Neolithic Refuge and Continuity in Transylvania

This is the in comparison to the raw data.

we765YG.png


I prefer to remove Hungarian post-Roman samples because they are all over the place and often mixed individuals. Early Albanian cluster is next evolution of the Bassarabi one, and and they are surrounded by similar profiles from Avar Hungary, not Dalmatia.

I use the term Bassarabi as all inclusive for unaltered, Daco-Thracian. It is the most original E-V13 IA profile. Psenchievo Thracians were likely very similar before mixing with neolithic heavy and Anatolian-Levant admixture. I do not believe the profile will be entirely restricted to Bassarabi, but it will be found concentrated on a geography that matches that culture, hence why I coined the profile as such. The Bessi will likely be Bassabi shifted. We will just have to wait for future samples. Rrenjet inbreds will be btfo when the Gomolava and Transalvanya papers come out. Plus the new measurement of IDB relationship will make their fraudelent semantic games pointless. IBD has a final say on who is related to who and there is simply no way around it. The early Albanian IBD cluster is nowhere near Illyrians.
 
Last edited:
@palleorevenge

is your term Bassarabi connected with Bessi or Bastarnae tribes ?
both invited by the macedonians into southern balkans
 
@palleorevenge

is your term Bassarabi connected with Bessi or Bastarnae tribes ?
both invited by the macedonians into southern balkans

Basarabi is the Iron Age culture with a centre in South Western Romania. It followed Gáva-related Channelled Ware and the Kalakacza horizon and was very influential for the formation of Early Hallstatt cultures in Central Europe, with contacts especially to the Frög group in Southern Austria. Its commonly considered a North Thracian/Daco-Thracian culture.

And there is no direct connection to any of the mentioned people and cultures.
 
We can expect that the "northern exotic" EV13 are for the most descendants of Urnfields period ones?
 
We can expect that the "northern exotic" EV13 are for the most descendants of Urnfields period ones?
Depends on the context and time frame. The Eastern Urnfield groups I associate with Proto-Thracian and E-V13 did primarily migrate East, South East and South, a bit to the West, less to the South West and even less to the North, where they had contacts to Lusatians, but there was little bigger scale expansion.
Splinters likely reached the Eastern and Central Hallstatt zone, from where they distributed on a very low level to Celts and indirectly, later, Germanics too.

Most of the modern branches came to the West-North West later though, not before Vekerzug into La Tene, many in the Roman and migration period.
 
Which samples are these?

It's in the post

Denmark Bronze Age, Denmark Iron Age, and Sweden Iron Age. They are listed as other type of E(non-E-V13), but the Iron Age ones for example are listed as a very specific Moroccan haplogroup that has TMRCA from the middle ages, the designation is incorrect and they could turn out to be E-V13 instead, we will see when the bam files go public.
 
It's in the post

Denmark Bronze Age, Denmark Iron Age, and Sweden Iron Age. They are listed as other type of E(non-E-V13), but the Iron Age ones for example are listed as a very specific Moroccan haplogroup that has TMRCA from the middle ages, the designation is incorrect and they could turn out to be E-V13 instead, we will see when the bam files go public.
The Germanic from the Netherlands is E-V13 and has a Germanic autosomal profile. I guess he ended up there with Hallstatt-La Tene migrants, mostly artisans, to the North.
 
Depends on the context and time frame. The Eastern Urnfield groups I associate with Proto-Thracian and E-V13 did primarily migrate East, South East and South, a bit to the West, less to the South West and even less to the North, where they had contacts to Lusatians, but there was little bigger scale expansion.
Splinters likely reached the Eastern and Central Hallstatt zone, from where they distributed on a very low level to Celts and indirectly, later, Germanics too.

Most of the modern branches came to the West-North West later though, not before Vekerzug into La Tene, many in the Roman and migration period.

