE* we propose that this element was brought into the genepool of the more southern region of the Baltic coast after the Late Bronze Age."
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...13241.full.pdf
The Genetic History of Northern Europe
A.Mittnik et al.

----------


## Ukko

> Some interesting stuff
> "As *we do not see Y-haplogroup N in any of the male samples from Lithuania and Latvia dated as late as 230 calBCE* we propose that this element was brought into the genepool of the more southern region of the Baltic coast after the Late Bronze Age."
> http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...13241.full.pdf
> The Genetic History of Northern Europe
> A.Mittnik et al.


You are in the minority that does not go.

----------


## arvistro

Not sure I follow. What is minority view? 

/
For the record I do not believe any more N in Balts was caused by Varyags :) However not seeing N in Kivutkalns, and having persons in Kivutkalns that are like modern Balts except for extra farmer genes, makes stuff very complicated to understand Baltic N.

----------


## Ukko

> Not sure I follow. What is minority view? 
> 
> /
> For the record I do not believe any more N in Balts was caused by Varyags :) However not seeing N in Kivutkalns, and having persons in Kivutkalns that are like modern Balts except for extra farmer genes, makes stuff very complicated to understand Baltic N.




It arrived later.




> What is more, since the genetic variation of contemporary Estonians cannot be fully explained by these events, further research will be needed to reveal the subsequent demographic events that brought Y chromosome hg N onto the shores of the Baltic Sea and changed the autosomal variation of the people living in this area.


http://biorxiv.org/content/early/201....full.pdf+html

----------


## Tony 6whiskeys

I'm not sure if this thread has died or moved on but it was a fascinating read. I was interested in what made Arvisto abandon his original hypothesis as it appeared to construct a storyline which did not conflict with known facts? Also, if the debate regarding NIC1 in Baltic areas has moved on I'd be grateful for a heads up as to where. 

My interest is somewhat selfish as a N1C1-L550-M2783-L551-N-Y17696 male whose ancestral line traces back to the Lvov/Lviw area in the far SE.Poland/W.Ukraine region for a least 400 years. I'd be fascinated to hear peoples opinions on whether this state of affairs is most likely due to those ancestors having remained stationary while the different nation states sprang up and fluctuated around them, whether it might have been due to mass migrations in historical times or even earlier related to known events....

----------


## Ukko

> I'm not sure if this thread has died or moved on but it was a fascinating read. I was interested in what made Arvisto abandon his original hypothesis as it appeared to construct a storyline which did not conflict with known facts? Also, if the debate regarding NIC1 in Baltic areas has moved on I'd be grateful for a heads up as to where. 
> 
> My interest is somewhat selfish as a N1C1-L550-M2783-L551-N-Y17696 male whose ancestral line traces back to the Lvov/Lviw area in the far SE.Poland/W.Ukraine region for a least 400 years. I'd be fascinated to hear peoples opinions on whether this state of affairs is most likely due to those ancestors having remained stationary while the different nation states sprang up and fluctuated around them, whether it might have been due to mass migrations in historical times or even earlier related to known events....


Recent papers suggest that N1c around the Baltic Sea clearly originates from an Finnic population, not Norse or Baltic.
The debate will be how long they remained Finnic, what was their role in the receiving Germanic and Baltic cultures and who the hell where they if they appeared so late in the region, we must have some mentions of them in the historical records and folklore.

----------


## arvistro

> Recent papers suggest that N1c around the Baltic Sea clearly originates from an Finnic population, not Norse or Baltic.
> The debate will be how long they remained Finnic, what was their role in the receiving Germanic and Baltic cultures and who the hell where they if they appeared so late in the region, we must have some mentions of them in the historical records and folklore.


Well, some down to Earth scenarios are possible.
1) N1c comes to Baltic together with iron working, some centuries before AD. They Finnify big part of local population. For example, Liivi folk (coastal Finns) I think will turn out basically Finnified old Kivutkalns people. They are quite R1a rich population with some N1c.
2) Baltic-to-be N1c still is hiding somewhere. This N1c spreads most likely after 500, after depopulation that followed the year without sun. Probably they took on fishing resources and or trade routes deep into coastal Prussia, Lithuania, etc. 
3) Later "True Balts" gradually arrived into region and Baltified N1c folk. Only some linguistic traces of this Finno substrate can be found in Lithuanian language. 

