Revised and improved prehistoric migration maps

Maciamo

Veteran member
Admin
Messages
10,085
Reaction score
3,507
Points
113
Location
Lothier
Ethnic group
Italo-celto-germanic
I have updated, corrected and improved most of the Neolithic and Bronze Age migrations maps. This includes adding new cultures, including minor ones, refining the boundaries, reworking the colours, and updating the haplogroup estimations for each culture. I have also split the map for the period 4000-3000 BCE in two to make the evolution clearer. Here is one example. Follow the link above to see all the maps. Please clear your browser cache before to see the changes.

middle_bronze_age_europe.png
 
I have updated, corrected and improved most of the Neolithic and Bronze Age migrations maps. This includes adding new cultures, including minor ones, refining the boundaries, reworking the colours, and updating the haplogroup estimations for each culture. I have also split the map for the period 4000-3000 BCE in two to make the evolution clearer. Here is one example. Follow the link above to see all the maps. Please clear your browser cache before to see the changes.

middle_bronze_age_europe.png

I presume Chalcolithic Italy represents all the 6 cultures of Italy on the map ?
 
Thank you Maciamo. Good to see the Kura-Araxes expansion, it is interesting that you've added I2c as a minor element in Kura-Araxes, I've never thought of that possibility, it could explain how Crete acquired the 6% frequency, mainland Greece also has 1-2%, and of course 3-4% in south Caucasus. If we were to assume it's presence in Kura-Araxes, then we should also find it in the other direction that culture hypothetically expanded into, Iran and probably the Indus valley, but no individual was found to carry I2c there.

If you're correct, then I2c2 should be older than it's current TMRCA estimate, which is around 3800 ybp, my theory was that, I2c2 was mainly brought to Transcaucasia by the proto-Armenians from the steppes, crossing the Caucasus and descending mainly from R1b-L584, and establishing the Kurganized Trialeti culture, which succeeded Kura-Araxes in Transcaucasia, if so then most I2c and R1b-L584 in Asia is the Armenian branch of the Indo-Europeans, indeed Armenians fall under all subclades downstream of both I2c2 and R1b-L584 (results from Turkey have Armenian surnames), they even correlate outside their caucasian home, in Europe.

Great maps (y)
 
I find the map confusing: no Unetice? Lycians and Lydians? Thracians Macedonians and Illyrians? For these the Lukka could be accepted, the others...
 
I find the map confusing: no Unetice? Lycians and Lydians? Thracians Macedonians and Illyrians? For these the Lukka could be accepted, the others...
The map? As in singular? Didn't you check Maciamo's link with the dozen maps. Dude, if you can't read no wonder you are confused.
 
Shouldn't you change Lycia and Lydia?
 
Those maps covering Baltics are full of ignorance. Since the very old days up to modern.
It would have been much better to just grey them out :)

How come there is no R1b in Kunda/Narva? Not heard about the big Baltic aDNA papers of year 2017?
How come there is Kiukanen culture in Baltics (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia)?
How come Comb Ceramic Pottery is I2 and N1c? When the aDNA tells you R1a?

Here you go:
Now we have 3 Baltic studies released
The genetic history of Northern Europe,
Extensive farming in Estonia started through a sex-biased migration from the Steppe,
The Neolithic Transition in the Baltic Was Not Driven by Admixture with Early European Farmers.


Will try to do some Y-dna summary.
ESTONIAN PAPER
10 individuals. (5 CWC, 4 CCC, 1 Narva)
5 CWC were R1a Z645 (2,000–2,800 yr BCE)
1 CCC was R1a YP1272 (3,900–1,800 yr BCE)


LATVIAN PAPER
6 individuals from Latvia
Kunda, Narva, Late Neolithics - all three were R1b (5700-3900 BCE). Rest were women.


NORTH EUROPE
Narva (Lithuania) - 2 I2a samples (5,550 - 2,900 BCE), of different I2a subsamples
Baltic LN (Lithuania 2, Estonia 1) - 3 R1a samples (2,620 - 1,750 BCE).
Baltic BA (Lithuania 1, Latvia Kivutkalns 5) - 6 R1a samples. Lithuania 1000 - 800 BCE. Kivutkalns - from 730 to 230 BCE.


Crazy uniformity of Corded Ware/ post Corded Ware - from 2,800 BCE to 230 BCE, there were 14 samples from all three Baltic states covering all region, all R1a...
 