E-V13 had very little to do with Urnfield proper/Lusatians. They didn't find any E-V13 in Tollense battle, it was mostly I2, even R1a was found

I am thinking E-V13 originated somewhere in south Europe and expanded into central Europe after Urnfield ended. This lines up with the formation of Dacians and Thracians and their iron age expansion but could it be that Thracians were related to Scythians which means they would have been R-Z93 instead? -

"The Thracians were culturally closer to the Iranian Scythians to the north of the Danube river and the peoples of Asia Minor and the Achaemenid Persians to the east of the Hellespont than to their Greek neighbours in the south."
 
Last edited:
The main central Thracian group was Gava-related Channelled Ware and these were independent, had a different background from both Lusatians and Scytho-Sarmatians
They being influenced, but were a different people.
 
Last edited:
So what’s the best guess on the publication date of this Romania/Transylvania paper? August of this year? Or is sooner an option with some sort of preprint?
 
So what’s the best guess on the publication date of this Romania/Transylvania paper? August of this year? Or is sooner an option with some sort of preprint?

Honestly, I have no idea, but I think it won't be before Q3/4 2024 or even Q1/2025, because of the presentation at the conference. I doubt there will be an earlier publication. I hope for a publication around the conference though, or at least some peak into it from the participants or something like that.
 
BTW the IBD data in the Germanic study showed the Mezoscat individuals being all Celtoids or steppe nomads(r1a intruders). The same as G25 autsomal models.

I hope going forward every study performs these IBD tests and continue to built up the database, the clusters will become more accurate through more samples.

The Albanian sample from Kenete is clustered with the other Albanians even though it is wildly different, the only reason is because the kukes post-mdv samples assimilated a fraction of this persons DNA and now they share a fraction of IBD segments. The post-kukes samples share significantly more segments with the Shtike sample which might be an early Vlach.
 
Honestly, I have no idea, but I think it won't be before Q3/4 2024 or even Q1/2025, because of the presentation at the conference. I doubt there will be an earlier publication. I hope for a publication around the conference though, or at least some peak into it from the participants or something like that.

The Southern Arc series of papers were interesting because I seem to remember the final publication (Science) coming out before any sort of presentation. Then Professor Reich went to the University of Leiden for the first presentation. So maybe we’ll luck out and get the Romania paper prior to presentation.

Anyone know which scientific journal will be publishing the study?
 
It’s a Max Planck affiliated study and Rohrlach is one of the authors. Looking at his Google scholar profile, he has authored or coauthored many excellent studies over the last couple years. This Romania paper should be excellent, too. Really looking forward to this one. I noticed many of his higher profile publications over the last 2 years have been published in Nature. So maybe that’s where it will eventually pop up.

I can’t believe it’s 2024 and we still don’t have a comprehensive ancient DNA paper from Romania.

 
Found the thread Hawk was quoting. This is interesting, I noted this way before insider info became available, before the Reich lab did the analysis. Thracians, Himera's and the Bassarabi's all have a Baltic drift. This is without a doubt the Noua component that finalized the Daco-Thracian ethnogenesis in LBA.
According to the author this Baltic component also shows up in the analysis in the Germanic paper on the Thracian samples.

This pink component at the top of the breakdown of Cap. andreevski is Baltic. The graph is from Steppe Ancestry in western Eurasia and the spread of the Germanic Languages | bioRxiv of Max Planck and Copenhagen this year. By comparison, the second graph is again from there, the situation in BG through the Neolithic - it is quite uniform, just anatomical Neolithic with a few Balkan hunters gather. But, the Thracians of Cap Andreevo split the twilight with the early entry of the Baltic mesolite of the Balkans, as a mark-up to their component. The study included sikora, scoglund, krauze, kristiansen and a mass of top archaeologists. Unfortunately, we have nothing published from late bronze to see the differences. But we have an unpublished one. PS - we can see, however, the differences between Cap. andreevtsi (early iron Thracians) and the population of the same region from the Bronze Age - Mogila. The difference is from earth to sky. The new "tracks" (from the Iron Age) do not seem to be the heirs of the old ones, who are almost entirely Japanese (if this one of the bronze are Thracians, but someone must have called "tracks"). Ie on the border between bronze and iron, along with the fall of the trove, while the noble Mycenaeans, Trojans and Thracians cut their throats, a crowd of rude bastards from the Carpatho-Baltic region hit them in the back, clearing them, taking their place on the map and on top of everything self-announced for "tracks", ie. steals the name of the previous ones, at this moment O Bose cleansers. However, he may show some mercy to their daughters and wives, judging by the picture of the DNA, or at least some of them.