The problem however is why only this particular N1c spread in Balts, when Estonians had different types of it.

Anyway, first thing to await for now is what Kivutkalns N1c will look like in terms of for example Fennoscandian admixture.

----------


## Norvila

N1C1 could be spread to Finland, Karela and N.E. Sweden during 12-15 c. AD.
In the late 14th century, the Novgorodians set up the fiefs of Korela, Oreshek, Koporye, Luga, and Ladoga as a sort of buffer state between their core dominions and Sweden. Several Lithuanian dukes renowned for their military skills were invited to rule this Ingrian duchy; Narimantas, his son Patrikas, and then Lengvenis. They helped fortify the Russian-Swedish border and built several new forts in the region, including one in Yama.
Birch letter from around 1191 has message "Litva vstala na Korelu" (Litva stood on Karela). 
http://karel.su/230-litva-vstala-na-korelu.html
This let to assume Lithuanian mercenaries were contracted to fight with Sweden from beginning of Swedish - Novgorodian wars or earlier.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedis...vgorodian_Wars
 This explains way how the "Lithuanian language became Lingua Franca in Finland, Karela and Estonia" according to academic Kalevi Wiik.

----------


## Norvila

Another possibility to spread N1C1 was the fur trade route that passed Lithuania to Wroclav via Alps to Venice:
"The merchants of Wroclaw ... began to reexport Russian furs to northern Italy at the end of the 13th century. *Among all these trade links of the city of Wrocław, the most important turned out to be the routes of Lithuania*), crossing Wrocław, continuing either to southern Germany or to Austria, and, finally, all reaching Venice. In that direction, Wrocław merchants transported principally natural products: furs, wax, and the red dye of Polish origin called czerwiec. ...As we comparing the Wrocław tariffs of 1266 and of 1327, we observe a rise of imported goods from about a dozen to about eighty." So trade volume rose 667% or 10% a year. 
http://www.fnp.org.pl/monografie/ima...liwski-summary[0].pdf

The same mercenaries stationed in Karela (Finland after division) most likely were involved in fur trade and transportation.

----------


## laint

> There is this mystery as to why Balts (Latvians, Lithuanians, also former Prussian lands) have so much N1C in them. N1C ~ R1A in our lands. R1A is the hg of initial bearers of our IE language, that is believed to be quite archaic and conserved IE. 
> What I have found recently googling up and reading through several English and Russian forums and sites is that Latvian/Lithuanian/Belarus/Prussian/NE Polish N1C is of different subclade than the version most popular in Finland & Estonia. I've read quite a lot of theories coming up, i.e. Balts and Baltic languages being created by mixed R1A/N1C people. All this would make sense if there was continuity with Estonia. But they (Estonians) appear to have two types of N, the Baltic one mixed with the Finnic one.
> 
> This is how it looks in Tree:
> 
> N1c1a1a1 (CTS2929/VL29): found in Russia (incl. Volga-Ural), the Baltic, Sweden and Hungary
> N1c1a1a1a (L550): found throughout the Baltic and North Slavic countries, *and in places settled by the Vikings*. Varyag Rurikids of Russia was under this L550, but not further down the tree.
> *N1c1a1a1a1 (L1025): found especially in Balto-Slavic countries, with a peak in Lithuania and Latvia*
> N1c1a1a1a1a (L149.2, L551)- *Lithuanian Great Prince Gediminas Clan* (includes Polish, Hungarian, Bohemian temporar rulers Jagellons, Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian Princes of former Great Lithuanian Duchy territories)N1c1a1a1a1b (L591) -N1c1a1a1a1c (L1027) - *Lithuanian Prince Giedrus Clan* 
> ...



I've read thread and it doesn't look answered and I'm curious what data was used for this statement, because in 1945 native population of those areas were replaced by poles and russians. Unless there is some archeological evidence used, this question does not make much sense.

1000 -1500 years ago there was constant influx of new people from north, as it is easier to settle on shores for more mobile sailors. Kursenieki(they are new Curonian ethnicity, that emerged on base of Curonians) on wiki show map, that they had settlements up to Gdansk(Danzig). Also Curonians are the only tribe, that had name given from foreigners - as a variant of corsare - sea people, which for the most of the recent history(last 1000 years) were mixed - baltic and finnic people. 