Those maps covering Baltics are full of ignorance. Since the very old days up to modern.
It would have been much better to just grey them out :)

How come there is no R1b in Kunda/Narva? Not heard about the big Baltic aDNA papers of year 2017?
How come there is Kiukanen culture in Baltics (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia)?
How come Comb Ceramic Pottery is I2 and N1c? When the aDNA tells you R1a?

Here you go:
You reminded me of this map I saw before

Genetic_landscape_of_Europe_7000_YBP (1).jpg
 
Last edited:
Nice but there are samples of R1b1b from the Narva and Kunda cultures in Latvia, why do you leave that out of your maps? That is the only major complaint I have here.

Also I like how I1 now appears first in Neolithic Hungary though, to think until very recently people would have never it was I2 in Scandinavian at first not I1.


Here is a great map that collects all ancient y-dna and mtdna samples, includes sources

https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ancient-human-dna_41837#3/44.40/55.02
 
Those maps covering Baltics are full of ignorance. Since the very old days up to modern.
It would have been much better to just grey them out :)

How come there is no R1b in Kunda/Narva? Not heard about the big Baltic aDNA papers of year 2017?
How come there is Kiukanen culture in Baltics (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia)?
How come Comb Ceramic Pottery is I2 and N1c? When the aDNA tells you R1a?

Here you go:

Thanks for your feedback. Actually I updated all the maps except the the two first with the Kunda and Narva cultures, which I had updated in late 2016 (as mentioned in the bottom right corner). I didn't have the data from the 2017 study on the Baltics at the time. I will update it today.

I used the term Kiukainen culture broadly for the mixture of Comb Ceramic and Corded Ware in the East Baltic as I couldn't find the names of contemporary cultures in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Perhaps you can help me on that?

Regarding the haplogroup estimates, you should not rely exclusively on the few isolated samples that have been tested, but also on common sense. I predicted that I2 would be found in the East Baltic because of the presence of mtDNA U5b today, which had always been found alongside I2 (including I2a1)in central and western Europe. Since it is still there today, it means that the population wasn't completely replaced, and therefore I2 would have been present in all cultures in the region at least since the Narva period (but probably also Kunda). You mention that the Comb Ceramic was R1a based on the EHG admixture, but once again common sense dictates that the earlier I2 and R1b would still be present, and since Comb Ceramic clearly introduced a new lifestyle with Siberian/Northeast Asian pottery, N1c1 must have been present too. Besides, N1c was found near Smolensk c. 2500 BCE, in a culture descended from the Comb Ceramic.
 
Thanks for your feedback. Actually I updated all the maps except the the two first with the Kunda and Narva cultures, which I had updated in late 2016 (as mentioned in the bottom right corner). I didn't have the data from the 2017 study on the Baltics at the time. I will update it today.

I used the term Kiukainen culture broadly for the East Baltic cultures of the period as I couldn't find the names of contemporary cultures in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Perhaps you can help me on that?
I think there is not good umbrella term for Baltics plus South Finland those days.

If the timeline is 2000-1500 BCE, then it is still the Battle Axe culture or post-Battle Axe cultures if you wish. And it was very R1a. And very steppe (EHG - CHG mix).

The N1c most likely spread with Net Ceramics (Textile, or Fake Textile Ceramics) after 1,500 BCE.
http://www.sarks.fi/fa/PDF/FA13_51.pdf
"According to the summarized data of several researchers,archaeological cultures with net potteryemerged approximately as follows. During the secondhalf of the second millennium BC the BronzeAge culture of Net Ware formed in an areabounded by the Upper Volga in the south, LakeOnega in the north, the upper reaches of the RiverSukhona in the east and in the west by the area tothe southeast of Lake Ladoga and possibly as far asthe River Volkhov. Later, during the first half ofthe first millennium BC, it spread over a wide area,extending to the coasts of the Baltic and the WhiteSea, along the middle reacp.ers of the Volga to themouth of the River Kama, and to a lesser extentsouthwards to the basin of the River Kama (Fig. 1)."
But also that is a bit interesting because:
"From the middle to the second half of thefirst millennium BC it ceased to exist independentlyand merged with a new wave of Early IronAge culture of the so-called Ananyino type thatspread over the vast territories of the forest zone tothe north of the Volga between the Ural Mountainsand the Baltic Sea"
So, it is not clear which wave brought N, maybe both brought different subbranches of N into Baltics.

