Stolarek et al: Genetic history of East-Central Europe...

[okshtunas]

In practice, it looked like this: firstly the Slavs migrated from their homeland, covering roughly the area of historical Galicia, to the west and east, and then flowed into the Balkans from the east and west direction.

I have no problem with this geographical model - we might only disagree about the time when it happened :-)

It is crucial to differentiate the events associated with the Kyiv Culture, particularly in the absence of confirmed ancient DNA (aDNA) evidence from this culture. Although some proponents link "Slavic" clades such as M458/L1029 predominantly with the Kyiv Culture, the modern genetic distribution and diversity within the Slavs occupying this area do not strongly support this association, especially given the limited diversity within the L1029 subclade and its sibling or parent clades. One can argue for a sampling bias toward Central Europe. However, even with the smaller sample sizes prior to their higher testing rate, we saw a good amount of diversity further west. 

Furthermore, the possibility of a more widespread Proto-Slavic group/enclaves/minor settlements preceding a Slavic expansion by the Kyiv Culture should not be overlooked. For instance, consider a hypothetical scenario where a smaller group of Albanians from an isolated region expands after the assimilation or elimination of a larger group of Albanians. Such an expansion could potentially be traced to this hypothetical "isolation zone", unlike its distant cousin branches that might have been destroyed or assimilated and then reintroduced and expanded under new dominion. We see this for instance with the wider Illyrian Y-DNA lines. Albanians carry a small number of them that bottlenecked and re-expanded around the early 6th century (coinciding with the migration events and the destabilization of the Danube Limes).

We must also consider the potential for Proto-Slavic enclaves or sporadic settlements along the Northeast Carpathians or even in Poland that may have operated independently of the Kyiv influence. Additionally, there could have been non-Slavic or peripheral individuals who were not incorporated into the larger Slavic expansion. Given the presence of numerous singletons further west of this region, it is plausible that some of these groups were unrelated to the Kyiv Culture expansion and were instead absorbed into other populations, the Kyiv culture when it's sub-cultures expanded west, or a collection of these scenarios.

The Venedi, as mentioned by Tacitus, could also play a role in this narrative. If they carried the M458 marker, they might have been absorbed during the later Slavic expansion before the migration or in other potential scenarios. If we find only a few subclades within this culture, we cannot unanimously associate all it's distant related singletons to it and assume a "educated guess" however reasonable, takes the place of verifiable evidence.

Interpreting Y-DNA evidence requires caution against viewing genetic data as linear or robotic progressions that neatly fit preconceived conclusions (be they linguistic or archaeological). The dynamic and complex nature of human migrations and interactions (individually and collectively) often defies simple explanations and necessitates a nuanced understanding of genetic, cultural, and historical contexts.

[Bukva_]

@Pribislav are we gonna get any Y-DNA from Histogenes samples soon?

[Orentil]

In practice, it looked like this: firstly the Slavs migrated from their homeland, covering roughly the area of historical Galicia, to the west and east, and then flowed into the Balkans from the east and west direction.

I have no problem with this geographical model - we might only disagree about the time when it happened :-)

What kind of time frame do you have in mind?

I'm talking specifically about the time of Tacitus (approx. 100 AD) till the Gothic king Ermanaric (who died in 376 AD) as mentioned by Jordanes and the later spread of the Prague-Korchak culture, Sukov culture etc.

And no, I don't want to start here a new round of discussion about Veneti at the Baltic coast as mentioned by Pliny and Ptolemy, this was discussed exhaustively enough in other threads ;-)

[leonardo]

I have no problem with this geographical model - we might only disagree about the time when it happened :-)

What kind of time frame do you have in mind?

I'm talking specifically about the time of Tacitus (approx. 100 AD) till the Gothic king Ermanaric (who died in 376 AD) as mentioned by Jordanes and the later spread of the Prague-Korchak culture, Sukov culture etc.

And no, I don't want to start here a new round of discussion about Veneti at the Baltic coast as mentioned by Pliny and Ptolemy, this was discussed exhaustively enough in other threads ;-)

Ok. You know my opinion. As they say, the timing is right.