Curonians are closely linked to other prussians, than eastern balts and zemgalian/zemaitian tribes. Initially they were inhabiting Saaremaa, but later were pushed back to Courland peninsula. There was a heavily mixing of influx of finnic tribes after and it does not help, that they forced large part of livonians to resettle to Daugava.

There is not that much mystery of why some R1a were assimilated(as that is what happened to R1a in east for the last 2000-3000 years), as that is natural process, that happens over long time. Only wars eradicate neighbours, but living side by side has some cultural consequences for neighbours. Also, during Terra Marianna a lot of finnic people were captured and settled among locals. There are many such groups, who were resettled which make distinctive groups among locals, so that is not really a mystery if you take those into account. Autosomal chromosome makes perfect job of making people similar, even if their paternal or maternal paths are different.

----------


## laint

> 5) Assumption, which I am not that sure. N1C1 in South Baltic most likely appeared after 500 AD (which is not that far after common ancestor "B"). It did not just "appear", it became ruling class. Why after 500 AD? First, there is a Prussian legend of Bruten and Widevut who established Prussian statehood around 600. Second, according to Gimbutas Balts if my memory serves me right starting after 500 AD archeological findings show that peacefull life near Baltics ended, broken arrows findings, more military equipment, etc. Third, Truso was established at the end of 8th century.


There are some similarities with viking invasions to eastern Baltic shore and what happened with viking invasions in Britain. They mixed with locals and in next generations created mixed ethnicity. I've read 30 years ago papers by Russian historians that stated, that early towns of Ilmen "slavs" were created among finnic locals not by slavic, but by joint prussian and prussian-varangian settlers initially. Of course they were not as populous as locals, so N1c could have become nobles, who later created Kievan Rus.

----------


## Tomenable

> Well, some down to Earth scenarios are possible.
> 1) N1c comes to Baltic together with iron working, some centuries before AD. They Finnify big part of local population. For example, Liivi folk (coastal Finns) I think will turn out basically Finnified old Kivutkalns people. They are quite R1a rich population with some N1c.
> 2) Baltic-to-be N1c still is hiding somewhere. This N1c spreads most likely after 500, after depopulation that followed the year without sun. Probably they took on fishing resources and or trade routes deep into coastal Prussia, Lithuania, etc. 
> 3) Later "True Balts" gradually arrived into region and Baltified N1c folk. Only some linguistic traces of this Finno substrate can be found in Lithuanian language. 
> 
> The problem however is why only this particular N1c spread in Balts, when Estonians had different types of it.
> 
> Anyway, first thing to await for now is what Kivutkalns N1c will look like in terms of for example Fennoscandian admixture.


It seems theory 1) has been confirmed - some Iron Age Baltic samples had N1c.

There is N1c from Berčiūnai, Lithuania, dated to 1900-1300 years before present.

----------


## laint

> Well, some down to Earth scenarios are possible.
> 1) N1c comes to Baltic together with iron working, some centuries before AD. They Finnify big part of local population. For example, Liivi folk (coastal Finns) I think will turn out basically Finnified old Kivutkalns people. They are quite R1a rich population with some N1c.
> 2) Baltic-to-be N1c still is hiding somewhere. This N1c spreads most likely after 500, after depopulation that followed the year without sun. Probably they took on fishing resources and or trade routes deep into coastal Prussia, Lithuania, etc. 
> 3) Later "True Balts" gradually arrived into region and Baltified N1c folk. Only some linguistic traces of this Finno substrate can be found in Lithuanian language. 
> 
> The problem however is why only this particular N1c spread in Balts, when Estonians had different types of it.
> 
> Anyway, first thing to await for now is what Kivutkalns N1c will look like in terms of for example Fennoscandian admixture.


1) It is rather somewhat too easy to call Liivs coastal Finns... with this style of naming maybe Finns can be called northern Liivs...
From what I remember from history lessons, 2 out of 3 earliest skulls in Latvia had asian features and third most probably was mediterranian.
Liivi people originated from Sāmsala. They most probably were remnants of earliest Finnish migrations to Baltic(and they either were so called Baltic Saami people or replaced them), however it seems, that around ~500AD they spread to Courland, causing conflicts with Couronians.
2) Year without the sun would definitelly reduce avaibility of fish, too :) 
3)Map in eupedia shows a large N1c presence in Prussia, which is dubious data. Many tribes in Prussia practised funeral pyres, so it is speculation at best - we can't have y-dna from ashes, sadly. It is also unknown to what it points - to current russian population, which will have N1c, of course. Prewar population, which had N1c flow via Kursenieki, who inhabitated coast up to Gdansk, or viking era, which makes no sense if there are no ancient y-dna data. 

