Slavic origins

Program and abstract book can be downloaded under this link . Some intriguing abstracts: Pins with eight-shaped movable links in the Middle Volga region in the 4th–7th centuries and their possible prototypes Lilia Khalimullina, Leonid Vyazov (Kazan, Russia) The sedentary population of the Middle Volga region during the Migration Period is represented by a number of closely connected groups, with the Imen’kovo culture and the Middle Volga variety of the Kiev culture (sites of the Sidelkino-Timyashevo type) as the largest ones. The issue of identifying specific elements that could be used as “ethnographic” features is of crucial importance for identifying the origins of their introduction to the region. Metal costume pins are among the few such examples. The earliest examples of pins in the Middle Volga region come from sites of the 3rd–4th centuries in the Cheremshan River basin where specimens with a loop-shaped head, with and without a round movable link were found. A separate eight-s

 Large-scale migration into Britain during the Middle to Late Bronze Age  Abstract Present-day people from England and Wales harbour more ancestry derived from Early European Farmers (EEF) than people of the Early Bronze Age1. To understand this, we generated genome-wide data from 793 individuals, increasing data from the Middle to Late Bronze and Iron Age in Britain by 12-fold, and Western and Central Europe by 3.5-fold. Between 1000 and 875 bc, EEF ancestry increased in southern Britain (England and Wales) but not northern Britain (Scotland) due to incorporation of migrants who arrived at this time and over previous centuries, and who were genetically most similar to ancient individuals from France. These migrants contributed about half the ancestry of Iron Age people of England and Wales, thereby creating a plausible vector for the spread of early Celtic languages into Britain. These patterns are part of a broader trend of EEF ancestry becoming more similar across central and wester

 The Neolithic vs. the Mesolithic in Southern Poland: Is Everything Known Yet? Marek Nowak, Mirosław Zając, Justyna Zakrzeńska Abstract According to a common belief, southern Poland was a typical area of Early Neolithic settlements which was rarely exploited and even ignored by Mesolithic communities. However, the prehistoric reality was more complex. Indeed, the zones largely omitted by the hunter-gatherers were fertile loess uplands and foothills settled by the first Neolithic farmers (Linear Band Pottery culture) in the third quarter of the 6th millennium BC. However, such ecological zones are by no means the only or even predominant zones within the territory in question. Areas with other ecological conditions, mainly those close to the Polish Lowland, yielded surprisingly numerous remains of Mesolithic settlements, including late Mesolithic ones. Radiocarbon data makes it clear that the Late Mesolithic communities coexisted with their Neolithic counterparts. However, the tempora

Uncanny genetic proportions from Hungary suggest a long lasting Hunter-Gatherer ancestry in Central Europe at the Bronze Age Gerber Dániel (1, 2), Ari Eszter (2, 3), Szeifert Bea (1, 2), Kustár Ágnes, Fábián Szilvia (4), Bondár Mária (5), Kiss Viktória (5), Köhler Kitti (5), Mende Balázs Gusztáv (1), Szécsényi-Nagy Anna (1) 1 - Research Centre for the Humanities, Institute of Archaeogenomics, Eötvös Loránd Research Network (ELKH), Budapest, Hungary (Hungary), 2 - Department of Genetics, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary (Hungary), 3 - Synthetic and Systems Biology Unit, Biological Research Centre, Eötvös Loránd Research Network (ELKH BRC) (Hungary), 4 - Natural History Museum (Hungary), 5 - Research Centre for the Humanities, Institute of Archaeology, Eötvös Loránd Research Network (ELKH), Budapest, Hungary (Hungary) Bronze Age was a critical turning point in the formation of today's European populations when especially Central Europe became genetically really colour

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.458211v1?rss=1     Cosmopolitanism at the Roman Danubian Frontier, Slavic Migrations, and the Genomic Formation of Modern Balkan Peoples Inigo Olalde , Pablo Carrion , Ilija Mikic , Nadin Rohland , Shop Mallick , Iosif Lazaridis , Miomir Korac , Snezana Golubovic , Sofija Petkovic , Natasa Miladinovic-Radmilovic , Dragana Vulovic , Kristin Stewardson , Ann Marie Lawson , Fatma Zalzala , Kim Callan , Zeljko Tomanovic , Dusan Keckarevic , Miodrag Grbic , Carles Lalueza-Fox , David E. Reich   Abstract The Roman Empire expanded through the Mediterranean shores and brought human mobility and cosmopolitanism across this inland sea to an unprecedented scale. However, if this was also common at the Empire frontiers remains undetermined. The Balkans and Danube River were of strategic importance for the Romans acting as an East-West connection and as a defense line against "barbarian" tribes. We gener