[ambron]

Orentil

Yes! These dates fit linguistic facts that would take too long to discuss here. These dates also match genetic data showing the intensive development of Slavic paternal lines.

[ambron]

okshtunas

I think there is no point in forcefully defending the concept of medieval Kiev migration, because historical and archaeological data do not confirm it, while linguistic and genetic data contradict it.

[okshtunas]

okshtunas

I think there is no point in forcefully defending the concept of medieval Kiev migration, because historical and archaeological data do not confirm it, while linguistic and genetic data contradict it.

Who said I was defending it? 

Reading comprehension goes a long way lol.

[ambron]

okshtunas

My comment was more general.

[ambron]

It's simple...

If there had been a mass migration westward from the Kiev culture area in the early Middle Ages, Poland would have been dominated by paternal lines whose last common ancestors lived in the Kiev culture areas during the Roman period.

If the Kiev culture population had been the source of the medieval Central European populations, the population boom and development of Slavic paternal lines would have occurred in the East Slavic population, not the West Slavic one.

[Galadhorn]

It's simple...

If there had been a mass migration westward from the Kiev culture area in the early Middle Ages, Poland would have been dominated by paternal lines whose last common ancestors lived in the Kiev culture areas during the Roman period.

If the Kiev culture population had been the source of the medieval Central European populations, the population boom and development of Slavic paternal lines would have occurred in the East Slavic population, not the West Slavic one.

We still have too few DNA examples from the areas of the Kiev culture (and probably they always will be few due to the cremation).

Meanwhile, Ambron deliberately ignores this possibility: a relatively genetically undiverse population (with the help of Avar political factors and social conditions in the Dark Ages) is linguistically Slavicizing similar, post-Trzciniec populations west of present-day Ukraine, west of Proto-Slavic areas. This Y-DNA, which dominates today among the Slavs, may have been dominant until the 5th/6th century in non-Slavic (though related to the Slavs) populations with an unnamed, now forgotten group of Indo-European dialects (from which the names of the Vistula, Warta, San, etc. come from).

I propose to compare the Slavic expansion with the expansion of the Arabic language and culture in the Mediterranean in the 7th and 8th centuries.

[ambron]

Galadhorn

But it was earlier that just linguists had already ruled out the Kiev culture as the Slavic homeland.

[Radko]

On the issue of localization of the Proto-Slavic homeland in the southeastern part of the Pripyat Polissya - link

[Radko]

Genetic history of the ancient population of the Russian Plain - https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJNA1086800 (no data yet)

IIRC, aDNA samples from these sites were sequenced under this project.

[ambron]

Radko

Moszyński, Bernstein and Filin it is old story, but even they located the Slavic homeland in the upper Vistula basin, where it is currently located by mainstream academic linguists - Udolph, Pronk, Babik, Kortlandt.

[ph2ter]

On the issue of localization of the Proto-Slavic homeland in the southeastern part of the Pripyat Polissya - link

Beautiful maps.

From the document:
"During the last few decades, a number of previously unknown monuments of the 4th–
5th centuries were discovered on the territory of the "Polessky White Spot" and the territories
that gravitate towards it. And although the interpretation of the materials of some of these
monuments and their dating have given rise to certain criticism, there is no doubt that, in
general, most of them really demonstrate the earliest stage of the development of Prague
culture. At the same time, more and more researchers see the origins of Prague culture in the
local Polesian monuments of the late Zarubyniec horizon."

According to the ancient common Slavic vocabulary, the ancestral Slavs did not come into contact with the sea coast, and were also not located in the steppe zone, since all Slavic terminology related to the sea and the steppe is borrowed. It is poor in general the terminology of features of the mountain landscape also. At the same time, in the common Slavic terminology, there is a large variety of nouns naming lakes, swamps, forest tracts, as well as various animals, birds, fish, trees and plants of the temperate forest zone. This testifies to the fact that the ancestral home of the Slavs (as an ethnic unit) was away from the seas, mountains and steppes, located in the forest belt of the temperate zone, rich in lakes, rivers and swamps.