Later "True Balts" arrived in Latvia and Lithuania from east around 600AD from regions where they had more chances to mix with N1c. Most probably, that Mari has R1a, that is more common to Baltic, so y-dna went both ways. And most probably so called "True Balts" were pushed together with neighbouring N1c because of slavic invasions and most probably your so called "True Balts", or how I call them - Eastern Balts brought into Baltic most of N1c. So far y-dna research in Latvia showed, that eastern areas that did not had livonians had more N1c than expected. And they also should differ from Estonian N1c, because Estonia most probably had multiple migration waves(from north) of N1c and this one is only one such recent massive Baltic migration in last ~1500 years.

----------


## laint

> From: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451206
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly, Baltic clades N-L550 and N-L1025 have similar ages and TMRCAs as I2a1b1:
> 
> N1c1a1a1a (L550): found throughout the Baltic and North Slavic countries
> N1c1a1a1a1 (L1025): found especially in Balto-Slavic countries, with a peak in Lithuania and Latvia
> 
> ...


This data really destroys original OP research, because Lithuanians inhabited mainly EA region - a lot of them also lived in western Belorussia, where I had lithuanian relatives from my mothers side. Other regions were remnants of other tribes and EA, just like in Latvia eastern side has more N1c, than other regions, which points to Latvian-Lithuanian migration as a biggest source of N1c in Latvia and Lithuania. N1c in Baltic area has mainly nothing to do with vikings, but with Eastern Balts, who heavily mixed with "Finnish" tribes during last couple of thousand years. In Latvia Latvians replaced Selonians(Highlandians - translation from Livonian) and Lithuanians did the same to southern part of them - Aukštaitians(translation - Highlandians) in process keeping name, where Latvians replaced Augšzemnieki inhabited area on right side of Daugava up to the Estonia - extending straight line from EA corner makes area in eastern Latvia, that has dialects of Highlandian.

PS Just for future use: N1c is now called N1a. Lots of naming changes in short time...

----------


## Khazar

Hello everyone. Kindly advise me if this comment is off-topic and should rather be in a new thread, but I noticed that Eupedia's N1c map is highly inaccurate over the Kaliningradskaya Oblast. The entire Kaliningrad population was deported after WW2. I find it highly improbable that there should be an uninterrupted steady flow of N1c across the region into Poland considering the depopulation. Prior to that it was inhabited by people primarily descended from Teutonic Knights. That is in start contrast to the history of Lithuania which fought hard against them. I think there is an honest need to correct that map unless evidence of DNA testing on males proven to be patrilineally descended from men who lived in the area before Stalin depopulated the area.

----------


## laint

> Hello everyone. Kindly advise me if this comment is off-topic and should rather be in a new thread, but I noticed that Eupedia's N1c map is highly inaccurate over the Kaliningradskaya Oblast. The entire Kaliningrad population was deported after WW2. I find it highly improbable that there should be an uninterrupted steady flow of N1c across the region into Poland considering the depopulation. Prior to that it was inhabited by people primarily descended from Teutonic Knights. That is in start contrast to the history of Lithuania which fought hard against them. I think there is an honest need to correct that map unless evidence of DNA testing on males proven to be patrilineally descended from men who lived in the area before Stalin depopulated the area.


Teutonic Knights were religious Brotherhood and did not get married, unless you have some idea, that Prussians were only Germanic descendants, which is not true. Somehow people(even in Baltic) think, that Baltic people were in Total War against invaders, but real picture is different - they fought among themselves and Germans gained foothold by landing military support whoever needed it. Some of the conversion mechanisms are very well explained in game Crusader Kings 2, where locals were granted titles, as mass killings of country folks were not economically viable. That's why fighting sides in these wars also took hostages in enemy territory and settled them in their own lands.
Prussian languages were used up till 17th century and it coincides with influx of refugees from protestant areas and Prussia was part of most bloodiest war in European history, but claiming that it made Prussians extinct is far stretch. Reasons why Prussian language went extinct is in not because they died out, but because Protestantism was their main self-identification and Prussian languages were pushed out of use for other - economical and educational reasons, where more and more educated Prussians simply switched to German language, as Prussian was language of country folks. And that is main difference from Latvia or Estonia, where only ruling class adapted German language and distanced themselves from much larger native population, who used different language and to whom education became available centuries later(under Swedes) than Prussians had it.