Dynamic changes in genomic and social structures in third millennium BCE central Europe  https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/35/eabi6941 Abstract: Europe’s prehistory oversaw dynamic and complex interactions of diverse societies, hitherto unexplored at detailed regional scales. Studying 271 human genomes dated ~4900 to 1600 BCE from the European heartland, Bohemia, we reveal unprecedented genetic changes and social processes. Major migrations preceded the arrival of “steppe” ancestry, and at ~2800 BCE, three genetically and culturally differentiated groups coexisted. Corded Ware appeared by 2900 BCE, were initially genetically diverse, did not derive all steppe ancestry from known Yamnaya, and assimilated females of diverse backgrounds. Both Corded Ware and Bell Beaker groups underwent dynamic changes, involving sharp reductions and complete replacements of Y-chromosomal diversity at ~2600 and ~2400 BCE, respectively, the latter accompanied by increased Neolithic-like

 https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA2021/Programme.aspx?Program=3   Title: Early Bronze Age families in the northwestern Carpathian Basin Main authors: Anna Szecsenyi-Nagy Content: Fine-scale ancient DNA analyses provide not only insights to prehistoric demographic processes, but also a deeper understanding of the studied communities’ structure and organization. Here we present intensively sampled Early Bronze Age graveyards (assigned to the Nitra and Únětice cultures) from the north-west part of the Carpathian Basin, and compare the new genomic data with anthropological and archaeological records and theories. Several families are reconstructed based on the genome-wide capture data, and attempts on reconstructing distant relatedness is also presented. A comprehensive analyses of the paternal and maternal lineages, together with the autosomal DNA results enable to reformulate the current knowledge about the social system of the Nitra (Nitria

In this post I'll show what happens when we subtract any potential Germanic ancestry from the Krakauer Berg samples. German LBK is being used as a source of the neolithic ancestry and any deviation from this genetic profile should trigger the inclusion of Germanic sources in the output. Modern Norwegian, Icelandic and Danish samples are being used in the Germanic group. As you can see below the shift can be quite substantial and almost all individuals show this potentially Germanic ancestry. "Potentially", because in fact in can come from any CWC-rich source, but we are being generous and for the sake of simplicity we assume that all of it is a recent Germanic admixture. One thing you may notice, besides the fact that after the subtraction they became closer to the Balts, is that the cline formed by Krakauer Berg samples became parallel to the Balto-Slavic one. The second reflection should be that there is a cline at all! Multitude of people still claim that the early Sla

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/avaria#Italian Some time ago one of the Avar period samples from Hungary reported initially as a female (V37.2: released Feb 2019): AV1 AV1 AV1 petrous .. .. 1240K AmorimNatureCommunications2018 1361 541-637 calCE (1487±26 BP) Hungary_Avar Szólád Hungary 46.28333333 17.85 F X2m'n 1472±27 0.325459145 2.76426 802843 half All PASS (literature) .. .. 0.325459145 0.0874 X2m'n 0.98 2018 Gained male Y-chromosome (V42.4: released Mar 2020): 5697 AV1 AV1 AV1 petrous 2018 AmorimNatureCommunications2018 AmorimNatureCommunications2018 1361 541-637 calCE (1487±26 BP) Hungary_AvarPeriod Szólád Hungary 46.28333333 17.85 1240K .. 2.573859 802843 U R1b1a1a2a1 .. X2m'n .. .. .. .. .. .. .. half .. PASS (literature) This erroneous information possibly have come from the authors themselves as even folks from the Reich's Lab were bamboozled for a while (although not completely, as the sex of the sample was changed to U nknown). Fortunately since then they&

I think that most people interested in archaeogenetics would easily name two ancient groups that are the base of genetic composition of modern day Balto-Slavs. These two groups are the Baltic Bronze Age and the Corded Ware Culture. But nor the Slavs, nor even the Balts lie on a hypothetical cline between CWC and Baltic_BA. They also aren't identical to any of them. Clearly at least one additional source of ancestry is needed - the neolithic farmers of Europe. To check which neolithic group can or cannot be the source of this surplus ancestry I've modelled modern populations using a large set of ancients. Then I subtracted from the targets the ancestry from sources not located on the EEF-WHG cline. Below you can see the West Eurasian PCA with the distribution of samples used in this model.   Results of this experiment: Slavs Balts Germanics Selected Germanic, Baltic and Slavic groups Selected IA and Medieval groups The first thing you may notice is the stark difference in the ty