What we know is Kivutkalns samples from Riga (from 730-230 BCE) were all R1a. And that in the latest dates (decline of) Kivutkalns appeared both iron working, and also some Ananyino type artifact(s). Most likely that is where N1c arrived into Baltics for good. But that is of course speculations.

The lack of N in aDNA in Baltics however is evident, most likely it nevertheless was near. Somewhere North of Srubna and/or North of Trzciniec.

So, for current understanding I would draw it like this:
Cut Western half of "Kiukainen" and name it post-Battle-Axe cultures (make it R1a). And merge Eastern part with light blue, cut 1/3 of Northern Srubna make it light blue too. And tentatively assign N1c? and R1a? to them, because those parts most likely was a mix of Uralic/IE folks, but my knowledge does not go that far to tell exactly where to draw the line :) and at which point what was IE became Uralic.
 
If you're correct, then I2c2 should be older than it's current TMRCA estimate, which is around 3800 ybp, my theory was that, I2c2 was mainly brought to Transcaucasia by the proto-Armenians from the steppes, crossing the Caucasus and descending mainly from R1b-L584, and establishing the Kurganized Trialeti culture, which succeeded Kura-Araxes in Transcaucasia, if so then most I2c and R1b-L584 in Asia is the Armenian branch of the Indo-Europeans, indeed Armenians fall under all subclades downstream of both I2c2 and R1b-L584 (results from Turkey have Armenian surnames), they even correlate outside their caucasian home, in Europe.

I think that I2c could have been present in Anatolia and the Caucasus since the Mesolithic. It was found in Neolithic Anatolia and today I2c2 is found in the Caucasus. That's why I think that I2c (maybe already I2c2) was found in the Kura-Araxes culture, and maybe also in Maykop, as I2c2 ended up in the the Unetice culture (if my theory is right about R1b-L51 coming from the Black Sea shores, including the Maykop and Kemi-Oba cultures, as opposed to the more eastern R1b-Z2103 in the Capsian Steppe).
 
Linguistic scenarios for N and Finnish arrival to Baltics go something like this:
0) North of Srubna proto-Uralics (something like 2500 BCE or so) acquired Indo-Iranian loanwords that are shared among all branches
1) on their way to Baltics through (Northern) parts of (post-)Trzciniec they (Baltic Finns) acquired Balto-Slavic genes and proto-Balto-Slavic loanwords (somewhere between 1500 bce-500 bce)
2) on the coasts of Baltics from (post Battle Axe?) language close to para-Germanic they acquired earliest Germanic-ish loanwords. Such as 'laiva' - (boat, ship). Which in turn was given to (East?) Balts when they arrived from Trzciniec to Baltics.

That is best I can do at the moment. Of course, these are just theories that I consider most likely.
 
Thanks, arvistro. You surely know Baltic archaeology and linguistics better than me. I have adapted the maps and added the Net Ware culture as well as other contemporary ones to the south. So, in your opinion, N1c1 tribes weren't present in the Kama culture?
 
Thanks, arvistro. You surely know Baltic archaeology and linguistics better than me. I have adapted the maps and added the Net Ware culture as well as other contemporary ones to the south. So, in your opinion, N1c1 tribes weren't present in the Kama culture?
It is hard to tell. Most likely N1c or para-N1c was somewhere around.

First, I thought it was all about para-N clades in NE Europe, then we got Karelians (Olenij Ostrov) who were R1a, then we got Baltic WHGs/SHGs who were R1b, and some EHG folks who were R1a.

Then I expected para-N clades to arrive in Baltics with Comb Ceramics. It still can't be excluded, not so many CCC or post CCC samples are analyzed. The analyzed 15 samples from 3000-200 BCE in Baltics are exclousively R1a but most of them in the context of Corded Ware or post-Corded Ware. I think one can estimate that CW swept away about any Y who were before them in Baltics (to be later swept away themselves by Balto-Slavic Ys). But Russian forests and tundra is a story that I do not know. The N sample from Belarus shows that N could have been around.

I know only the samples that were studied so far, and they tell story of Baltics without N until 200 BCE. This story is consistent with story of age of Balts N forefather (500 BCE).

The non-Balts N has not been in my direct attention :)
 
The map? As in singular? Didn't you check Maciamo's link with the dozen maps. Dude, if you can't read no wonder you are confused.

I can read, but it's you that don't read even; look at the dates of the map posted, 2000-1500 BC, with the incongruences found it's not so enthusiastic to look to more maps.
 

This thread has been viewed 14617 times.

Back
Top