Also, there is some wrong idea, that Lithuania was driving force in fighting against Teutonic Order, which is not really true - the ones that fought against Teutonic Order were Prussians, and later Samogitians. Lithuanians quite regularly invaded Samogitia and even gave it as a present to either Teutonic or Livonian Order. Up to 1400 Lithuania had no power over Samogitia, as it was governed by Samogitian Eldership, which was not under Lithuania. Teutonic order did not even reached Lithuanian lands, but ravaged lands of other tribes, which Lithuania later claimed as their own. Wars in ancient times were not fought exclusively by religious reasons, but also economical - pillaging, ransoms, trade arguments, etc. - nothing much has changed in modern times.
A lot of Prussians who escaped war, settled in Lithuania and became Lithuanians - and prior WW2 in part of Prussia was known as little Lithuania, as some of the locals were either of Lithuanian descent or Prussians, who switched to Lithuanian. Also there was always steady influx of Kursenieki in 19th century from north up to Poland, who settled mainly in shore area, so it is not that only non-Baltic people settled in Prussia.

Genetically, Prussians had some(probably - quite a large part) Prussian heritage in them, even if they mixed with others, but similar mixing was going on everywhere else. There are still Prussian descendants of those replaced people, that primarily now live in Germany, so all is fair, if map that shows N1a uses data from Prussian descendants. There might be some N1a influx from Scandinavian vikings, but the main N1a source in modern Baltic populations comes from East and is not related to vikings, though. I think, that this thread was used to look for descendants of those Scandinavians, but somehow data is not readily available to make final conclusions.

----------


## Olivia_19

Well, that is like

----------


## Olivia_19

I love this theory

----------


## Olivia_19

It's kinda difficult to understand it

----------


## Klavs

My personal, current understanding of Baltic genetics and history is as follows:

First there where Cro-Magnon people who formed initial WHG population in northern Europe with a dominant yDNA I1 and I2.

Then came "proto-celtic" people to the Baltic region carrying R1b, as seen in Zvejnieku kapulauks:

(censored - can't post links, yet, lol)

The influence of these people was probably strong enough to add first bits of ANE admixture to the local population and to replace existing language with and old proto-Indo-European variant - at least in some places.

Then came R1a men and pushed any signs of I1 and I2 yDNA ancestry from the baltic region but the overall WHG genetic admixture remained the same - that could be explained by process of "selective mating" when following generations would choose people with predominant WHG traits over their "own" ANE traits - in process forming a population which continues to be dominated by WHG admixture to this very day but almost completely lacking original I1 and I2 yDNA - contrary to the neighbouring Sweden, Norway and even Finland still retaining reasonably large proportions of old WHG paternal I1 and I2 ancestral lines.

Now when this was done already and we had what we know as Kunda culture as can be seen here (censored - can't post links, yet, lol) (I really appreciate these quality maps there, made by Maciamo), another "invasion" happened by N1c people, forming the following Narva culture.

Now the tricky thing here is to figure out who were those N1c people, coming to the Baltic territories - because the majority of current N1c people don't speak Finno-Ugric languages at all but speak Turkic languages instead. That makes me believe that N1c had it's source among Turkic language speaking people, who acquired old Finno-Ugric language from the very same WHG people who were still living in Northern Europe (Fennoscandia?) who have been able to still avoid any significant "colonisation" by ANE men by that time. And then this group of people moved down or west and created what we know as Narva culture - which most probably already spoke a mix of proto-Baltic and proto-Estonian / proto-Liiv languages in the region.

What seems obvious is that the very same N1c people who came to Baltic also settled as "upper class" or "warrior class" caste which later formed Varyag traders and Warrior groups which in end resulted in known early ruler dynasties in Lithuania and Kiev Rus - Rurikids and Gediminids. 

And the resemblance of Gediminid "columns" to the Rurikid "Raven", which were thought to be just a coincidence was most probably influenced by actual clan sign used by Varyag people of Finno-Ugric / N1c heritage and clearly Scandinavian cultural origin - hence Ttruvar - Thor-war (Warrior of Thor) and other Scandinavian names of old Rurikid rulers.