Population turnover confirmed.
He seems confused why South Thracians have MENA admixture. Because they partook in Bronze Age invasions and penetrate southern Greece and Anatolia, and took wives.


PS The Himera's have an incredible strong Baltic BA drift. Team retard/rrenjet is in for a rude awakening.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure we can trust everything they write, but the direction is the right one nevertheless. Its not the only source which points into the same direction, because like we agree upon before: What else should Transylvanian continuity be about, if talking about male lineages, if not E-V13?
 
Found the thread Hawk was quoting. This is interesting, I noted this way before insider info became available, before the Reich lab did the analysis. Thracians, Himera's and the Bassarabi's all have a Baltic drift. This is without a doubt the Noua component that finalized the Daco-Thracian ethnogenesis in LBA.
According to the author this Baltic component also shows up in the analysis in the Germanic paper on the Thracian samples.



Population turnover confirmed.
He seems confused why South Thracians have MENA admixture. Because they partook in Bronze Age invasions and penetrate southern Greece and Anatolia, and took wives.


PS The Himera's have an incredible strong Baltic BA drift. Team retard/rrenjet is in for a rude awakening.

He said there will be E-V13 between North Carpathians and Steppe during Chalcolithic, some of these mixed with European HG and participated in forming some important Chalcolithic sites in Northern Balkans, now we saw the E-L618 (E-V13?) sample in Usatovo kurgan. It fits together i would say.
 
Seeking for the Dacian Dream. Exploring ancient mobility in Roman DaciaContent:
The province of Dacia, now part of modern-day Romania, was annexed into the Roman Empire by Trajan in 106 AD, drawing people from ancient Italy and other areas, attracted by the prospect of enhancing their livelihoods. Apulum was strategically selected by the Romans as the site for a legionary fort where the Legio XIII Gemina was stationed until the withdrawal of the Roman administration around 270 AD. Initially, a civilian settlement emerged near the castrum. The transformation into one of the most prominent Romano-Dacian settlements featuring two urban centres, still requires in-depth examination in terms of social and demographic change from a bioarchaeological perspective. This interdisciplinary research examines a sample of individuals buried in the Pitchforks Hill (Dealul Furcilor, ADF) biritual necropolis of the Roman Apulum, which is the largest identified in Dacia so far with its over 1000 burials, being utilised throughout the Roman rule. Teeth samples from 34 Roman-era individuals from ADF necropolis were collected for Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) analysis. After applying rigorous quality controls, 21 samples were chosen for the downstream analyses, with their genetic variants being filtered using the 1240K SNP panel. PCA, F statistics, and Admixture modeling were utilised to assess the genome-wide variation of the ADF group in relation to coeval and current-day populations. The genetic diversity within the ADF group aligns with the broader European genetic landscape. However, it is possible to distinguish two primary clusters: the majority of the samples share genetic similarities with Mediterranean populations, while a minority shows closer ties to Eastern European groups. These findings significantly enhance our understanding of the Romanisation in the region, revealing the genetic imprints left by legionaries and other Italic peoples who settled in Apulum compared to those who migrated from nearby regions, whose genomic makeup is anticipated to be markedly distinct.

https://submissions.e-a-a.org/eaa2024/repository/preview.php?Abstract=3191

Interesting, it looks like the authors want to associate clustering near Illyrians and Macedonians as proof of Latin genetics/mediterrenean. I don't think it will pass the IDB or autosomal tests. The other interesting part is this "Eastern European" ancestry, if these are not early Slavs, than some groups still had strong Noua ancestry. It would helpful to know if they all carried this ancestry to some degree. But the paper seems to be out in a mission to prove Romanians = Latin + Dacian.
 

This thread has been viewed 17164 times.

Back
Top