One of the false information that keeps being repeated is the supposed Baltic HG admixture in the Bronze Age Baltic population. I've even seen people who instructed others to use Baltic_LVA_HG as a source of the so called "Balto-Slavic drift" in their models. If true, such admixture would make Baltic BA a hard-core north-east European population, and by extension it would anchor the Slavs to the northern Belarus or even north-western parts of Russia. Maybe that's why this idea is so popular? But the problem is that it ignores the data we have had for a long time. In the Baltics, a sudden shift towards Eastern Hunter-Gatherers was observed in the Middle Neolithic, as evidenced below: Target: Baltic_LVA_MN Distance: 1.9079% / 0.01907883 50.2 RUS_Karelia_HG 49.8 Baltic_LVA_HG It would be reasonable to expect that Baltic BA also has additional EHG admixture, but nor Baltic BA, nor Balts, nor Slavs have it. Mittnik et al. made an attempt to model Baltic BA as a mixture of

Early Slavic samples are still scarce in the archaeogenetic record, but at the same time there are already enough of them to start see certain patterns. One of them is the variability of the level of ancestry related to the Baltic BA cluster. For some reason there are plenty of people who strongly believe that only the samples with the highest Baltic BA-like ancestry can be representative for a Proto-Slavic population. According to them any deviation from this Baltic genetic profile eliminates given individual from a pool of potential Proto-Slavs. Such reasoning is wrong on so many levels and ignores so much of the already published data, that I don't know if even a dozen of blog posts will be enough to deal with these shenanigans. But for now let's focus on one simple aspect - that certain samples can't be representative for the Proto-Slavic population just because they don't look like Balts (sic!). Below you can see a North European PCA with Lithuanians a

Coordinates - Eurogenes Global 25 Anatolia_BA - Bronze Age populations without outliers CWC-Yamnaya - German CWC and Yamnaya Samara HG - Serbian Iron Gates, Motala HG, NOR_North_LN_HG, NOR_Meso, NOR_N_HG N - Polish GAC, German LBK N-HG - Blatterhohle, Wartberg

Workflow: merged fastq files -> bwa-aln -> mpileup -> pileupCaller -> DIYDodecad Samples ( https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/gix044 ): Archaeological site ID Sample no. Sample no. that passed selection Dating Kowalewko KO 58 48 (11 deep seq.) 100–300 AD Masłomęcz MZ 27 24 200–400 AD Ancient DNA from the Wielbark culture (Kowalewko, deep seq., selected samples) - Eurogenes K36 similarity map Ancient DNA from the Wielbark culture (Kowalewko, shallow seq., all samples) - Eurogenes K36 similarity map Ancient DNA from the Wielbark culture (Masłomęcz, shallow seq., all samples) - Eurogenes K36 similarity map  

 Incomplete list of haplogroups from the Wielbark culture Kowalewko Kow_22 PCA0027 ~ 80-110/120 AD M CTS35 G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2 https://www.yfull.com/tree/G-Z726/ Kow_24 PCA0029 ~ 10-375 AD unknown I1 or female* Kow_25 PCA0030 ~ 110/120-160 AD F Kow_26 PCA0031 ~ 10-375 AD F Kow_29 PCA0034 ~ 80-260 AD F Kow_31 PCA0036 ~ 80-260 AD M FGC8303 G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2a1b1 https://www.yfull.com/tree/G-Y3101/ Kow_35 PCA0040 ~ 80-260 AD M CTS12891 G2a2b2a1 , conflicting downstream mutations https://www.yfull.com/tree/G-CTS796/ Kow_41 PCA0046 ~ 110/120-160 AD M S12223 I1a3a1a2a1a ~ https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-S11991/ Kow_48 PCA0053 ~ 80-260 AD F Kow_54 PCA0059 ~ 110/120-160 AD F Kow_57 PCA0062 ~ 80-260 AD M PF3331 G2a2b2a1 https://www.yfull.com/tree/G-CTS796/   Masłomęcz Mas_1 PCA0088 211AD-383AD M low chrX and chrY coverage CTS8868 N1a1a1a1a1a https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-VL29/ Mas_23 PCA0110 124AD-257AD M M CTS6229,CTS3287,CTS12527 E1b1b1a1b1 https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-V13/ Mas_26 P

  Ancient DNA from Medieval Poland – West Eurasian PCA   Workflow: merged fastq files -> bwa-aln -> mpileup -> pileupCaller -> smartpca Samples ( https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/gix044 ): Archaeological site ID Sample no. Sample no. that passed selection Dating Sowinki SI 21 19 1000–1100 AD Niemcza NA 36 31 900–1000 AD Markowice ME 8 8 1000–1200 AD Gniezno GO 2 2 1000–1200 AD Łęgowo LO 9 8 1000–1200 AD     Ancient DNA from Medieval Poland - Eurogenes K36 similarity map