----------


## paul333

( ' Quote' from post #211 ) 

"Also, there is some wrong idea, that Lithuania was driving force in fighting against Teutonic Order, which is not really true - the ones that fought against Teutonic Order were Prussians, and later Samogitians. Lithuanians quite regularly invaded Samogitia and even gave it as a present to either Teutonic or Livonian Order. Up to 1400 Lithuania had no power over Samogitia, as it was governed by Samogitian Eldership, which was not under Lithuania. Teutonic order did not even reached Lithuanian lands, but ravaged lands of other tribes, which Lithuania later claimed as their own. Wars in ancient times were not fought exclusively by religious reasons, but also economical - pillaging, ransoms, trade arguments, etc. - nothing much has changed in modern times."


The Teutonic Order certainly reached Lithuania.

One of these Tuetonic Knights who fought in Lithuania was an English man, Anthony de Lucy killed in a battle at Kaunas,1368, ( alongside two others Roger Felbrigg, and John de Multon ) on Holy Crusade. His body was brought back to England, and suprisingly in order to identify him, his body was dug up in 1981, and was found perfectly preserved, so much so,that when they cut into his body during an autopsy it was still pink, and when opening his liver ( I think ) it began to bleed. ( over 600 yrs later !!! ) I'm not sure if his DNA has been tested yet, but check, 'St Bees Man, Sir Anthony de Lucy'. there is a video of the excavation and Autopsy.

He might even have grounds for Saint Hood, based on the bleeding alone.

----------


## exceededminimumso..

> Teutonic Knights were religious Brotherhood and did not get married, unless you have some idea, that Prussians were only Germanic descendants, which is not true. Somehow people(even in Baltic) think, that Baltic people were in Total War against invaders, but real picture is different - they fought among themselves and Germans gained foothold by landing military support whoever needed it. Some of the conversion mechanisms are very well explained in game Crusader Kings 2, where locals were granted titles, as mass killings of country folks were not economically viable. That's why fighting sides in these wars also took hostages in enemy territory and settled them in their own lands.
> Prussian languages were used up till 17th century and it coincides with influx of refugees from protestant areas and Prussia was part of most bloodiest war in European history, but claiming that it made Prussians extinct is far stretch. Reasons why Prussian language went extinct is in not because they died out, but because Protestantism was their main self-identification and Prussian languages were pushed out of use for other - economical and educational reasons, where more and more educated Prussians simply switched to German language, as Prussian was language of country folks. And that is main difference from Latvia or Estonia, where only ruling class adapted German language and distanced themselves from much larger native population, who used different language and to whom education became available centuries later(under Swedes) than Prussians had it.
> 
> Also, there is some wrong idea, that Lithuania was driving force in fighting against Teutonic Order, which is not really true - the ones that fought against Teutonic Order were Prussians, and later Samogitians. Lithuanians quite regularly invaded Samogitia and even gave it as a present to either Teutonic or Livonian Order. Up to 1400 Lithuania had no power over Samogitia, as it was governed by Samogitian Eldership, which was not under Lithuania. Teutonic order did not even reached Lithuanian lands, but ravaged lands of other tribes, which Lithuania later claimed as their own. Wars in ancient times were not fought exclusively by religious reasons, but also economical - pillaging, ransoms, trade arguments, etc. - nothing much has changed in modern times.
> A lot of Prussians who escaped war, settled in Lithuania and became Lithuanians - and prior WW2 in part of Prussia was known as little Lithuania, as some of the locals were either of Lithuanian descent or Prussians, who switched to Lithuanian. Also there was always steady influx of Kursenieki in 19th century from north up to Poland, who settled mainly in shore area, so it is not that only non-Baltic people settled in Prussia.
> 
> Genetically, Prussians had some(probably - quite a large part) Prussian heritage in them, even if they mixed with others, but similar mixing was going on everywhere else. There are still Prussian descendants of those replaced people, that primarily now live in Germany, so all is fair, if map that shows N1a uses data from Prussian descendants. There might be some N1a influx from Scandinavian vikings, but the main N1a source in modern Baltic populations comes from East and is not related to vikings, though. I think, that this thread was used to look for descendants of those Scandinavians, but somehow data is not readily available to make final conclusions.


You can give something that you don'thave control over as present?

----------


## laint

> Now the tricky thing here is to figure out who were those N1c people, coming to the Baltic territories - because the majority of current N1c people don't speak Finno-Ugric languages at all but speak Turkic languages instead.


(To what Klavs refer as N1c, I'm refering as N1a)


Whoa, what math are you using to come to that conclusion. Actually, most of the N1a people nowadays speak Finnish or maybe even - Russian!
As for most N people - it is Chinese language.
I've calculated, that there are ~100 million N y-dna in China and ~25-30 million of N y-dna in Europe and Russia.

Most of the Uralic languages in Russia are in heavy decline - hardly any numbers given in wiki represent actual situation - judging by the actual statistical data, everything in wiki has to be divided by 2(!). And that situation has changed dramatically during last 20 years, while Putin was president, because of mass hysteria of Russian nationalism, that fuels Uralic people switch to Russian.

Yakuts are the only significant population with actual large number of N1a carriers that use Turkic language, but they aren't as numerous as Finnish people! Yakuts are ~600 000 in total.


Here are some links to educate in this matter:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_...ions_of_Europe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_...and_North_Asia

Where N1a(on map it is named N1c) actually is located
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...plogroup_N.png
You see - not all Uralic people are N1a!!!



What you want to read about Baltic N1c is:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...1111/ahg.12130
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N-M231

I'm not going to argue and explain, but Baltic N1a comes in most cases from Mari(vague term for their ancestors).
Latvian has 80% Mari N1a and Lithuanian N1a for Mari related ancestry is even higher - 93%!

----------


## laint

> ( ' Quote' from post #211 ) 
> 
> "Also, there is some wrong idea, that Lithuania was driving force in fighting against Teutonic Order, which is not really true - the ones that fought against Teutonic Order were Prussians, and later Samogitians. Lithuanians quite regularly invaded Samogitia and even gave it as a present to either Teutonic or Livonian Order. Up to 1400 Lithuania had no power over Samogitia, as it was governed by Samogitian Eldership, which was not under Lithuania. Teutonic order did not even reached Lithuanian lands, but ravaged lands of other tribes, which Lithuania later claimed as their own. Wars in ancient times were not fought exclusively by religious reasons, but also economical - pillaging, ransoms, trade arguments, etc. - nothing much has changed in modern times."
> 
> 
> The Teutonic Order certainly reached Lithuania.
> 
> One of these Teutonic Knights who fought in Lithuania was an English man, Anthony de Lucy killed in a battle at Kaunas,1368, ( alongside two others Roger Felbrigg, and John de Multon ) on Holy Crusade. His body was brought back to England, and suprisingly in order to identify him, his body was dug up in 1981, and was found perfectly preserved, so much so,that when they cut into his body during an autopsy it was still pink, and when opening his liver ( I think ) it began to bleed. ( over 600 yrs later !!! ) I'm not sure if his DNA has been tested yet, but check, 'St Bees Man, Sir Anthony de Lucy'. there is a video of the excavation and Autopsy.
> 
> He might even have grounds for Saint Hood, based on the bleeding alone.


You see, most arguments are over small things really - some are over terminology and other starts, because people are not reading carefully.
Lithuanian lands =/= Lithuania. I know, this is very confusing, but you see - if I mentioned land of Angles, would you think, that I mean - England, because they took over it? Or place in Danemark/Germany from where they came?

Ok, what I actually mean by Lithuanian lands is Nalšia, as rest of lands were not really Lithuanian. Nowadays territory of Nalšia is mostly part of Belorussia.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b3/d1...5aa1bc67c4.jpg
Actually, the person who tried to locate tribes has made some(LARGE) mistakes, but more or less those territories and borders are ok and also for purpose to locate Nalšia.

PS It is interesting that English men had French(?) names.

----------


## laint

> You can give something that you don't have control over as present?


Ok, I get the question now. I was mixed up, because some of the words were written together, but I fixed them(at least - in my answer).

Yes.
At first, you should have asked Pope to grant rights on some lands. It was better, if those lands were owned by nonchristians.
After that it was up to you if you could take over those lands.
If I remember correctly, then rights to take over Prussians were granted first to Bohemian king Otokar I, but since Teutonic knights/Sword brothers had to do all the work, they took over - all with the blessing from Pope. 
Terra Marianna initially was very monasteic country - only later it became Germanic Livonia.

Something similar was how Americas were granted(from Pope) to Spanish and Portugese. So, definitely you can give rights to take over lands or give them as present to someone else, if you can't.


In modern times - it is de jure recognition of rights of some countries to territories. They are not new terms, really. It is a bit complicated nowadays, but yeah:
for example, Russia invaded South Ossetia of Georgia and "gave them independence"(in reality it is dependent territory of Russian federation) which no one recognizes. It is still up to Georgia to talk sense into Russia, or take back de jure territory by force...

----------


## exceededminimumso..

> Ok, I get the question now. I was mixed up, because some of the words were written together, but I fixed them(at least - in my answer).
> 
> Yes.
> At first, you should have asked Pope to grant rights on some lands. It was better, if those lands were owned by nonchristians.
> After that it was up to you if you could take over those lands.
> If I remember correctly, then rights to take over Prussians were granted first to Bohemian king Otokar I, but since Teutonic knights/Sword brothers had to do all the work, they took over - all with the blessing from Pope. 
> Terra Marianna initially was very monasteic country - only later it became Germanic Livonia.
> 
> Something similar was how Americas were granted(from Pope) to Spanish and Portugese. So, definitely you can give rights to take over lands or give them as present to someone else, if you can't.
> ...


"I give you pope's hat as a present" it only works if I have pope's hat

You sound very sure about parts of history quite mysterious to historians.

----------


## laint

> "I give you pope's hat as a present" it only works if I have pope's hat
> 
> You sound very sure about parts of history quite mysterious to historians.


Yes, I'm sure, that your present would be crime even according to modern criminal laws, as there is no easy way you can get hold on Popes hat legally.

You see - even today there are rightful heirs to title King of Persia, but that doesn't mean anything, if they can't take over Iran... but who knows - future is not set in stone.


I'll take it... you are not required to bow before me, I'm sure about that, too :P

----------


## IMPERCVTOR

N haplogroup is obviously of Turkic (or even Proto-Iranian) origin, according to Xingnu graves. Wikipedia: In the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD, the Greek physician Galen declared that Sarmatians, Scythians and other northern peoples had reddish hair. They are said to owe their name (Sarmatae) to it.

----------


## paul333

Well Im positive for Y N1c1a1a2, now N1a1a1a2, with SNP-Z11010, where does this come from ? and I can't find any reference to Z11010.

----------


## paul333

> Well Im positive for Y N1c1a1a2, now N1a1a1a2, with SNP-Z11010, where does this come from ? and I can't find any reference to Z11010.


.

In looking through information regarding Y N1a1a1a2, It seems this has recently changed to Y N3a1, with snp B211. 

A report online, published 7th July 2016, refering to 'Human Y chromosome Haplogroup N', included in discussion,' that N3a1-B211, the early branch of N3a, could of been brought to the fringes of Europe by Seima-Turbina groups, but that earlier migrations cannot be ruled out either, given a study of ancient DNA, revealed a 7,500 year influx from Siberia to North East Europe'. North East Europe would mean or include, the Baltic states region

----------


## paul333

I have a confusing positive SNP marker for M9313, which is representing some problems as it is associated with a number of different Y Haplogroups, Y H2a1, I2a2a, D1b, and also Y 'N'. 

Regarding Y Haplogroup 'N', SNP M9313, is connected with the Y N SNP 'F2905', which using Robert Spencers SNP Tracker tool, is showing a 'Paleolithic' Location in Sweden, ( before or during the beginning of the Holocene period, around 11,500ybp ? ) via a pathway to Y N L731,. Its arrival pathway to this area, came from an area of modern day China. 

The information on Y Tree, 'N' is indicating F2905 formed 18,100ybp, with a TMCRA of 15,900 ybp. The most recent downstream subclade of F2905, being Y15965, is indicating, 'formed 2700 ybp', with a TMCRA of '600ybp', associated within Poland. On entering this SNP Y15965 into the SNP Tracker tool, it then highlighted the descendant pathway from Sweden, of Y N-L735, to Iron Age Poland Y N-L731.

The vast majority of downstream subclades of Y N F2905 are associated with Chinese markers/locations, but do show the mentioned movements of people from East Asia into the region. 

Is the SNP M9313 representing a genuine number of migrations, with several differing Haplogroups, including Y 'N', or is it a false call for a number of these Haplogroups,that are being associated with it.

Is there any way to clear this, or any information available that may explain how this occurs.

----------


## Norvila

Check the authors list of the publications.
No author knowing Lithuanian or Latvian as mother tongue.
Fins discuss with fins if Danes were right about Baltic loan words
The same about publications in Russian:)))

----------

